Re: [bess] WGLC, IPR and implementation poll for draft-ietf-bess-evpn-irb-mcast-04

[Henderickx, Wim (Nokia - BE/Antwerp)]

Support.

From: BESS  on behalf of Jorge Rabadan 

Date: Wednesday, 26 February 2020 at 16:12
To: "slitkows.i...@gmail.com" , "bess@ietf.org" 

Cc: "bess-cha...@ietf.org" 
Subject: Re: [bess] WGLC, IPR and implementation poll for 
draft-ietf-bess-evpn-irb-mcast-04

Support for publication, as co-author. This is a very important and needed 
technology in EVPN networks.
Not aware of any undisclosed IPRs.

Nokia has an implementation of this draft.

Thank you.
Jorge

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

Date: Wednesday, February 26, 2020 at 3:26 PM
To: 'BESS' 
Cc: "bess-cha...@ietf.org" 
Subject: [bess] WGLC, IPR and implementation poll for 
draft-ietf-bess-evpn-irb-mcast-04

Hi WG,

This email starts a two weeks Working Group Last Call on 
draft-ietf-bess-evpn-irb-mcast-04 [2]

Please review the draft and send any comments to the BESS list. Also, please 
indicate if you support publishing the draft as a standards track RFC.

This poll runs until 11th March 2020.


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. The Document won't progress without answers from all the 
Authors and Contributors.

There is currently one IPR disclosed.

https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/search/?submit=draft=draft-ietf-bess-evpn-irb-mcast



We are also polling for any existing implementation as per [1]. Please indicate 
if you are aware of any implementations.

 Thank you,

Stephane

[1] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/bess/cG3X1tTqb_vPC4rg56SEdkjqDpw
[2] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bess-evpn-irb-mcast/

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

Re: [bess] WG Adoption and IPR Poll for draft-litkowski-bess-rfc5549revision-00

[Henderickx, Wim (Nokia - BE/Antwerp)]

support

From: BESS  on behalf of Jorge Rabadan 

Date: Wednesday, 27 November 2019 at 14:49
To: "Bocci, Matthew (Nokia - GB)" , "bess@ietf.org" 

Cc: "bess-cha...@ietf.org" 
Subject: Re: [bess] WG Adoption and IPR Poll for 
draft-litkowski-bess-rfc5549revision-00

Support.

Thx
Jorge

From: BESS  on behalf of "Bocci, Matthew (Nokia - GB)" 

Date: Wednesday, November 27, 2019 at 1:37 PM
To: "bess@ietf.org" 
Cc: "bess-cha...@ietf.org" 
Subject: [bess] WG Adoption and IPR Poll for 
draft-litkowski-bess-rfc5549revision-00

Hello,

This email begins a two-weeks WG adoption poll for 
draft-litkowski-bess-rfc5549revision-00 [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 won't progress 
without answers from all 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 Wednesday 11th December 2019.

Regards,
Matthew

[1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-litkowski-bess-rfc5549revision/



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

Re: [bess] WG adoption poll and IPR poll for draft-snr-bess-evpn-loop-protect

[Henderickx, Wim (Nokia - BE/Antwerp)]

Support adoption,  as this is useful addition to EPVN

From: BESS  on behalf of Gunter VAN DE VELDE 

Date: Tuesday, 1 October 2019 at 04:59
To: Stephane Litkowski , Stephane Litkowski 

Cc: "draft-snr-bess-evpn-loop-prot...@ietf.org" 
, "bess-cha...@ietf.org" 
, "bess@ietf.org" 
Subject: Re: [bess] WG adoption poll and IPR poll for 
draft-snr-bess-evpn-loop-protect

Yes, Support adoption.

G/

From: BESS  On Behalf Of Stephane Litkowski
Sent: Thursday, September 19, 2019 16:06
To: stephane.litkow...@orange.com
Cc: draft-snr-bess-evpn-loop-prot...@ietf.org; bess-cha...@ietf.org; 
bess@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [bess] WG adoption poll and IPR poll for 
draft-snr-bess-evpn-loop-protect

Hi,

The poll has ended.
I haven't seen a lot of support from the various vendor while Jorge has 
mentioned that there are multiple implementations. Before closing definitely 
this poll, I would like to let the opportunity to other vendors to raise their 
voice and support the draft especially if they have implementations.
I will let an additional week.

Stephane


On Mon, Sep 2, 2019 at 4:29 PM 
mailto:stephane.litkow...@orange.com>> wrote:
Hi,

This email begins a two-weeks WG adoption poll for 
draft-snr-bess-evpn-loop-protect-04 [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 won't progress 
without answers from all 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 16th September 2019.

Regards,
Stephane and Matthew

[1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-snr-bess-evpn-loop-protect/




[Orange logo]

Stephane Litkowski
Network Architect
Orange/SCE/EQUANT/OINIS/NET
Orange Expert Future Networks
phone: +33 2 23 06 49 83 

  NEW !
mobile: +33 6 71 63 27 50 

  NEW !
stephane.litkow...@orange.com


_



Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations 
confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc

pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce 
message par erreur, veuillez le signaler

a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages 
electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,

Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou 
falsifie. Merci.



This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged 
information that may be protected by law;

they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.

If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete 
this message and its attachments.

As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been 
modified, changed or falsified.

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

Re: [bess] WG adoption and IPR poll for draft-keyupate-bess-evpn-virtual-hub-02

[Henderickx, Wim (Nokia - BE/Antwerp)]

Support as co-author and not aware of ipr related to this draft

From: EXT Jeff Tantsura 
Date: Wednesday, 4 September 2019 at 22:18
To: "draft-keyupate-bess-evpn-virtual-...@ietf.org" 
, "bess@ietf.org" 
, "Bocci, Matthew (Nokia - GB)" 
Cc: "bess-cha...@ietf.org" 
Subject: Re: [bess] WG adoption and IPR poll for 
draft-keyupate-bess-evpn-virtual-hub-02
Resent from: 
Resent to: , Ali Sajassi , 
, , 
Resent date: Wednesday, 4 September 2019 at 22:18

yes/support

Cheers,
Jeff
On Sep 4, 2019, 1:36 AM -0700, Bocci, Matthew (Nokia - GB) 
, wrote:

This email begins a two-week poll for adoption for 
draft-keyupate-bess-evpn-virtual-hub-02

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 won't progress 
without answers from all 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 to the IPR poll 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 Wednesday 18th September 2019.

Regards,
Matthew and Stephane


___
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] Second WG Last Call on draft-ietf-bess-evpn-proxy-arp-nd-06

[Henderickx, Wim (Nokia - BE/Antwerp)]

I echo that, there is a number of implementations in the field which uses this 
mechanism

From: Yu Tianpeng 
Date: Friday, 7 June 2019 at 11:15
To: "Bocci, Matthew (Nokia - GB)" 
Cc: "bess@ietf.org" , "bess-cha...@ietf.org" 
, "draft-ietf-bess-evpn-proxy-arp...@ietf.org" 

Subject: Re: [bess] Second WG Last Call on draft-ietf-bess-evpn-proxy-arp-nd-06
Resent-From: 
Resent-To: Jorge Rabadan , 
, , 
, Greg HANKINS , 
, Daniel Melzer , 

Resent-Date: Friday, 7 June 2019 at 11:15

Dear WG,
support
this is useful optimization mechanism and has couple of known implementations 
and well documented.
Thanks,
Tim

On Fri, 7 Jun 2019, 10:07 Bocci, Matthew (Nokia - GB), 
mailto:matthew.bo...@nokia.com>> wrote:
WG

We ran a working group last call on this draft in August 2018. Although we had 
an Ops Area review, we did not get a lot of responses from participants who 
were not already authors of the draft. We are therefore running another working 
group last call on draft-ietf-bess-evpn-proxy-arp-nd-06.

Please indicate to the list if you have read the draft and support its 
publication as an RFC. Please also indicate to the list if you have read the 
draft and do not support its publication.

Please also send any other last call comments to the BESS list.

This last call ends on Friday 21st June 2019.

