Re: [alto] Meeting Info for Oct 26, 2021

Thank Jensen to provide ALTO OAM work status update in the weekly meeting. Two open issues are brought up: 1. How to understand the intent based interface? 2. When we say internal or external, compare with who, it is internal or external? A few quick suggestions to your shared

[alto] 转发: Kick off discussion on ALTO OAM work

Good questions, Jensen, would you like to clarify these issues? -Qin 发件人: roland.sch...@telekom.de [mailto:roland.sch...@telekom.de] 发送时间: 2021年10月26日 21:28 收件人: jen...@jensen-zhang.site; Qin Wu 抄送: dhruv.i...@gmail.com 主题: AW: Kick off discussion on ALTO OAM work Hi all, thank you Qin for

Re: [alto] Kick off discussion on ALTO OAM work

Hi, Jensen: 发件人: Jensen Zhang [mailto:jen...@jensen-zhang.site] 发送时间: 2021年10月26日 9:54 收件人: Qin Wu 抄送: alto@ietf.org; alto-chairs ; Dhruv Dhody 主题: Re: Kick off discussion on ALTO OAM work Hi Qin and all, The updated version of the ALTO OAM draft is available here:

Re: [alto] Opsdir last call review of draft-ietf-alto-path-vector-17

Dear Time, We have just submitted a revision of the Path Vector draft (-19). Below are the links to the latest revision and the diffs. Please see inline the pointers to the proposed changes to the comments, in brief: 1. More detailed examples are given in Sec 4.2: a. what is the role of ALTO

Re: [alto] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-alto-path-vector-17

Dear Suresh, Please see below our latest revision of the Path Vector draft (-19). We have added IPv6 examples for each endpoint-based example. We hope this addresses your comments. Draft: https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-alto-path-vector-19.html Diffs:

[alto] Fw: I-D Action: draft-ietf-alto-path-vector-19.txt

Dear WG members and reviewers, We have just submitted a new version of the Path Vector draft. This revision addresses the comments in the Last Call reviews, most notably: 1. Add IPv6 examples 2. Change the "content-id" format in multipart messages to conform to RFC 2387 5322 3. Add

Re: [alto] Designated Experts

Hi Martin, Sorry for the late response. I had a discussion with Qin yesterday on the responsibility of designated experts. I think I can do it. Best, Kai 2021-10-27 03:18:35"Martin Duke" wrote: Kai, does this work for you? Any other nominations? On Mon, Oct 25, 2021 at 10:57 PM Qin Wu

Re: [alto] Designated Experts

Thanks Martin, Kai agreed to do this in last night weekly meeting discussion. Yes, this is IETF review. Thank for checking registration procedure type. -Qin 发件人: Martin Duke [mailto:martin.h.d...@gmail.com] 发送时间: 2021年10月27日 6:03 收件人: Qin Wu 抄送: IETF ALTO 主题: Re: [alto] Designated Experts

Re: [alto] Designated Experts

Never mind, this is IETF review, so there is no DE needed. On Tue, Oct 26, 2021 at 12:18 PM Martin Duke wrote: > Kai, does this work for you? > > Any other nominations? > > On Mon, Oct 25, 2021 at 10:57 PM Qin Wu wrote: > >> Hi, Martin: >> >> I suggest Kai, as the primary, I can be the backup.

Re: [alto] Designated Experts

Kai, does this work for you? Any other nominations? On Mon, Oct 25, 2021 at 10:57 PM Qin Wu wrote: > Hi, Martin: > > I suggest Kai, as the primary, I can be the backup. > > > > -Qin > > *发件人:* alto [mailto:alto-boun...@ietf.org] *代表 *Martin Duke > *发送时间:* 2021年10月26日 8:43 > *收件人:* IETF ALTO >

Re: [alto] Meeting Info for Oct 26, 2021

Hi all, Thanks for the great discussion today. The slides for today's ALTO OAM discussion are available here: https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1ZptSLG8NBdN0zM20MPcjLLvlqI81GtdSLU70-o-XYys/edit?usp=sharing I haven't got a chance to present all the open discussion items. They are listed on