Re: [bess] WG Adoption and IPR Poll for draft-mishra-bess-deployment-guide-ipv4nlri-ipv6nh-03

[Dongjie (Jimmy)]

Hi,

I support the adoption of this document, it provides useful information which 
can help the transition towards IPv6.

Best regards,
Jie

From: BESS [mailto:bess-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Bocci, Matthew (Nokia - 
GB)
Sent: Tuesday, April 13, 2021 5:37 PM
To: draft-mishra-bess-deployment-guide-ipv4nlri-ipv...@ietf.org; bess@ietf.org
Subject: [bess] WG Adoption and IPR Poll for 
draft-mishra-bess-deployment-guide-ipv4nlri-ipv6nh-03

Hello,

This email begins a two-weeks WG adoption poll for 
draft-mishra-bess-deployment-guide-ipv4nlri-ipv6nh-03 [1].

Please review the draft and post any comments to the BESS working group list.

We are also polling for knowledge of any undisclosed IPR that applies to this 
document, to ensure that IPR has been disclosed in compliance with IETF IPR 
rules (see RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669 and 5378 for more details).

If you are listed as an author or a contributor of this document, please 
respond to this email and indicate whether or not you are aware of any relevant 
undisclosed IPR, copying the BESS mailing list. The document will not  progress 
without answers from all of the authors and contributors.

Currently, there are no IPR disclosures against this document.

If you are not listed as an author or a contributor, then please explicitly 
respond only if you are aware of any IPR that has not yet been disclosed in 
conformance with IETF rules.

This poll for adoption closes on April 27th 2021.

Regards,
Matthew and Stephane


[1] 
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-mishra-bess-deployment-guide-ipv4nlri-ipv6nh/


___
BESS mailing list
BESS@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess

Re: [bess] WG and IPR poll adoption poll for draft-krattiger-evpn-modes-interop

[Neeraj Malhotra]

Hi,

Support adoption. Indeed, much needed!!

Thanks,
Neeraj

On Mon, Apr 19, 2021 at 11:06 AM  wrote:

> Hello,
>
>
>
> This email begins a two-weeks WG adoption poll for
> draft-krattiger-evpn-modes-interop-03 [1].
>
>
>
> Please review the draft and post any comments to the BESS working group
> list.
>
>
>
> We are also polling for knowledge of any undisclosed IPR that applies to
> this document, to ensure that IPR has been disclosed in compliance with
> IETF IPR rules (see RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669 and 5378 for more details).
>
>
>
> If you are listed as an author or a contributor of this document, please
> respond to this email and indicate whether or not you are aware of any
> relevant undisclosed IPR, copying the BESS mailing list. The document will
> not  progress without answers from all of the authors and contributors.
>
>
>
> Currently, there are no IPR disclosures against this document.
>
>
>
> If you are not listed as an author or a contributor, then please
> explicitly respond only if you are aware of any IPR that has not yet been
> disclosed in conformance with IETF rules.
>
>
>
> This poll for adoption closes on 4th May 2021.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Matthew and Stephane
>
>
>
>
>
> [1]  https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-krattiger-evpn-modes-interop/
>
>
> ___
> BESS mailing list
> BESS@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess
>
___
BESS mailing list
BESS@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess

Re: [bess] WG Adoption and IPR Poll for draft-mishra-bess-deployment-guide-ipv4nlri-ipv6nh-03

[Gyan Mishra]

Hi Jakob

Thank you for reviewing the draft.

We will have included in detail the list of test cases in the
interoperability testing that must be passed.

Thanks


Gyan
On Mon, Apr 19, 2021 at 7:57 PM Jakob Heitz (jheitz) 
wrote:

> I also believe that a table of conforming implementations is not
>
> appropriate in an RFC, as it is forever changing as software is upgraded.
>
> What is however appropriate is a list of test cases that must be passed
>
> in order to claim interoperability. Claiming that a session comes up is
> not good enough.
>
> An example of what I mean is at
>
>
> https://standards.iso.org/ittf/PubliclyAvailableStandards/c030932_ISO_IEC_10589_2002(E).zip
>
> Annex A, A.5 to A.7
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Jakob.
>
>
>
> *From:* BESS  *On Behalf Of * Ketan Talaulikar
> (ketant)
> *Sent:* Saturday, April 17, 2021 12:51 AM
> *To:* Gyan Mishra 
> *Cc:* Bocci, Matthew (Nokia - GB) ;
> draft-mishra-bess-deployment-guide-ipv4nlri-ipv...@ietf.org; bess@ietf.org
> *Subject:* Re: [bess] WG Adoption and IPR Poll for
> draft-mishra-bess-deployment-guide-ipv4nlri-ipv6nh-03
>
>
>
> Hi Gyan,
>
>
>
> Thanks for your quick and detailed response. Please check inline below.
>
>
>
> *From:* Gyan Mishra 
> *Sent:* 17 April 2021 12:10
> *To:* Ketan Talaulikar (ketant) 
> *Cc:* Bocci, Matthew (Nokia - GB) ; bess@ietf.org;
> draft-mishra-bess-deployment-guide-ipv4nlri-ipv...@ietf.org
> *Subject:* Re: [bess] WG Adoption and IPR Poll for
> draft-mishra-bess-deployment-guide-ipv4nlri-ipv6nh-03
>
>
>
> Hi Ketan
>
>
>
> Thanks you for your feedback on the draft.
>
>
>
> Most of your comments have been mentioned on the ML are being addressed in
> the next draft update.
>
>
>
> Responses in-line
>
>
>
> Many Thanks!!
>
>
>
> Gyan
>
>
>
> On Sat, Apr 17, 2021 at 12:21 AM Ketan Talaulikar (ketant)  40cisco@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
>
> Hello Authors,
>
>
>
> A few comments/observations on this draft:
>
>
>
>
>
> 1. The BCP categorization does not seem right for this document and
> perhaps informational is better. Is this really something that has already
> seen widespread deployment such that the IETF community can say that it is
> the best “current” practice?
>
>
>
>Gyan> This draft addresses a real issue that has been discussed at
> NANOG and other operator groups around the world related to IXP major
> peering points where 1000s have IPv4 & IPv6 dual stacked peering exist and
> IPv4 address depletion have been a major issue issue for many years now.
>
>
>
> Operators around the world are clamoring for a solution that can help with
> worldwide address IPv4 depletion issues at the IXP peering points.  With
> this solution IXPs as well as all infrastructure Core, DC PE-CE public or
> private can now utilize this solution and reap the benefits immediately on
> address space saving.  This can be used for IPv4 core or IPv6 core and I
> will clarify in the draft.  All infrastructure peering with this draft
> along with RFC 5565 now becomes officially IPv6-Only.
>
> *[KT] I am not questioning the need for a design to address this problem
> space. It is real and relevant – something that the WG should take up. So
> thanks to the authors for bringing this up. Just emphasising it, in case
> anyone got a different impression from my initial response. *
>
>
>
> With this draft as it stands today as a BCP, the POC QA testing from the 5
> major vendors that make up almost 90%+ of the router and switch market
> share Cisco, Juniper, Arista, Nokia, Huawei, the idea is that all other
> vendors will follow suit and adopt this BCP and implement and support this
> solution to help with IPv4 address depletion issues faced by their
> customers.  We not trying to be not inclusive of all vendors, as it’s
> impossible to test every vendor.  With this  draft being a BCP, as
> strategy, we would now once this draft is published as a best practice be
> able create an industry shift momentum that now all operators all around
> the world including Verizon as well as other tier 1 carriers as well as
> Tier 2 and 3 and all ISPs can use this solution immediately and start
> deployment once this draft becomes an RFC.  This will also help with the
> underlying goal of worldwide IPv6 proliferation.
>
> *[KT] This is my concern exactly and I think we perhaps differ on the
> definition of BCP. As also, differ on the use of IETF stream RFC as the
> means for publication of interop test results. I will suggest to the
> authors as well as the WG to consider using such a document for capturing
> the design as informational. More specifically, I will recommend somewhat
> on similar lines as RFC7938 or even draft-ietf-mpls-seamless-mpls (even
> though the later didn’t get to RFC). That, IMHO, would be valuable for
> everyone in the community (including vendors and operators).*
>
> 2. do not think that the term “legacy” is appropriate for IPv4 and IPv4
> based services.
>
> Gyan> Understood. I can remove the word legacy
>
>
>
> 3. RFC5565 specifies the dual-stack 

Re: [bess] WG and IPR poll adoption poll for draft-krattiger-evpn-modes-interop

[Gyan Mishra]

I support WG Adoption.