Regards

Matthew and Stephane
___
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] Poll to continue or not the work on draft-ietf-bess-service-chaining

[Henderickx, Wim (Nokia - BE/Antwerp)]

I would support this doc as a WG doc, could be informational though

From: BESS  on behalf of Stephane Litkowski 

Date: Wednesday, 3 April 2019 at 13:34
To: "bess@ietf.org" , 
"draft-ietf-bess-service-chain...@ietf.org" 

Subject: [bess] Poll to continue or not the work on 
draft-ietf-bess-service-chaining

Hi WG,

As pointed on the mailing list and during our session in Prague (IETF 104), the 
shepherd’s review of draft-ietf-bess-service-chaining [1] has identified major 
issues that make the document far from being ready.

As the document is targeted to be standard track, the work to make it ready is 
quite huge and we, chairs, are wondering if the WG still supports this work.
The current proposal from the authors is to split the document: one 
informational, one standard track (containing the BGP extensions). The work 
remains huge. While we are happy to hear about this proposal, we need to ensure 
that the WG supports this proposal and will be kind to review/comment the new 
drafts.

This email starts a 2 weeks poll to determine if the work on this document 
should continue or if this document should be parked..
Please answer to this poll telling us if you want to support this document (you 
so commit on commenting and reviewing it) or if you don’t support. In both 
cases, please explain why.
Authors should also commit on the roadmap for the document split/update.

The poll ends on Wed 17th April.

[1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bess-service-chaining/


Stephane & Matthew

_



Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations 
confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc

pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce 
message par erreur, veuillez le signaler

a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages 
electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,

Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou 
falsifie. Merci.



This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged 
information that may be protected by law;

they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.

If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete 
this message and its attachments.

As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been 
modified, changed or falsified.

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

Re: [bess] WG adoption and IPR poll for draft-rabadan-sajassi-bess-evpn-ipvpn-interworking-02

[Henderickx, Wim (Nokia - BE/Antwerp)]

Agreed/Support

From: BESS  on behalf of "Andrew G. Malis" 

Date: Wednesday, 20 February 2019 at 08:24
To: Stephane Litkowski 
Cc: "bess-cha...@ietf.org" , "bess@ietf.org" 
, "draft-rabadan-sajassi-bess-evpn-ipvpn-interwork...@ietf.org" 

Subject: Re: [bess] WG adoption and IPR poll for 
draft-rabadan-sajassi-bess-evpn-ipvpn-interworking-02

Yes/support.

Cheers,
Andy


On Mon, Feb 18, 2019 at 10:53 AM 
mailto:stephane.litkow...@orange.com>> wrote:

This email begins a two-week poll for adoption of 
draft-rabadan-sajassi-bess-evpn-ipvpn-interworking-02
[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 won't progress 
without answers from all 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 Wednesday 4th March 2019.

Regards,
Stephane and Matthew

[1] 
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-rabadan-sajassi-bess-evpn-ipvpn-interworking/


_



Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations 
confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc

pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce 
message par erreur, veuillez le signaler

a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages 
electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,

Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou 
falsifie. Merci.



This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged 
information that may be protected by law;

they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.

If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete 
this message and its attachments.

As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been 
modified, changed or falsified.

Thank you.
___
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] WGLC, IPR and implementation poll for draft-ietf-bess-nsh-bgp-control-plane

[Henderickx, Wim (Nokia - BE/Antwerp)]

I need to get into more details, but the current draft is written with 
draft-ietf-mpls-sfc-04 dataplane in mind. I believe that the draft can be 
useful with other dataplanes like: draft-ietf-mpls-sfc-encapsulation and 
draft-guichard-spring-nsh-s
So I would like the see the BGP control plane extensions here to become more 
generic to support multiple data-planes options. I need to go in more detail, 
but from high level this is my feedback here. I don’t want to stop/block this 
work as I believe this is a very useful proposal, but if we make it more 
generic it can serve a bigger purpose.

So I would like to see the following:

  1.  Protocol draft
  2.  Use case drafts for the different data planes.

My 2 cents.

From: BESS  on behalf of Stephane Litkowski 

Date: Monday, 21 January 2019 at 08:06
To: "bess@ietf.org" 
Cc: "bess-cha...@ietf.org" 
Subject: [bess] WGLC, IPR and implementation poll for 
draft-ietf-bess-nsh-bgp-control-plane


Hello Working Group,



This email starts a three weeks Working Group Last Call on  
draft-ietf-bess-nsh-bgp-control-plane [1].



This poll runs until *the 4th of February*.



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. The Document won't progress without answers from all the 
Authors and Contributors.



We have several IPRs already disclosed.



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.



We are also polling for any existing implementation as per [2].



Thank you,

Stephane & Matthew



[1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bess-nsh-bgp-control-plane/



[2] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/bess/cG3X1tTqb_vPC4rg56SEdkjqDpw



_



Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations 
confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc

pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce 
message par erreur, veuillez le signaler

a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages 
electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,

Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou 
falsifie. Merci.



This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged 
information that may be protected by law;

they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.

If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete 
this message and its attachments.

As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been 
modified, changed or falsified.

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

Re: [bess] short WGLC for draft-ietf-bess-service-chaining

[Henderickx, Wim (Nokia - BE/Antwerp)]

I am happy with the update. The encapsulation could also mention segment 
routing.

From: BESS  on behalf of Stephane Litkowski 

Date: Friday, 11 January 2019 at 00:37
To: "bess@ietf.org" 
Cc: "bess-cha...@ietf.org" 
Subject: [bess] short WGLC for draft-ietf-bess-service-chaining

Hi,

The draft-ietf-bess-service-chaining [1] document failed its WGLC with 
substantial comments received.
The document has been updated beginning of December and we would like to know 
if people are now happy with the content of the new version.

This email starts a poll of 1 week to gather additional comments or 
support/agreement.
This work is an old one and we should close it asap.

The poll runs until *** Friday 18th January 

Brgds,



[1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bess-service-chaining/



[Orange logo]

Stephane Litkowski
Network Architect
Orange/SCE/EQUANT/OINIS/NET
Orange Expert Future Networks
phone: +33 2 23 06 49 83 

  NEW !
mobile: +33 6 71 63 27 50 

  NEW !
stephane.litkow...@orange.com


_



Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations 
confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc

pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce 
message par erreur, veuillez le signaler

a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages 
electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,

Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou 
falsifie. Merci.



This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged 
information that may be protected by law;

they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.

If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete 
this message and its attachments.

As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been 
modified, changed or falsified.

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

Re: [bess] WGLC, IPR and implementation poll for draft-ietf-bess-mvpn-fast-failover => NEED your FEEDBACK

[Henderickx, Wim (Nokia - BE/Antwerp)]

I am not aware of IPR related to this draft other than the one that was 
disclosed.
We have an implementation of some use cases in the draft

From: BESS  on behalf of "Hassen, Clayton" 

Date: Wednesday, 28 November 2018 at 07:30
To: Stephane Litkowski , "bess@ietf.org" 

Subject: Re: [bess] WGLC, IPR and implementation poll for 
draft-ietf-bess-mvpn-fast-failover => NEED your FEEDBACK

I am unaware of any undisclosed IPR’s.

Thanks

--CH


From: "stephane.litkow...@orange.com" 
Date: Wednesday, November 28, 2018 at 4:53 AM
To: "raggarw...@yahoo.com" , 
"nehal.b...@alcatel-lucent.com" , Clayton Hassen 
, "wim.henderi...@alcatel-lucent.com" 
, "pradeep.j...@alcatel-lucent.com" 
, "jayant.kotal...@alcatel-lucent.com" 
, "praveen.mu...@alcatel-lucent.com" 
, "r...@juniper.net" , 
"kanwar.si...@alcatel-lucent.com" , 
"rkeb...@juniper.net" 
Subject: FW: [bess] WGLC, IPR and implementation poll for 
draft-ietf-bess-mvpn-fast-failover => NEED your FEEDBACK

Hi,

You are listed as contributor or co-author of this draft. Could you please 
respond to the IPR poll as soon as possible ? Please reply to the BESS WG list. 
If you are aware of an implementation, please also let us know.

Thank you

Brgds,

From: Greg Mirsky [mailto:gregimir...@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, November 26, 2018 03:47
To: LITKOWSKI Stephane OBS/OINIS
Cc: BESS; bess-cha...@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [bess] WGLC, IPR and implementation poll for 
draft-ietf-bess-mvpn-fast-failover

Hi Stephane, et al.,
I'm not aware of any IPR related to this draft other than already disclosed.

RE: implementation status
In Q1 of 2019, ZTE will release a product that includes support of this draft.

Regards,
Greg

On Wed, Nov 21, 2018 at 11:54 PM 
mailto:stephane.litkow...@orange.com>> wrote:

Hello Working Group,



This email starts a two-week Working Group Last Call on 
draft-ietf-bess-mvpn-fast-failover-04  [1]



This poll runs until *the 6th of December*.



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. The Document won't progress without answers from all the 
Authors and Contributors.



Currently two IPRs have been disclosed 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.



We are also polling for any existing implementation as per [2].



Thank you,

Stephane & Matthew



[1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bess-mvpn-fast-failover/



[2] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/bess/cG3X1tTqb_vPC4rg56SEdkjqDpw




_



Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations 
confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc

pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce 
message par erreur, veuillez le signaler

a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages 
electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,

Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou 
falsifie. Merci.



This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged 
information that may be protected by law;

they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.

If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete 
this message and its attachments.

As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been 
modified, changed or falsified.

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

_



Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations 
confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc

pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce 
message par erreur, veuillez le signaler

a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages 
electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,

Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou 
falsifie. Merci.



This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged 
information that may be protected by law;

they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.

If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete 
this message and its attachments.

As emails may be altered, 

Re: [bess] draft-ietf-bess-service-chaining

[Henderickx, Wim (Nokia - BE/Antwerp)]

Stuart thanks, we also support this but wanted to ensure some things that are 
obvious to some people are not for others and hence I believe we have a duty in 
IETF to make people aware about these things. Thx

From: Stuart Mackie 
Date: Tuesday, 6 November 2018 at 19:41
To: "Henderickx, Wim (Nokia - BE/Antwerp)" , 
"draft-ietf-bess-service-chain...@ietf.org" 
, "bess@ietf.org" 
Subject: Re: draft-ietf-bess-service-chaining

Hi Wim,

Stephane had alerted me to these comments you made a while ago, but which I 
missed at the time. Sorry for the delay in getting back to you.

*   The doc is much focused on the VRF constructions and architecture, but in 
some use cases we need to program the SF, which is not always clear and we 
should be a bit more explicit about it in the draft
SM> Agreed that programming the SF will almost always be required, but there 
isn’t any standard way of doing this. I can add a comment to that effect.
*   If a SF is L2 vs L3 we need to program the static NH and IP@ a bit 
different and we should clarify this
SM> I don’t think there is any difference for L3 routes  between L2 and L3 SFs 
– at a service egress the next hop is the forwarder where the next service is 
running with a label that identifies the ingress interface. There is a 
difference in that the VRF has to add an Ethernet header before sending into an 
L2 SF, which for non-transparent would be that of the ingress SF interface 
(known from when the SF was instantiated). For an L2 transparent service, the 
ingress VRF would put the MAC address of the egress forwarder (which since they 
can all be the same, would be the simplest), and then the egress forwarder 
rewrites the L2 destination if forwarding out of the service chain. I’ll add 
some detail on this.
*   A question I have is if in this architecture a SFF could be shared using 
the same interface/sub-interface with other service chains or not. Based on 
this it would also be good to document the things the SFC architecture allows 
and are supported or not with this proposal.
SM> Sharing can be done for transparent L2 SFs, where VLANs can be used to 
identify which virtual network a packet came from (already supported in 
Contrail), and for L3 SFs could potentially be supported using next-table 
policies in VRFs (similar to floating IP addresses). However, that depends on 
service chains being tied to subnets, which isn’t the scenario that is usually 
discussed in mobility applications where the chosen service chain is based on 
subscriber/application. I can add a couple of sentences on this.

Regards

Stuart
-914 886 2534

From: "Henderickx, Wim (Nokia - BE/Antwerp)" 
Date: Monday, November 5, 2018 at 2:17 AM
To: "draft-ietf-bess-service-chain...@ietf.org" 
, "bess@ietf.org" 
Subject: draft-ietf-bess-service-chaining
Resent-From: 
Resent-To: , , , 
, , 
Resent-Date: Monday, November 5, 2018 at 2:17 AM

Attached were my comments which I sent at the time which were not addressed so 
far in the doc.
Would be good if we can incorporate them before WG last call

https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/bess/current/msg00791.html<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.ietf.org_mail-2Darchive_web_bess_current_msg00791.html=DwMGaQ=HAkYuh63rsuhr6Scbfh0UjBXeMK-ndb3voDTXcWzoCI=iVavQx6gb7x-wiXKtJ7ryhHWVzNbV-FpJD1JlIhEm6s=uWaX1cs3QGWIWutYoveySsQRYlCX8sh7sALiGa91osk=2YXOxs06X6-NwAP3gYDrtB27peSlBZsN21WaSSE3pwc=>

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

Re: [bess] draft-ietf-bess-security-00.txt

[Henderickx, Wim (Nokia - BE/Antwerp)]

Also how does the solution behave if the edge device is no longer connected to 
the RR and does not get keys in time to refresh. Common issue in SD-WAN context 
which is in scope from what I understood on the discussion with Linda.

From: BESS  on behalf of Susan Hares 
Date: Monday, 5 November 2018 at 15:06
To: "bess@ietf.org" 
Subject: [bess] draft-ietf-bess-security-00.txt

Ali:

It would be useful to indicate how you keep the IPSEC information from going 
outside the AS.   For reference, this is Keyur Patel’s question.

Cheerily, Susan Hares
___
BESS mailing list
BESS@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess

[bess] draft-ietf-bess-service-chaining

[Henderickx, Wim (Nokia - BE/Antwerp)]

Attached were my comments which I sent at the time which were not addressed so 
far in the doc.
Would be good if we can incorporate them before WG last call

https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/bess/current/msg00791.html

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

Re: [bess] Second WG Last Call on draft-ietf-bess-vpls-multihoming-02

[Henderickx, Wim (Nokia - BE/Antwerp)]

Agreed.

From: BESS  on behalf of Jorge Rabadan 

Date: Monday, 24 September 2018 at 17:16
To: "Bocci, Matthew (Nokia - GB)" , "bess@ietf.org" 

Subject: Re: [bess] Second WG Last Call on draft-ietf-bess-vpls-multihoming-02

I fully support the publication of this document.
It should have been an RFC long time back. I don’t understand why it took so 
long.

Nokia has an implementation of this draft in SROS.

Thanks.
Jorge

From: BESS  on behalf of "Bocci, Matthew (Nokia - GB)" 

Date: Monday, September 24, 2018 at 1:04 PM
To: "bess@ietf.org" 
Subject: [bess] Second WG Last Call on draft-ietf-bess-vpls-multihoming-02

All

Since we have received a recent IPR declaration on this draft and the first WG 
last call was so long ago, we are running a second last call to reaffirm WG 
consensus to publish the draft as an RFC.

Therefore, this email begins a two-week working group last call for 
draft-ietf-bess-vpls-multihoming-02.txt

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

Currently there is one IPR declaration against this document.

We are also polling for any existing implementations.

The working group last call closes on Monday 8th Oct 2018.

Regards,
Matthew and Stéphane



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

Re: [bess] WGLC, IPR and implementation poll for draft-ietf-bess-service-chaining

[Henderickx, Wim (Nokia - BE/Antwerp)]

Stephane, I sent a list of question/clarifications/remarks some time ago. I 
haven’t seen them addresses so far on this draft

From: BESS  on behalf of Stephane Litkowski 

Date: Monday, 3 September 2018 at 10:30
To: "bess@ietf.org" 
Subject: [bess] WGLC, IPR and implementation poll for 
draft-ietf-bess-service-chaining


Hello Working Group,



This email starts a two-week Working Group Last Call on 
draft-ietf-bess-service-chaining-05 [1]



This poll runs until *the 17th of September*.



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. The Document won't progress without answers from all the 
Authors and Contributors.



Currently two IPRs have been disclosed 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.



We are also polling for any existing implementation as per [2].



Thank you,

Stephane & Matthew



[1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bess-service-chaining/



[2] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/bess/cG3X1tTqb_vPC4rg56SEdkjqDpw




[Orange logo]

Stephane Litkowski
Network Architect
Orange/SCE/EQUANT/OINIS/NET
Orange Expert Future Networks
phone: +33 2 23 06 49 83 

  NEW !
mobile: +33 6 71 63 27 50 

  NEW !
stephane.litkow...@orange.com


_



Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations 
confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc

pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce 
message par erreur, veuillez le signaler

a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages 
electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,

Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou 
falsifie. Merci.



This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged 
information that may be protected by law;

they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.

If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete 
this message and its attachments.

As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been 
modified, changed or falsified.

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

Re: [bess] WG adoption poll for draft-malhotra-bess-evpn-unequal-lb-04

[Henderickx, Wim (Nokia - BE/Antwerp)]

Same here. Support since this is very useful

From: BESS  on behalf of EXT Jeff Tantsura 

Date: Tuesday, 4 September 2018 at 11:45
To: "Acee Lindem (acee)" 
Cc: Stephane Litkowski , "bess@ietf.org" 

Subject: Re: [bess] WG adoption poll for draft-malhotra-bess-evpn-unequal-lb-04

Yes/support
On Tue, Sep 4, 2018 at 02:06 Acee Lindem (acee) 
mailto:40cisco@dmarc.ietf.org>> wrote:
I support WG adoption.
Thanks,
Acee

From: BESS mailto:bess-boun...@ietf.org>> on behalf of 
Stephane Litkowski 
mailto:stephane.litkow...@orange.com>>
Date: Tuesday, September 4, 2018 at 3:29 AM
To: "bess@ietf.org" mailto:bess@ietf.org>>
Subject: [bess] WG adoption poll for draft-malhotra-bess-evpn-unequal-lb-04

Hi WG,

This email begins a two-week poll for BESS working group adoption 
draft-malhotra-bess-evpn-unequal-lb-04 [1]

Please review the draft and post any comments to the BESS working group list, 
stating whether or not you support adoption.

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 won't progress 
without answers from all the authors and contributors.

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.

The poll for working group adoption closes on Tue 18th September.

Regards,
Stéphane and Matthew

[1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-malhotra-bess-evpn-unequal-lb/






_



Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations 
confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc

pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce 
message par erreur, veuillez le signaler

a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages 
electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,

Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou 
falsifie. Merci.



This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged 
information that may be protected by law;

they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.

If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete 
this message and its attachments.

As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been 
modified, changed or falsified.

Thank you.
___
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 last call and IPR Poll for draft-ietf-bess-evpn-proxy-arp-nd-04

[Henderickx, Wim (Nokia - BE/Antwerp)]

No aware of IPR related to this draft.
Document is stable and should progress to WG last call

From: BESS  on behalf of Jorge Rabadan 

Date: Tuesday, 14 August 2018 at 03:49
To: "Bocci, Matthew (Nokia - GB)" , "bess@ietf.org" 

Cc: "bess-cha...@ietf.org" 
Subject: Re: [bess] WG last call and IPR Poll for 
draft-ietf-bess-evpn-proxy-arp-nd-04

This document has been stable for a long time and it’s ready.
Not aware of any relevant IPR.

Also, Nokia SROS has an implementation of this draft that has been shipping for 
a long time now.

Thank you.
Jorge

From: BESS  on behalf of "Bocci, Matthew (Nokia - GB)" 

Date: Wednesday, August 8, 2018 at 7:25 AM
To: "bess@ietf.org" 
Cc: "bess-cha...@ietf.org" 
Subject: [bess] WG last call and IPR Poll for 
draft-ietf-bess-evpn-proxy-arp-nd-04

This email begins a two-week working group last call for 
draft-ietf-bess-evpn-proxy-arp-nd-04.txt
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 won't progress 
without answers from all the authors and contributors.

Currently there is one IPR declaration 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.

We are also polling for any existing implementations.

The working group last call closes on Wednesday 22nd August 2018.

Regards,
Matthew and Stéphane


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

Re: [bess] new WGLC for draft-ietf-bess-evpn-inter-subnet-forwarding-05

[Henderickx, Wim (Nokia - BE/Antwerp)]

Support as co-author

From: BESS  on behalf of Jorge Rabadan 

Date: Tuesday, 14 August 2018 at 01:26
To: Stephane Litkowski , "bess@ietf.org" 

Subject: Re: [bess] new WGLC for draft-ietf-bess-evpn-inter-subnet-forwarding-05

Support as co-author.
The document has been significantly improved and it is ready.

Thanks.
Jorge

From: BESS  on behalf of "stephane.litkow...@orange.com" 

Date: Wednesday, August 8, 2018 at 7:03 AM
To: "bess@ietf.org" 
Subject: [bess] new WGLC for draft-ietf-bess-evpn-inter-subnet-forwarding-05


Hello working group,



This email starts a two-week Working Group Last Call on 
draft-ietf-bess-evpn-inter-subnet-forwarding-05 [1].



A significant amount of update has been introduced since the previous WGLC. 
Please review the updates and provide your feedback.



This poll runs until *the 22th of August*.





Thank you



Stéphane, Matthew

bess chairs



[1] 
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bess-evpn-inter-subnet-forwarding/



_



Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations 
confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc

pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce 
message par erreur, veuillez le signaler

a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages 
electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,

Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou 
falsifie. Merci.



This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged 
information that may be protected by law;

they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.

If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete 
this message and its attachments.

As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been 
modified, changed or falsified.

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

Re: [bess] draft-ietf-bess-nsh-bgp-control-plane

[Henderickx, Wim (Nokia - BE/Antwerp)]

Adrian, yes lets discuss in Montreal to see how we can move fwd here.

On 01/07/2018, 14:11, "Adrian Farrel"  wrote:

Wim asked...
> would you consider adding an MPLS label to the SFIR route in order to
> support https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-malis-mpls-sfc-encapsulation-01.

I think that the idea of making such an addition is fine, but (and no 
offence
meant to the authors of draft-malis-mpls-sfc-encapsulation) we might want 
to get
a little more stability and (of course) clarify the relationship with
draft-ietf-mpls-sfc.

It would also be worth checking whether the mechanisms included in sections
3.2.1.5 and 3.2.1.6 already do the job, whether 7.6 helps explain, and 
whether
the (already defined) Tunnel Encapsulation attribute can help.

Shall we spend some face time in Montreal clarifying what needs to be added?

Cheers,
Adrian



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

Re: [bess] WG adoption and IPR poll for draft-sajassi-bess-evpn-vpws-fxc-03.txt

[Henderickx, Wim (Nokia - BE/Antwerp)]

Support the adoption. Very useful solution and implemented by a number of 
vendors.

From: BESS  on behalf of John E Drake 

Date: Monday, 9 April 2018 at 15:34
To: "Bocci, Matthew (Nokia - GB)" , 
"draft-sajassi-bess-evpn-vpws-...@ietf.org" 
, "bess@ietf.org" 
Subject: Re: [bess] WG adoption and IPR poll for 
draft-sajassi-bess-evpn-vpws-fxc-03.txt

I’m not aware of any IPR

Yours Irrespectively,

John

From: BESS  On Behalf Of Bocci, Matthew (Nokia - GB)
Sent: Monday, April 9, 2018 9:23 AM
To: draft-sajassi-bess-evpn-vpws-...@ietf.org; bess@ietf.org
Subject: [bess] WG adoption and IPR poll for 
draft-sajassi-bess-evpn-vpws-fxc-03.txt

This email begins a two-week poll for BESS working group adoption of 
draft-sajassi-bess-evpn-vpws-fxc-03.txt.

Please review the draft and post any comments to the BESS working group list, 
stating whether or not you support adoption.

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 won't progress 
without answers from all the authors and contributors.

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.

The poll for working group adoption closes on Monday 23rd April.

Regards,
Matthew and Stéphane

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

Re: [bess] WG Last Call and IPR Poll for draft-ietf-bess-evpn-vpls-seamless-integ-01.txt

[Henderickx, Wim (Nokia - BE/Antwerp)]

Support, we have an implementation on this

From: BESS  on behalf of EXT Jeff Tantsura 

Date: Wednesday, 4 April 2018 at 00:59
To: "Bocci, Matthew (Nokia - GB)" , 
"draft-ietf-bess-evpn-vpls-seamless-in...@ietf.org" 
, "bess@ietf.org" 

Cc: "bess-cha...@ietf.org" 
Subject: Re: [bess] WG Last Call and IPR Poll for 
draft-ietf-bess-evpn-vpls-seamless-integ-01.txt

Yes/support

Cheers,
Jeff
From: BESS  on behalf of "Bocci, Matthew (Nokia - GB)" 

Date: Wednesday, March 28, 2018 at 5:50 AM
To: "draft-ietf-bess-evpn-vpls-seamless-in...@ietf.org" 
, "bess@ietf.org" 

Cc: "bess-cha...@ietf.org" 
Subject: [bess] WG Last Call and IPR Poll for 
draft-ietf-bess-evpn-vpls-seamless-integ-01.txt

This email begins a two-week working group last call for 
draft-ietf-bess-evpn-vpls-seamless-integ-01.txt

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 won't progress 
without answers from all the authors and contributors.
Currently there is one IPR declaration 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.
We are also polling for any existing implementations.
The working group last call closes on Wednesday 11th April.

Regards,
Matthew and Stéphane

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

Re: [bess] WGLC on draft-ietf-bess-evpn-df-election-framework

[Henderickx, Wim (Nokia - BE/Antwerp)]

Support, not aware of IPR related to this draft.

From: BESS  on behalf of John E Drake 

Date: Monday, 26 March 2018 at 21:53
To: Stephane Litkowski , "bess@ietf.org" 

Subject: Re: [bess] WGLC on draft-ietf-bess-evpn-df-election-framework

Support, not aware of any undisclosed IPR.

Yours Irrespectively,

John

From: BESS  On Behalf Of stephane.litkow...@orange.com
Sent: Monday, March 26, 2018 10:21 AM
To: bess@ietf.org
Subject: [bess] WGLC on draft-ietf-bess-evpn-df-election-framework


Hello working group,



This email starts a two-week Working Group Last Call on 
draft-ietf-bess-evpn-df-election-framework-00 [1]



This poll runs until *the 9th of April*.



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. The Document won't progress without answers from all the 
Authors and Contributors.



Currently no IPR has been disclosed 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.



We are also polling for any existing implementation.



Thank you



Matthew, Stéphane

bess chairs



[1] 
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bess-evpn-df-election-framework/



_



Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations 
confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc

pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce 
message par erreur, veuillez le signaler

a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages 
electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,

Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou 
falsifie. Merci.



This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged 
information that may be protected by law;

they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.

If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete 
this message and its attachments.

As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been 
modified, changed or falsified.

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

Re: [bess] [mpls] [sfc] Progress with draft-farrel-mpls-sfc

[Henderickx, Wim (Nokia - BE/Antwerp)]

Jim whats wrong with this draft:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-bess-service-chaining-04

It provides simple service chaining using MPLS techniques


From: "UTTARO, JAMES" <ju1...@att.com>
Date: Tuesday, 20 March 2018 at 11:30
To: Stephane Litkowski <stephane.litkow...@orange.com>, "LINGALA, AVINASH" 
<ar9...@att.com>, "mohamed. boucadair" <mohamed.boucad...@orange.com>, 
"Henderickx, Wim (Nokia - BE/Antwerp)" <wim.henderi...@nokia.com>, Robert 
Raszuk <rob...@raszuk.net>, Adrian Farrel <adr...@olddog.co.uk>
Cc: mpls <m...@ietf.org>, SPRING WG List <spr...@ietf.org>, "s...@ietf.org" 
<s...@ietf.org>, "bess@ietf.org" <bess@ietf.org>
Subject: RE: [mpls] [sfc] Progress with draft-farrel-mpls-sfc

I guess I am not being clear.

The issue as I see it is that I do not require NSH to realize the creation of 
simple chains. I simply need SR to realize the chain. Why is the IETF forcing 
me to adopt technology that I do not need, while at the same time reducing the 
number of vendors that I may use in my network as this encap will have to be 
supported by traditional OEMs and others looking to get into the business.

TBC I am not against NSH it addresses use cases where dynamic complex chains 
are required. The reality of my world is that I have lots of simpler chains i.e 
FW, LB  and do not need the additional OPEX and CAPEX  costs associated with 
deploying NSH.

Jim Uttaro

From: stephane.litkow...@orange.com [mailto:stephane.litkow...@orange.com]
Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2018 6:25 AM
To: LINGALA, AVINASH <ar9...@att.com>; BOUCADAIR Mohamed IMT/OLN 
<mohamed.boucad...@orange.com>; UTTARO, JAMES <ju1...@att.com>; Henderickx, Wim 
(Nokia - BE/Antwerp) <wim.henderi...@nokia.com>; Robert Raszuk 
<rob...@raszuk.net>; Adrian Farrel <adr...@olddog.co.uk>
Cc: mpls <m...@ietf.org>; SPRING WG List <spr...@ietf.org>; s...@ietf.org; 
bess@ietf.org
Subject: RE: [mpls] [sfc] Progress with draft-farrel-mpls-sfc

> Same approach that IETF took for EVPN  with various encap options like MPLS, 
> VXLAN, GENEVE,..

Well you do have the same thing with SFC/NSH, you can use any type of transport 
underneath: MPLS, VXLAN, GRE,UDP,…

In your example EVPN provides the service, then you pick the transport you want.
Here SFC/NSH may provide the service (chaining), then you pick also the 
transport you want.


From: mpls [mailto:mpls-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of LINGALA, AVINASH
Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2018 10:06
To: BOUCADAIR Mohamed IMT/OLN; UTTARO, JAMES; Henderickx, Wim (Nokia - 
BE/Antwerp); Robert Raszuk; Adrian Farrel
Cc: mpls; SPRING WG List; s...@ietf.org<mailto:s...@ietf.org>; 
bess@ietf.org<mailto:bess@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [mpls] [sfc] Progress with draft-farrel-mpls-sfc


I support this effort and I agree with Jim.  As an operator we would like to 
see various encapsulation options for SFC. This would help an operator to pick 
the suitable encapsulation option for their networks.

Same approach that IETF took for EVPN  with various encap options like MPLS, 
VXLAN, GENEVE,..

​
Thanks,
Avinash Lingala


From: BESS [mailto:bess-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of 
mohamed.boucad...@orange.com<mailto:mohamed.boucad...@orange.com>
Sent: Monday, March 19, 2018 10:25 AM
To: UTTARO, JAMES <ju1...@att.com<mailto:ju1...@att.com>>; Henderickx, Wim 
(Nokia - BE/Antwerp) 
<wim.henderi...@nokia.com<mailto:wim.henderi...@nokia.com>>; Robert Raszuk 
<rob...@raszuk.net<mailto:rob...@raszuk.net>>; Adrian Farrel 
<adr...@olddog.co.uk<mailto:adr...@olddog.co.uk>>
Cc: mpls <m...@ietf.org<mailto:m...@ietf.org>>; SPRING WG List 
<spr...@ietf.org<mailto:spr...@ietf.org>>; bess@ietf.org<mailto:bess@ietf.org>; 
s...@ietf.org<mailto:s...@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [bess] [sfc] [mpls] Progress with draft-farrel-mpls-sfc

Re-,

This is really a matter of taste.

Jim, whatever scheme we use for identifying service chains, there are 
requirements/constraints/new practices/new OAM procedures that need to be 
supported/honored for service chaining purposes.

Those are not simple nor complex in MPLS vs. NSH over MPLS. I’m wrong?

Cheers,
Med

De : UTTARO, JAMES [mailto:ju1...@att.com]
Envoyé : lundi 19 mars 2018 14:10
À : BOUCADAIR Mohamed IMT/OLN; Henderickx, Wim (Nokia - BE/Antwerp); Robert 
Raszuk; Adrian Farrel
Cc : mpls; SPRING WG List; s...@ietf.org<mailto:s...@ietf.org>; 
bess@ietf.org<mailto:bess@ietf.org>
Objet : RE: [sfc] [mpls] Progress with draft-farrel-mpls-sfc

Med,

When I say simply, I am speaking as an operator. The 
operations, systems, tools, institutional knowledge etc… in this space is 
around MPLS. There is a simpler path to creating simple chains by using MPLS 
instead of introducing a new encap.

Thanks,
  

Re: [bess] [mpls] [sfc] Progress with draft-farrel-mpls-sfc

[Henderickx, Wim (Nokia - BE/Antwerp)]

Jim and a few others started to document how we can use MPLS as transport to 
support service chaining with NSH.
The draft needs a lot of work and is right now focussed on SR but will also 
work on any MPLS transport: LDP, RSVP, SPRING, etc etc + how to use in 
IP-VPN/EVPN.
We will refine it and update it but for reference:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-guichard-sfc-nsh-sr-00


From: Stephane Litkowski <stephane.litkow...@orange.com>
Date: Tuesday, 20 March 2018 at 10:24
To: "LINGALA, AVINASH" <ar9...@att.com>, "mohamed. boucadair" 
<mohamed.boucad...@orange.com>, "UTTARO, JAMES" we <ju1...@att.com>, 
"Henderickx, Wim (Nokia - BE/Antwerp)" <wim.henderi...@nokia.com>, Robert 
Raszuk <rob...@raszuk.net>, Adrian Farrel <adr...@olddog.co.uk>
Cc: mpls <m...@ietf.org>, SPRING WG List <spr...@ietf.org>, "s...@ietf.org" 
<s...@ietf.org>, "bess@ietf.org" <bess@ietf.org>
Subject: RE: [mpls] [sfc] Progress with draft-farrel-mpls-sfc

> Same approach that IETF took for EVPN  with various encap options like MPLS, 
> VXLAN, GENEVE,..

Well you do have the same thing with SFC/NSH, you can use any type of transport 
underneath: MPLS, VXLAN, GRE,UDP,…

In your example EVPN provides the service, then you pick the transport you want.
Here SFC/NSH may provide the service (chaining), then you pick also the 
transport you want.


From: mpls [mailto:mpls-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of LINGALA, AVINASH
Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2018 10:06
To: BOUCADAIR Mohamed IMT/OLN; UTTARO, JAMES; Henderickx, Wim (Nokia - 
BE/Antwerp); Robert Raszuk; Adrian Farrel
Cc: mpls; SPRING WG List; s...@ietf.org; bess@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [mpls] [sfc] Progress with draft-farrel-mpls-sfc


I support this effort and I agree with Jim.  As an operator we would like to 
see various encapsulation options for SFC. This would help an operator to pick 
the suitable encapsulation option for their networks.

Same approach that IETF took for EVPN  with various encap options like MPLS, 
VXLAN, GENEVE,..

​
Thanks,
Avinash Lingala


From: BESS [mailto:bess-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of 
mohamed.boucad...@orange.com<mailto:mohamed.boucad...@orange.com>
Sent: Monday, March 19, 2018 10:25 AM
To: UTTARO, JAMES <ju1...@att.com<mailto:ju1...@att.com>>; Henderickx, Wim 
(Nokia - BE/Antwerp) 
<wim.henderi...@nokia.com<mailto:wim.henderi...@nokia.com>>; Robert Raszuk 
<rob...@raszuk.net<mailto:rob...@raszuk.net>>; Adrian Farrel 
<adr...@olddog.co.uk<mailto:adr...@olddog.co.uk>>
Cc: mpls <m...@ietf.org<mailto:m...@ietf.org>>; SPRING WG List 
<spr...@ietf.org<mailto:spr...@ietf.org>>; bess@ietf.org<mailto:bess@ietf.org>; 
s...@ietf.org<mailto:s...@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [bess] [sfc] [mpls] Progress with draft-farrel-mpls-sfc

Re-,

This is really a matter of taste.

Jim, whatever scheme we use for identifying service chains, there are 
requirements/constraints/new practices/new OAM procedures that need to be 
supported/honored for service chaining purposes.

Those are not simple nor complex in MPLS vs. NSH over MPLS. I’m wrong?

Cheers,
Med

De : UTTARO, JAMES [mailto:ju1...@att.com]
Envoyé : lundi 19 mars 2018 14:10
À : BOUCADAIR Mohamed IMT/OLN; Henderickx, Wim (Nokia - BE/Antwerp); Robert 
Raszuk; Adrian Farrel
Cc : mpls; SPRING WG List; s...@ietf.org<mailto:s...@ietf.org>; 
bess@ietf.org<mailto:bess@ietf.org>
Objet : RE: [sfc] [mpls] Progress with draft-farrel-mpls-sfc

Med,

When I say simply, I am speaking as an operator. The 
operations, systems, tools, institutional knowledge etc… in this space is 
around MPLS. There is a simpler path to creating simple chains by using MPLS 
instead of introducing a new encap.

Thanks,
        Jim Uttaro

From: mohamed.boucad...@orange.com<mailto:mohamed.boucad...@orange.com> 
[mailto:mohamed.boucad...@orange.com]
Sent: Monday, March 19, 2018 10:03 AM
To: UTTARO, JAMES <ju1...@att.com<mailto:ju1...@att.com>>; Henderickx, Wim 
(Nokia - BE/Antwerp) 
<wim.henderi...@nokia.com<mailto:wim.henderi...@nokia.com>>; Robert Raszuk 
<rob...@raszuk.net<mailto:rob...@raszuk.net>>; Adrian Farrel 
<adr...@olddog.co.uk<mailto:adr...@olddog.co.uk>>
Cc: mpls <m...@ietf.org<mailto:m...@ietf.org>>; SPRING WG List 
<spr...@ietf.org<mailto:spr...@ietf.org>>; s...@ietf.org<mailto:s...@ietf.org>; 
bess@ietf.org<mailto:bess@ietf.org>
Subject: RE: [sfc] [mpls] Progress with draft-farrel-mpls-sfc

Re-,

I’m afraid that you cannot ‘simply’ re-use MPLS for chaining purposes without 
any code upgrade.


NSH does provide the simple functionality you need; that is the information to 
identify a chain + avoid infinite loops. This is known as: MD Type 0x2 with 
length is 0x2.

Of course you can encode that information

Re: [bess] [sfc] [mpls] Progress with draft-farrel-mpls-sfc

[Henderickx, Wim (Nokia - BE/Antwerp)]

Indeed, this is exactly my point. If you want an interim solution you want to 
use what we have and draft-ietf-bess-service-chaining-04 is an example of how 
you can use the existing data-plane for service chaining. draft-farrel-mpls-sfc 
requires an implementation change in the data-plane, whether we like it or not 
and an upgrade is required even in brownfield deployments. So, you better go 
directly to the final solution defined in IETF SFC WG. If we standardize 
draft-farrel-mpls-sfc we end up supporting both forever.

From: <rras...@gmail.com> on behalf of Robert Raszuk <rob...@raszuk.net>
Date: Saturday, 17 March 2018 at 19:13
To: Adrian Farrel <adr...@olddog.co.uk>
Cc: "Henderickx, Wim (Nokia - BE/Antwerp)" <wim.henderi...@nokia.com>, mpls 
<m...@ietf.org>, SPRING WG List <spr...@ietf.org>, "s...@ietf.org" 
<s...@ietf.org>, "bess@ietf.org" <bess@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [sfc] [mpls] Progress with draft-farrel-mpls-sfc

Hi Adrian,

> That proxy may be a bump in the wire between the SFF and SF


I am not so sure about that ... If this would be just "bump in the wire" you 
would have zero guarantees that all packets which need to go via given function 
will actually hit that bump - so this is far from a reliable network service.

There must be associated control plane component attracting traffic to such 
bump.

That mechanism with basic MPLS (where labels by based MPLS architecture are of 
local significance) is available with L3VPN extensions as already progressing 
in BESS (draft-ietf-bess-service-chaining-04) so why not use this for as you 
state "interim" ?

No one really addressed that question yet and I think it is a critical one to 
make any further judgement  as to the future of this individual submission.

Cheers,
R.



On Sat, Mar 17, 2018 at 6:46 PM, Adrian Farrel 
<adr...@olddog.co.uk<mailto:adr...@olddog.co.uk>> wrote:
Hi Wim,

Thanks for reading the draft so carefully.

> Adrian, on replacement of NSH. You will have to change the SF with this 
> proposal
> in Non proxy case so this proposal does not solve a brownfield case. Which 
> SF(s)
> support MPLS?

This is not about "replacing" the NSH. As you'll see from point 2, below, this 
is about providing an interim / migration technology.

Clearly (and I think you agree) in the case where an SF is not SFC-aware, a 
proxy must be used. That proxy may be a bump in the wire between the SFF and 
SF, a module of the SFF, or a module of the SF. In the case of PNFs, only the 
first two options are available. In the case of a VNF, all three options exist.

Now, let us recall where we are starting from. There are PNFs and there are 
VNFs built to look like PNFs. These SFs do not support MPLS or NSH.

Similarly, there are routers that do not support the NSH.

Now, of course, we would all love to sell major upgrades so that every 
component of the network is SFC-aware. But we would also like to start 
deploying SFC into existing network infrastructure.

So your question misses the point. The question to ask is which brownfield 
routers and SFs support NSH?

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

Re: [bess] New bess WG Co-Chair

[Henderickx, Wim (Nokia - BE/Antwerp)]

Thx for all the hard work Martin and enjoy the new endeavour.


From: BESS  on behalf of Jorge Rabadan 

Date: Tuesday, 13 February 2018 at 19:40
To: "Satya Mohanty (satyamoh)" , Ali Sajassi 
, Alvaro Retana , "bess@ietf.org" 

Subject: Re: [bess] New bess WG Co-Chair

+1

Excellent job, Martin, thank you very much for your time and dedication!

Jorge

From: BESS  on behalf of "Satya Mohanty (satyamoh)" 

Date: Tuesday, February 13, 2018 at 7:29 PM
To: "Ali Sajassi (sajassi)" , Alvaro Retana 
, "bess@ietf.org" 
Subject: Re: [bess] New bess WG Co-Chair

Second that.
Thanks Martin for all the work that you undertook while being chair.

Best Regards,
—Satya

From: BESS > on behalf of 
"Ali Sajassi (sajassi)" >
Date: Tuesday, February 13, 2018 at 9:27 AM
To: Alvaro Retana >, 
"bess@ietf.org" >
Subject: Re: [bess] New bess WG Co-Chair


Martin, thank you for all your work and efforts for this WG and reviewing/ 
shepherding many drafts.

Matthew, welcome to BESS.

Cheers,
Ali

From: BESS > on behalf of 
Alvaro Retana >
Date: Tuesday, February 13, 2018 at 8:11 AM
To: "bess@ietf.org" >
Subject: [bess] New bess WG Co-Chair

Dear bess WG:

As you know, Martin has been selected as a Routing AD starting next month at 
IETF 101 in London.  As a result, he will be stepping down as bess co-chair.  
Martin: thank you for all the work and time you have dedicated to the WG — we 
all look forward to working with you in your new role.  Congratulations!

In consultation with Stephane and the other ADs, we have asked Matthew Bocci to 
take on the role of bess Co-Chair.  Matthew is an experienced Chair (he is also 
the Co-Chair of nvo3, and has served in other WGs) and has been participating 
in the IETF for over a decade.

I am adding Matthew as a third Chair to facilitate the transition.  The 
expectation is that he will fully take over for Martin at IETF 101.  Welcome 
Matthew!

Matthew can be reached at 
matthew.bo...@nokia.com.

Thanks!

Alvaro.

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

Re: [bess] WG Last Call (including implem status) for draft-ietf-bess-evpn-ac-df

[Henderickx, Wim (Nokia - BE/Antwerp)]

Support as contributor, not aware of IPR related to this draft

From: BESS  on behalf of Jorge Rabadan 

Date: Monday, 29 January 2018 at 03:53
To: Stephane Litkowski , "bess@ietf.org" 
, "draft-ietf-bess-evpn-ac-df.auth...@ietf.org" 

Subject: Re: [bess] WG Last Call (including implem status) for 
draft-ietf-bess-evpn-ac-df

Support this document, as co-author, for publication as Informational RFC.
Not aware of any related IPR.

Nokia SROS has a full implementation of this draft.

Thank you.
Jorge


From: "stephane.litkow...@orange.com" 
Date: Monday, January 29, 2018 at 9:27 AM
To: "bess@ietf.org" , 
"draft-ietf-bess-evpn-ac-df.auth...@ietf.org" 

Subject: WG Last Call (including implem status) for draft-ietf-bess-evpn-ac-df
Resent-From: 
Resent-To: , , 
, , , 

Resent-Date: Monday, January 29, 2018 at 9:27 AM


Hello Working Group,



This email starts a Working Group Last Call on

draft-ietf-bess-evpn-ac-df-03 [1] which is considered mature and

ready for a final working group review.



Please read this document if you haven't read the most recent version

yet, and send your comments to the list, no later than *12th of February*.

Note that this is *not only* a call for comments on the document; it is

also a call for support (or not) to publish this document as an 
Informational

RFC.



In addition, we are also polling for knowledge of any IPR that

applies to draft-ietf-bess-evpn-ac-df, 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 a document Author or Contributor of the draft

please respond to this email and indicate whether or not you are aware

of any relevant IPR.



Note that, as of today, no IPR has been disclosed against this document

or its earlier versions.



We are **also polling for knowledge of implementations** of part or all

of what this document specifies. This information is expected as per [2].

Please inform the mailing list, or the chairs, or only one of the chairs.



Thank you,

Stephane & Martin



[1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bess-evpn-ac-df/

[2] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/bess/cG3X1tTqb_vPC4rg56SEdkjqDpw






_



Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations 
confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc

pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce 
message par erreur, veuillez le signaler

a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages 
electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,

Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou 
falsifie. Merci.



This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged 
information that may be protected by law;

they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.

If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete 
this message and its attachments.

As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been 
modified, changed or falsified.

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

Re: [bess] Call for adoption: draft-lin-bess-evpn-irb-mcast

[Henderickx, Wim (Nokia - BE/Antwerp)]

support

On 11/01/2018, 10:50, "BESS on behalf of Rabadan, Jorge (Nokia - US/Mountain 
View)"  wrote:

Support as co-author. Not aware of any IPR relevant to this document.

This is an important document. It describes a solution that integrates 
L2/L3 multicast in a very efficient and simplified way, under a single control 
plane protocol. It will be key for multicast applications in Data Centers and 
overlay networks. This revision is very mature already and includes all the 
details needed for the implementation, therefore it is ready for adoption.  

Thank you.
Jorge
 

-Original Message-
From: Martin Vigoureux 
Date: Thursday, January 11, 2018 at 2:12 AM
To: "bess@ietf.org" 
Cc: "draft-lin-bess-evpn-irb-mc...@ietf.org" 

Subject: Call for adoption: draft-lin-bess-evpn-irb-mcast
Resent-From: 
Resent-To: , , , 
, , 
Resent-Date: Thursday, January 11, 2018 at 2:12 AM

Hello working group,

This email starts a two-week call for adoption on 
draft-lin-bess-evpn-irb-mcast-04 [1] as a BESS Working Group Document.

Please state on the list if you support the adoption or not (in both 
cases, please also state the reasons).

This poll runs until *the 26th of January*.

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. The Document won't progress without answers
from all the Authors and Contributors.

Currently no IPR has been disclosed 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.

Thank you

Martin & Stéphane
bess chairs

[1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-lin-bess-evpn-irb-mcast/


___
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] New bess Co-Chair

[Henderickx, Wim (Nokia - BE/Antwerp)]

And one more. Thx Thomas and welcome Stephane

From: BESS  on behalf of EXT Jeff Tantsura 

Date: Friday, 1 December 2017 at 14:00
To: Andrew Dolganow 
Cc: Jorge Rabadan , Tony Przygienda 
, "bess@ietf.org" , Alvaro Retana 

Subject: Re: [bess] New bess Co-Chair

+1
Regards,
Jeff

On Dec 1, 2017, at 13:08, Dolganow, Andrew (Nokia - SG/Singapore) 
> wrote:
+1

Andrew

Sent from my iPhone

On Dec 1, 2017, at 11:27 AM, Rabadan, Jorge (Nokia - US/Mountain View) 
> wrote:
+1

Welcome Stephane!
And Thomas, thank you very much for all your hard work. You’ve been crucial for 
all the work in this WG.


On 12/1/17, 8:27 AM, "BESS on behalf of Tony Przygienda" 
 on behalf of 
tonysi...@gmail.com> wrote:

Ack, welcome, great to have more and more operators getting involved in the 
sausage definition. This leads often to early discussions and better 
appreciation of the challenges of ultimately pouring the resulting tapestry of 
RFCs into bits and silicon ;-)
--- tony

On Fri, Dec 1, 2017 at 8:16 AM, Alvaro Retana 
> wrote:
Dear bess WG:

I am sad to report that Thomas Morin has decided not to continue as bess 
Co-Chair due to the demands of his job.  Thomas: thank you for all the effort 
you have put into the WG, we all look forward to your continued contributions 
to the IETF!

In consultation with Martin and the other ADs, we have asked Stephane Litkowski 
to take on the role of bess Co-Chair.  As most of you know, Stephane works at 
Orange Business Services, has been involved in the IETF for several years and 
had made significant contributions in a number of WGs in and out of the Routing 
Area.  Welcome Stephane!

Stephane can be reached at 
stephane.litkow...@orange.com.

This change is effective immediately.

Thanks!

Alvaro.

___
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
___
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] Call for adoption: draft-snr-bess-evpn-na-flags

[Henderickx, Wim (Nokia - BE/Antwerp)]

Yes/support

On 22/09/2017, 01:22, "BESS on behalf of Jeff Tantsura"  wrote:

yes/support

Cheers,
Jeff


On 9/12/17, 12:35 AM, "BESS on behalf of Martin Vigoureux" 
 wrote:

Hello working group,

This email starts a two-week call for adoption on 
draft-snr-bess-evpn-na-flags-07 [1] as a Working Group Document.

Please state on the list if you support the adoption or not (in 
both 
cases, please also state the reasons).

This poll runs until *the 26th of September*.

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. The Document won't progress without 
answers
from all the Authors and Contributors.

Currently no IPR has been disclosed 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.

Thank you

Martin & Thomas
bess chairs

[1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-snr-bess-evpn-na-flags/

___
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



___
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] My fumbled answer :-)

[Henderickx, Wim (Nokia - BE/Antwerp)]

Adrian, the question is mainly what we are trying to achieve here with the 
draft.
If the goal is providing E2E SR-TE and utilizing all paths between the 
different DC(s) e.g. SR-TE policy does this as well.

You advertise a BGP SR-TE-policy with the different paths and you bind the 
prefix to them using the BGP-NH/colour. You can define a colour and weights and 
preferences to determine if you want to use ECMP, different weights or active 
standby, etc. A similar use case is described here: 
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-filsfils-spring-segment-routing-policy-01

I am mainly arguing the way we convey the different SR-TE path information. 
With SR-TE policy you get a level of indirection which means every time the 
path changes you don’t need to re-advertise the prefix, but just update the 
SR-TE policy update.

What is not part of SR-TE policy is GW discovery and you would need a 
controller to achieve the same thing. 

Hope this clarifies


On 20/07/2017, 16:29, "Adrian Farrel"  wrote:

Hi Wim,

That wasn't my most glorious moment :-)

I don't think that draft-drake-bess-datacenter-gateway and
draft-ietf-idr-segment-routing-te-policy are anything other than 
complementary.
Nor, apparently does Eric as he is a co-author of both documents :-)

I think high-level document names can sometimes lead to some confusion, but 
the
combination of "BGP", "SR", and "TE" in the same overviews only goes to show
that they are in the same general space, not that they overlap.

If you take a look at draft-farrel-spring-sr-domain-interconnect-00 you'll 
see
it references [I-D.previdi-idr-segment-routing-te-policy] (now adopted by 
the
IDR working group) as the assumed mechanism for advertising intra-AS links 
that
are SR TE policies. We also note that
[I-D.previdi-idr-segment-routing-te-policy] offers a method for label stack
compression.

I think the two mechanisms provide different functions, but functions that 
could
(or even should) be integrated into a deployable solution.

Thanks (and sorry again),

Adrian



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

Re: [bess] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-bess-evpn-optimized-ir

[Henderickx, Wim (Nokia - BE/Antwerp)]

Read and no further comments, so ready for WGLC
As a co-author not aware of IPR related to this draft
We have implementation on this

On 16/06/2017, 15:43, "thomas.mo...@orange.com"  wrote:

Hello Working Group,

This email starts a Working Group Last Call on 
draft-ietf-bess-evpn-optimized-ir-01 [1] which is considered mature and 
ready for a final working group review.

Please read this document if you haven't read the most recent version 
yet, and send your comments to the list, no later than *30th of June*.
Note that this is *not only* a call for comments on the document; it is 
also a call for support (or not) to publish this document as a Standard 
Track RFC.

*Coincidentally*, we are also polling for knowledge of any IPR that 
applies to draft-ietf-bess-evpn-optimized-ir, 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 a document Author or Contributor of the draft 
please respond to this email and indicate whether or not you are aware 
of any relevant IPR.

Note that, as of today, no IPR has been disclosed against this document 
or its earlier versions.

We are **also polling for knowledge of implementations** of part or all 
of what this document specifies. This information is expected as per [2].
Please inform the mailing list, or the chairs, or only one of the chairs.

Thank you,
T

[1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bess-evpn-optimized-ir/
[2] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/bess/cG3X1tTqb_vPC4rg56SEdkjqDpw



_

Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations 
confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc
pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu 
ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler
a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages 
electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,
Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou 
falsifie. Merci.

This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged 
information that may be protected by law;
they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.
If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and 
delete this message and its attachments.
As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been 
modified, changed or falsified.
Thank you.



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

Re: [bess] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-bess-evpn-usage

[Henderickx, Wim (Nokia - BE/Antwerp)]

Support as co-author. Not aware of IPR related to this draft

From: BESS  on behalf of Senad IETF - Internet 
Engineering Task Force 
Date: Monday, 12 June 2017 at 21:28
To: "Vigoureux, Martin (Nokia - FR/Nozay)" 
Cc: BESS 
Subject: Re: [bess] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-bess-evpn-usage

Full support of this document for RFC publication.  As a co-author, I am not 
aware of any IPR related to this document.

On Tue, Jun 6, 2017 at 10:11 AM, Martin Vigoureux 
> wrote:
Hello Working Group,

This email starts a Working Group Last Call on draft-ietf-bess-evpn-usage-04 
[1] which is considered mature and ready for a final working group review.

Please read this document if you haven't read the most recent
version yet, and send your comments to the list, no later than
*20th of June*.
Note that this is *not only* a call for comments on the document; it is also a 
call for support (or not) to publish this document as an Informational RFC.

*Coincidentally*, we are also polling for knowledge of any IPR that applies to 
draft-ietf-bess-evpn-usage, 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 a document Author or Contributor of
draft-ietf-bess-evpn-usage-04 please respond to this email and indicate whether 
or not you are aware of any relevant IPR.

Note that, as of today, no IPR has been disclosed against this document or its 
earlier versions.

As opposed to the policy [2], we are not polling for knowledge of 
implementations as it does not seem to make sense in that case. If you feel 
otherwise, please let us know.

Thank you,
M

[1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bess-evpn-usage/
[2] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/bess/cG3X1tTqb_vPC4rg56SEdkjqDpw

___
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