Thanks

Gyan

On Tue, Apr 20, 2021 at 2:23 AM Rabadan, Jorge (Nokia - US/Mountain View) <
jorge.raba...@nokia.com> wrote:

> As co-author, I support this document for WG adoption.
>
> Not aware of any related IPR, except for the one already stated by other
> co-authors.
>
>
>
> Thanks.
>
> Jorge
>
>
>
> *From: *BESS  on behalf of slitkows.i...@gmail.com
> 
> *Date: *Monday, April 19, 2021 at 8:06 PM
> *To: *bess@ietf.org 
> *Cc: *bess-cha...@ietf.org 
> *Subject: *[bess] WG and IPR poll adoption poll for
> draft-krattiger-evpn-modes-interop
>
> Hello,
>
>
>
> This email begins a two-weeks WG adoption poll for
> draft-krattiger-evpn-modes-interop-03 [1].
>
>
>
> Please review the draft and post any comments to the BESS working group
> list.
>
>
>
> We are also polling for knowledge of any undisclosed IPR that applies to
> this document, to ensure that IPR has been disclosed in compliance with
> IETF IPR rules (see RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669 and 5378 for more details).
>
>
>
> If you are listed as an author or a contributor of this document, please
> respond to this email and indicate whether or not you are aware of any
> relevant undisclosed IPR, copying the BESS mailing list. The document will
> not  progress without answers from all of the authors and contributors.
>
>
>
> Currently, there are no IPR disclosures against this document.
>
>
>
> If you are not listed as an author or a contributor, then please
> explicitly respond only if you are aware of any IPR that has not yet been
> disclosed in conformance with IETF rules.
>
>
>
> This poll for adoption closes on 4th May 2021.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Matthew and Stephane
>
>
>
>
>
> [1]  https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-krattiger-evpn-modes-interop/
>
>
> ___
> BESS mailing list
> BESS@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess
>
-- 



*Gyan Mishra*

*Network Solutions A**rchitect *

*Email gyan.s.mis...@verizon.com *



*M 301 502-1347*
___
BESS mailing list
BESS@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess

[bess] Publication has been requested for draft-ietf-bess-evpn-igmp-mld-proxy-09

[Stephane Litkowski via Datatracker]

Stephane Litkowski has requested publication of 
draft-ietf-bess-evpn-igmp-mld-proxy-09 as Proposed Standard on behalf of the 
BESS working group.

Please verify the document's state at 
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bess-evpn-igmp-mld-proxy/


___
BESS mailing list
BESS@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess

Re: [bess] WG and IPR poll adoption poll for draft-krattiger-evpn-modes-interop

[Rabadan, Jorge (Nokia - US/Mountain View)]

As co-author, I support this document for WG adoption.
Not aware of any related IPR, except for the one already stated by other 
co-authors.

Thanks.
Jorge

From: BESS  on behalf of slitkows.i...@gmail.com 

Date: Monday, April 19, 2021 at 8:06 PM
To: bess@ietf.org 
Cc: bess-cha...@ietf.org 
Subject: [bess] WG and IPR poll adoption poll for 
draft-krattiger-evpn-modes-interop
Hello,

This email begins a two-weeks WG adoption poll for 
draft-krattiger-evpn-modes-interop-03 [1].

Please review the draft and post any comments to the BESS working group list.

We are also polling for knowledge of any undisclosed IPR that applies to this 
document, to ensure that IPR has been disclosed in compliance with IETF IPR 
rules (see RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669 and 5378 for more details).

If you are listed as an author or a contributor of this document, please 
respond to this email and indicate whether or not you are aware of any relevant 
undisclosed IPR, copying the BESS mailing list. The document will not  progress 
without answers from all of the authors and contributors.

Currently, there are no IPR disclosures against this document.

If you are not listed as an author or a contributor, then please explicitly 
respond only if you are aware of any IPR that has not yet been disclosed in 
conformance with IETF rules.

This poll for adoption closes on 4th May 2021.

Regards,
Matthew and Stephane


[1]  https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-krattiger-evpn-modes-interop/

___
BESS mailing list
BESS@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess