Hi Roman,
Many thanks for your further feedback. We just uploaded revision -17 to
address your comments.
HTML: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-alto-oam-yang-17
Diff: https://author-tools.ietf.org/iddiff?url2=draft-ietf-alto-oam-yang-17
Please see our detailed responses inline
Hi Roman,
Sorry for the delay. We just uploaded the revision -16 to resolve your
comments: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-alto-oam-yang-16
We put detailed responses inline below. Please let us know if more is
needed.
Thanks,
Jensen
On Thu, Oct 26, 2023 at 7:31 PM Jensen
Hi Zahed,
Sorry for the delay. The new revision has been uploaded to resolve your
comment: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-alto-oam-yang-16
Please let us know if it is enough.
Thanks,
Jensen
On Thu, Dec 14, 2023 at 5:45 PM Zaheduzzaman Sarker <
zahed.sarker.i...@gmail.com>
; On Dec 12, 2023, at 7:47 AM, Jensen Zhang
> wrote:
>
> Hi authors,
>
> I am one of the authors of the draft-ietf-alto-oam-yang draft. Our draft
> is trying to reuse some groupings and typedefs in this document to support
> some TLS authentication features. But we find the
Hi authors,
I am one of the authors of the draft-ietf-alto-oam-yang draft. Our draft is
trying to reuse some groupings and typedefs in this document to support
some TLS authentication features. But we find the current typedef
'public-key-ref' cannot be used by another module.
To be more
Hi Ted,
Thanks for the comments on the NAPTR-related part. It is very helpful.
To be more concrete, this "rdns-naptr-records" YANG node is to configure
DNS for the U-NAPTR lookup suggested by Sec 3.4 of RFC 8686 (
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc8686#name-step-3-perform-dns-u-naptr-).
Hi Tom,
Many thanks for following up on this document. Sorry to miss the issues.
We have fixed them in
https://github.com/ietf-wg-alto/draft-ietf-alto-oam-yang/pull/100 and will
merge the changes to the next revision.
Thanks,
Jensen
On Thu, Oct 26, 2023 at 7:25 PM tom petch wrote:
> I
Hi Roman,
Many thanks for all the comments. Please see my responses inline below.
Thanks,
Jensen
On Wed, Oct 25, 2023 at 12:23 AM Roman Danyliw via Datatracker <
nore...@ietf.org> wrote:
> Roman Danyliw has entered the following ballot position for
> draft-ietf-alto-oam-yang-15: Discuss
>
>
Hi Scott,
Many thanks for catching the typo. The -15 version should fix it.
Thanks,
Jensen
On Fri, Oct 20, 2023 at 7:53 AM Scott Rose via Datatracker
wrote:
> Reviewer: Scott Rose
> Review result: Ready with Nits
>
> There does not appear to be any change to the text that relates how the
>
gt; Application-Layer Traffic Optimization (ALTO) WG of the IETF.
> >
> >Title : YANG Data Models for the Application-Layer
> > Traffic Optimization (ALTO) Protocol
> >Authors : Jingxuan Jensen Zhang
> > Dhruv Dhody
> >
Hi Mahdi,
Many thanks for your review comments. Based on your comments, the authors
have revised the document. Please see our responses inline.
Thanks,
Jensen on behalf of co-authors of draft-ietf-alto-oam-yang
On Thu, Jun 1, 2023 at 3:21 AM Mahdi Soleimani
wrote:
> Dear authors,
>
> I have
Hi Med and all,
Authors appreciate all the comments. We are working on the new revision and
will upload it this week.
Thanks,
Jensen on behalf of co-authors of draft-ietf-alto-oam-yang
On Wed, Jun 7, 2023 at 3:38 PM wrote:
> Hi all,
>
>
>
> The WGLC is now closed for the document. No
Hi Adrian,
Many thanks for your early review and quick comments.
On Mon, May 22, 2023 at 6:41 AM Adrian Farrel wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
>
> I looked at revision -07
>
>
>
> This is a really big document and would probably benefit from a more
> detailed review than I was able to give it. But it looks
Hi Richard,
Many thanks for your wonderful comments. Please see my response inline.
Looking forward to seeing your further review comments.
Thanks,
Jensen
On Mon, May 22, 2023 at 10:23 AM Y. Richard Yang wrote:
> Hi Jensen, all,
>
> Thank you for authoring the OAM document. It clearly is a
Hi Jordi,
Many thanks for your thorough review and wonderful comments. Please see my
response inline.
Thanks,
Jensen
On Sun, May 21, 2023 at 1:22 PM Jordi Ros Giralt
wrote:
> Please find below comments from my latest review of the
> doc draft-ietf-alto-oam-yang. No major blockers from my
Hi Shenshen,
Many thanks for your review comments. Please see my response inline.
Thanks,
Jensen
On Sat, May 20, 2023 at 6:05 PM Shenshen Chen
wrote:
> Hi, all
>
> I wrote a review for draft-ietf-alto-oam-yang-07, following the call for
> volunteers from Jordi.
> Since I am not confident
Hi Dong,
Many thanks for your review. Please see my response inline.
Thanks,
Jensen
On Fri, May 19, 2023 at 11:33 PM wrote:
> Dear ALTOers and authors of draft-ietf-alto-oam-yang,
>
> Below is my review for draft-ietf-alto-oam-yang-07.
>
> Since I'm new to ALTO, please consider my review
Hi Med,
Sorry for the late reply.
On Tue, May 9, 2023 at 9:39 PM wrote:
> Hi Jensen,
>
>
>
> Thanks for drafting that text. I do still that some sensitive data nodes
> have to be listed. For example,
>
>
>
>- Access to all authentication-related data nodes should be protected;
>those
Hi Med,
I am not aware of which data nodes are sensitive in this module. If you
find any, please point them out.
But I am aware that the extended modules (e.g., examples in the appendix)
may include sensitive data. Especially, the "data-source" node. So I added
a new paragraph [1] to clarify
Hi Jordi,
Many thanks for the proofreading and editing suggestions. The proposed
changes improve the text a lot.
Thanks,
Jensen
On Tue, May 2, 2023 at 5:41 AM Jordi Ros Giralt
wrote:
> Hi ALTOers,
>
> Luis and Jensen have revived these two drafts in prep for the next interim
> meeting:
>
>
Hi Dan,
Thanks for your feedback. See my response inline.
On Wed, Apr 26, 2023 at 3:25 PM Dan Romascanu wrote:
> Hi Jensen,
>
> Thank you for your email and for addressing my comments.
>
> See in-line.
>
> Regards,
>
> Dan
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Apr
Hi Luis and all,
Thanks for this useful collection of data sources. Besides the data sources
listed in this collection, I am wondering if the following kinds of data
sources can also be considered:
1. Prefix information, e.g., internet routing registry (IRR). It provides
route and provider
Hi Dan,
Sorry for the delay. Many thanks for your review. Please see our response
inline below.
On Fri, Apr 21, 2023 at 4:00 PM Dan Romascanu via Datatracker <
nore...@ietf.org> wrote:
> Reviewer: Dan Romascanu
> Review result: Has Nits
>
> Ready with Nits
>
> This document defines YANG data
Hi Andy,
Great thanks for your thorough yangdoctors review. We have gone over all
your comments. Please see our responses inline.
You can also check details of our proposed changes in the [GitHub
issues][1].
[1]:
Hi Luis,
Great thanks for your comments. Please see my answers inline.
Thanks,
Jensen
On Tue, Apr 4, 2023 at 3:39 AM LUIS MIGUEL CONTRERAS MURILLO <
luismiguel.contrerasmuri...@telefonica.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
>
>
> My apologies for answering late to this WGLC.
>
>
>
> I do support the
Hi Spencer,
Many thanks for your comments. See my answers inline.
On Fri, Mar 24, 2023 at 4:15 PM Spencer Dawkins via Datatracker <
nore...@ietf.org> wrote:
> Reviewer: Spencer Dawkins
> Review result: Ready
>
> I didn't have any questions on the document as written, and it's worth
> adding
>
Hi ALTOers,
We will have two ALTO-related projects presented in the coming IETF
hackathon:
- ALTO Transport Information Publication Service
- ALTO O driven by YANG data models
They will show our current progress of the reference implementations for
the two charter items.
The presentation
Hi,
I am not aware of any IPR related to this document.
Thanks,
Jensen
On Mon, Feb 27, 2023 at 11:16 PM Dhruv Dhody wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am not aware of any IPR related to this draft.
>
> Thanks,
> Dhruv
>
> On Mon, 27 Feb 2023 at 19:28, wrote:
>
>> Hi Authors,
>>
>>
>>
>> Please reply to
ity nominal
>
Thanks for capturing all the nits. Will fix them.
Thanks,
Jensen
>
>
> >-Original Message-
> >From: alto On Behalf Of internet-dra...@ietf.org
> >Sent: Saturday, February 11, 2023 3:53 AM
> >To: i-d-annou...@i
On Wed, Feb 22, 2023 at 11:35 AM maqiufang (A)
wrote:
> Hi, Jensen
>
>
>
> BTW. There seems to exist some revision inconsistence warnings:
>
> libyang warn: File name "ietf-alto-st...@2022-07-11.yang" does not match
> module revision "2023-02-10".
>
> libyang warn: File name
list definition?
>
I think leaf-list should be enough. Will change it.
>
>
> BTW. There seems to exist some revision inconsistence warnings:
>
> libyang warn: File name "ietf-alto-st...@2022-07-11.yang" does not match
> module revision "2023-02-10".
>
>
Hi Jordi,
Many thanks for the review. See my response inline.
On Fri, Feb 17, 2023 at 12:38 AM Jordi Ros Giralt
wrote:
> Hi Jensen and authors,
>
> Below my comments, thanks.
>
>
> Comments related to the two YANG Models:
> ---
>
> * In
rectories.
> This draft is a work item of the Application-Layer Traffic Optimization WG
> of the IETF.
>
> Title : A Yang Data Model for OAM and Management of ALTO
> Protocol
> Authors : Jingxuan Jensen Zhang
>
b.com/ietf-wg-alto/draft-ietf-alto-oam-yang
Cheers,
Jensen
On Tue, Jan 17, 2023 at 4:46 PM Jensen Zhang
wrote:
> Hi Qiufang,
>
> Many thanks for your deep review. See my feedback inline.
>
> On Tue, Jan 17, 2023 at 11:23 AM maqiufang (A)
> wrote:
>
>> Hi, all
>&g
Hi Qiufang,
Many thanks for your deep review. See my feedback inline.
On Tue, Jan 17, 2023 at 11:23 AM maqiufang (A)
wrote:
> Hi, all
>
>
>
> I had a chance to take a deeper look at this -02 version — not the other
> parts, but only the YANG model related to the data-source configuration,
>
Hi ALTOers,
>From the discussion about the ALTO O draft last week, we find there is
another open issue that we should solve before we request YANG doctor
reviews:
According to Section 16.2.4 of RFC7285 and Requirement R5-3 of the ALTO O
draft, the data model should support configuration for
Hi Jordi, all,
Sorry, it seems that I just missed the side meeting. I thought it would be
my tomorrow... Is there any recording or meeting minutes for the side
meeting?
Thanks,
Jensen
On Wed, Nov 9, 2022 at 1:37 AM Jordi Ros Giralt
wrote:
> Adding Teams meeting in case we can't run the
Hi all,
I just bring the open discussion about multi-domain support on ALTO O
data model to this separate thread. See my comments inline below.
Thanks,
Jensen
On Tue, Sep 6, 2022 at 9:13 PM Jensen Zhang
wrote:
> Hi Qin,
>
> Sorry for my late reply. See my comments inline.
>
>
all,
>
>
> Thanks for the discussion. Please see my comments inline.
>
>
> Best,
>
> Kai
>
> -Original Messages-
> *From:*"Jensen Zhang"
> *Sent Time:*2022-09-06 21:13:01 (Tuesday)
> *To:* "Qin Wu"
> *Cc:* "IETF ALTO"
> *Su
Hi Richard and all,
Thanks for the heads up. Our approach can be considered as a proactive mode
of the multidomain query described in the last email. Instead of searching
for each (srcIP, dstIP) pair, the algorithm works at the granularity of IP
prefixes.
We consider the case that each domain
Hi Qin,
Sorry for my late reply. See my comments inline.
On Sun, Aug 21, 2022 at 8:44 AM Qin Wu wrote:
> Hi, Jensen:
>
> Thank for summarizing the discussion in last IETF meeting, please see my
> comments inline.
>
>
>
> *发件人:* alto [mailto:alto-boun...@ietf.org] *
Hi ALTOers,
>From the WG session in IETF 114, we had a lot of discussions about the open
issues for ALTO O Authors appreciate all the comments and are working on
the next revision.
We quickly summarize the major debates and are willing to have more
discussions to move this work forward. To be
is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts
> directories.
> This draft is a work item of the Application-Layer Traffic Optimization WG
> of the IETF.
>
> Title : A Yang Data Model for OAM and Management of ALTO
> Protocol
> Authors
Hi Qiufang,
On Wed, Jul 13, 2022 at 9:48 AM maqiufang (A) wrote:
> Hi, Jensen
>
> Please see my reply inline.
>
>
>
> *From:* Jensen Zhang [mailto:jingxuan.n.zh...@gmail.com
> ]
> *Sent:* Tuesday, July 12, 2022 3:54 PM
> *To:* maqiufang (A)
> *Cc:* draft-
Hi Qiufang,
Many thanks for your comments again.
On Mon, Jul 11, 2022 at 4:14 PM maqiufang (A) wrote:
> Hi, all
>
>
>
> I have reviewed the draft-ietf-alto-oam-yang-00 draft today, and have got
> some comments regarding ietf-alto YANG module defined in the draft.
>
>
>
> Please feel free to
Hi Kevin,
Thanks for the information about the new CDNI footprint types.
RFC 9241 is going to be published soon. To leverage Sec 6 of RFC 9241 [1],
the new footprint type should be added to the ALTO Entity Domain Types
registry.
[1]
Hi all,
We are working on an I-D [1] that requires enumeration typedefs for some
IANA registries. We notice that some modules [2] self-contain identities
and typedefs for IANA registries, but some other modules [3] create
separated `iana-xxx-types.yang` modules.
We wonder what is the best
Hi WG,
As a co-author, it is obvious that I support the adoption.
Also, I am not aware of any IPR related to this document.
Thanks,
Jensen
On Tue, May 31, 2022 at 7:11 PM Qin Wu
wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
>
>
> This begins a 2 week WG Adoption Call for the following draft:
>
>
>
>
Hi WG,
I am not aware of any IPR related to this draft.
Thanks,
Jensen
On Wed, Mar 30, 2022 at 6:06 PM wrote:
> Hi WG,
>
> I am not aware of any IPR related to this document.
>
>
> Best,
>
> Kai
>
>
>
> -Original Messages-
> *From:*"Wei Wang"
> *Sent Time:*2022-03-30 14:37:41
Hi YANG doctors,
We are working on an I-D [1] that requires enumeration typedefs for some
IANA registries. We notice that some modules [2] self-contain identities
and typedefs for IANA registries, but some other modules [3] create
separated `iana-xxx-types.yang` modules.
We wonder what is the
://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-alto-cdni-request-routing-alto-21
Diff:
https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-alto-cdni-request-routing-alto-21.txt
Please let us know if they address your concerns.
Best regards,
Jensen
On Tue, Jan 18, 2022 at 10:00 PM Jensen Zhang
wrote:
> Hi Roman,
>
Hi Qiao,
Thanks for your review. See my quick response inline.
Thanks,
Jensen
On Tue, Feb 8, 2022 at 9:26 PM Qiao Xiang wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> The following are some comments on draft-zhang-alto-oam-yang-01:
>
> 1. Title: Yang -> YANG
>
Good point.
>
> 2. Introduction: "The basic propose"
Hi Qiufang,
Many thanks for your comments and YANG code! We will use your YANG code as
a base to complete our next revision. Thanks for your contribution.
Your comments on the scope of this document are also very valuable.
Thanks,
Jensen
On Sat, Jan 29, 2022 at 5:13 PM maqiufang (A) wrote:
>
Hi Adrian,
Really thank you for your "sanity review"! It is very helpful for us at
this moment. Let me separate my response into two parts to answer your
comments.
The following response applies to your comments until Sec 3. I'll send
another email to respond to your remaining comments soon.
Hi Francesca,
Thanks for pointing the remaining comments out. The new version is
available now:
IETF datatracker status page:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-alto-cdni-request-routing-alto/
HTML version:
Hi Roman,
Many thanks for your comments. See our answers inline. Please let us know
if they address your concerns.
On Thu, Jan 6, 2022 at 5:31 AM Roman Danyliw via Datatracker <
nore...@ietf.org> wrote:
> Roman Danyliw has entered the following ballot position for
>
Hi Francesca,
A new version that echoes the replies already provided in this thread is
available:
URL:
https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-alto-cdni-request-routing-alto-19.txt
Status:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-alto-cdni-request-routing-alto/
Htmlized:
Hi Alexey,
Thanks for your answer.
On Wed, Dec 15, 2021 at 6:52 PM Alexey Melnikov
wrote:
> Hi Jensen,
> On 15/12/2021 02:06, Jensen Zhang wrote:
>
> Hi Alexey,
>
> Thanks for your comments. Also thanks to Qin for your help. I will split
> the media-type registrati
Hi Alexey,
Thanks for your comments. Also thanks to Qin for your help. I will split
the media-type registration into two separated subsections as well as
address all your other comments and get back to you soon. For some of
your comments, I have some further questions inline.
Thanks,
Jensen
On
.
Please let me know if you still have any comments. Thanks.
Cheers,
Jensen
On Fri, Dec 10, 2021 at 12:05 AM Murray S. Kucherawy
wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 8, 2021 at 3:44 AM Jensen Zhang
> wrote:
>
>>
>> What your text tells me is that your document describes what a valid
>&
Hi Éric,
A new version that echoes the replies already provided in this thread is
available:
URL:https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-alto-cdni
-request-routing-alto-18.txt
Status: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-alto-cdni
-request-routing-alto/
Htmlized:
Hi Roman,
A new version that echoes the replies already provided in this thread is
available:
URL:https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-alto-cdni
-request-routing-alto-18.txt
Status: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-alto-cdni
-request-routing-alto/
Htmlized:
Hi Francesca,
A new version that echoes the replies already provided in this thread is
available:
URL:
https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-alto-cdni-request-routing-alto-18.txt
Status:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-alto-cdni-request-routing-alto/
Htmlized:
On Wed, Dec 8, 2021 at 3:02 PM Murray S. Kucherawy
wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 7, 2021 at 4:03 AM Jensen Zhang
> wrote:
>
>>
>> The "Interoperability considerations" part of Section 7.1 doesn't seem to
>>> be a
>>> complete answer to the
Welcome Med!
And thanks to Jan for your past work.
Jensen
On Tue, Dec 7, 2021 at 9:46 PM wrote:
> Welcome Med! Looking forward to working with you!
>
>
> Thanks Jan!
>
>
> Best,
>
> Kai
>
>
> -Original Messages-
> *From:*"LUIS MIGUEL CONTRERAS MURILLO" <
>
Hi Murray,
Thanks for your comments. Please see the authors' response inline.
Thanks,
Jensen
On Mon, Dec 6, 2021 at 3:44 PM Murray Kucherawy via Datatracker <
nore...@ietf.org> wrote:
> Murray Kucherawy has entered the following ballot position for
>
Hi Donald,
Many thanks for your review. Please see my responses inline.
Thanks,
Jensen
On Sat, Nov 27, 2021 at 10:19 AM Donald Eastlake via Datatracker <
nore...@ietf.org> wrote:
> Reviewer: Donald Eastlake
> Review result: Ready with Issues
>
> I am an assigned INT directorate reviewer for
>
Hi Klaas and Qin,
Thanks for the review and suggestions. See my comments inline.
Thanks,
Jensen
On Tue, Nov 30, 2021 at 12:59 AM Klaas Wierenga wrote:
> Hi Qin,
>
> > On 24 Nov 2021, at 14:07, Qin Wu wrote:
> >
> > Hi, Klaas:
> > -邮件原件-
> > 发件人: Klaas Wierenga via Datatracker
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
Dear all,
The video recording of the internal meeting yesterday has been uploaded.
For people who were not able to join the meeting, if you are interested in
the missing talks and discussions, welcome to check the recording.
Hi Spencer,
Many thanks for your review. Please see my responses inline.
Thanks,
Jensen
On Wed, Sep 8, 2021 at 4:41 AM Spencer Dawkins via Datatracker <
nore...@ietf.org> wrote:
> Reviewer: Spencer Dawkins
> Review result: Ready with Issues
>
> I'm sorry for running late on this review, and
Hi Scott,
Thanks for your review. About your questions, please see my answers inline.
Best regards,
Jensen
On Wed, Aug 25, 2021 at 10:08 PM Scott Bradner via Datatracker <
nore...@ietf.org> wrote:
> Reviewer: Scott Bradner
> Review result: Ready
>
> This is an OPD-DIR review of ALTO
Hi Thomas,
Thanks for the very nice review! Please see our responses inline.
Thanks,
Jensen
On Sat, Aug 28, 2021 at 8:28 AM Thomas Fossati via Datatracker <
nore...@ietf.org> wrote:
> Reviewer: Thomas Fossati
> Review result: Ready with Nits
>
> # Abstract
>
> I suggest to slightly increase
Hi Russ,
Thanks for the very nice review. Please see our responses inline.
Thanks,
Jensen
On Thu, Aug 19, 2021 at 10:40 PM Russ Housley via Datatracker <
nore...@ietf.org> wrote:
> Reviewer: Russ Housley
> Review result: Almost Ready
>
> I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The
Hi ALTOers,
A new draft draft-zhang-alto-oam-yang-00 (
https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-zhang-alto-oam-yang-00.txt) has been
submitted.
As the new working group charter proposed, this draft defines a YANG data
model for the operations and management of ALTO protocol and networks that
use
Hi all,
As multiple ALTO extensions have been or are going to be published and
introduce multiple versions of the ALTO message formats, I just create a
GitHub repo to maintain a collection of JSON schemas that can be used to
validate ALTO protocol messages in different versions:
Hi Qin,
It looks nice. Shall we send pull requests or you add us as collaborators
of each repo?
Cheers,
Jensen
On Mon, Mar 22, 2021 at 7:09 PM Qin Wu wrote:
> Excellent, Kai, can you move path vector document into
>
> https://github.com/ietf-wg-alto/
>
Hi,
I need to mention that daylight saving time began last Sunday in the US. If
we still align the time with US EST, the meeting time should be 2:00 pm CET
and 9:00 pm Beijing time.
Best,
Jensen
On Mon, Mar 15, 2021 at 10:40 PM wrote:
> Dear all,
>
>
> This is a friendly reminder that we
Hi all,
Please see my comments inline.
On Thu, Mar 11, 2021 at 2:38 PM Qin Wu wrote:
> Hi, Richard:
>
> *发件人:* alto [mailto:alto-boun...@ietf.org] *代表 *Y. Richard Yang
> *发送时间:* 2021年3月11日 12:52
> *收件人:* LUIS MIGUEL CONTRERAS MURILLO <
> luismiguel.contrerasmuri...@telefonica.com>
> *抄送:*
in the scope of our previous work. But personally,
if ALTO servers report different cost metrics, I think one potential
solution is to design a negotiation mechanism similar to the ethernet link
connection negotiation before the client does any ALTO queries.
Thanks,
Jensen
>
>
> -Qin
>
Hi Qin and Qiao,
Please see my comments inline.
On Thu, Mar 4, 2021 at 11:57 PM Qiao Xiang wrote:
> Hi Qin,
>
> Thank you so much for the feedback. Please see my responses inline.
>
> On Thu, Mar 4, 2021 at 9:22 PM Qin Wu wrote:
>
>> Thanks Qiao for sharing your project on Unicorn and thought
Hi Dhruv,
Thanks a lot for your feedback.
On Thu, Mar 4, 2021 at 2:07 PM Dhruv Dhody wrote:
> Hi Jensen,
>
> Thanks for starting this thread. It is great that you are thinking of
> similar questions as I was :)
>
> On Wed, Mar 3, 2021 at 9:03 PM Jensen Zhang
> wr
Dear all,
I would like to make some comments on the 3rd recharter item.
This item is going to propose YANG data models for ALTO configuration and
management. Most of this kind of YANG data models for communication
protocols like PCEP [1] and HTTP [2] will support both client and server
tual mentions of the documents in question.
>
>
>
> Please fix them.
>
>
>
> -Qin
>
> *发件人:* alto [mailto:alto-boun...@ietf.org] *代表 *Jensen Zhang
> *发送时间:* 2021年1月12日 14:36
> *收件人:* IETF ALTO
> *主题:* [alto] Fwd: I-D Action:
> draft-ietf-alto-cdni-request-routin
>
> -Qin
>
> [alto] Review for draft-ietf-alto-performance-metrics-12
>
> Jensen Zhang Tue, 13 October 2020 04:17 UTCShow
> header
> <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/alto/qZrkPza-vEUcIqQMR3OJfk8G-uw/>
>
> Dear ALTOers and authors of draft-ietf-alto-perfo
int and Capabilities Advertisement using ALTO
Authors : Jan Seedorf
Y.R. Yang
Kevin J. Ma
Jon Peterson
Jingxuan Jensen Zhang
Filename: draft-ietf-alto-cdni-request
tension (i.e., RFC8895), I think the current update/control stream
service is limited. e.g., It cannot handle the input change very well.
>
>
> -Qin
>
> *发件人:* alto [mailto:alto-boun...@ietf.org] *代表 *Jensen Zhang
> *发送时间:* 2020年12月10日 0:08
> *收件人:* LUIS MIGUEL CONTRERAS
Hi Qin,
Glad to see your feedback.
On Mon, Nov 16, 2020 at 10:14 PM Qin Wu wrote:
> Regarding the topic 3, I think investigating the configuration,
> management, and
>
> operation of ALTO systems is interesting, I am wondering how network
> topology model in RFC8345
>
> and TE topology model
Dear all,
Please find below a WG item proposal for “Operation Automation for ALTO”,
on which your feedback and suggestions will be more than welcome.
Thanks,
Jensen
Operation Automation for ALTO
=
## Proposed paragraph
Best practice
Hi all,
Sorry for the inconvenience. For today's meeting, we will switch to the new
bridge: https://yale.zoom.us/my/jensenzhang
Best,
Jensen
On Mon, Oct 12, 2020 at 9:20 AM wrote:
> Hello everyone,
>
>
> *IMPORTANT*: According to the doodle poll, our weekly meeting will be
> moved to *9:00
Dear ALTOers and authors of draft-ietf-alto-performance-metrics-12,
Below is my review for draft-ietf-alto-performance-metrics-12.
Best regards,
Jensen
==
General issue:
The document is well written. I only have one question about the design
part:
Hi Vijay,
I can also provide another review for performance-metrics. I see there have
been already two reviewers. Do we still need one more?
Thanks,
Jensen
On Tue, Sep 29, 2020 at 2:53 PM Vijay Gurbani
wrote:
> Dear Danny: Excellent, and thank you for your time on this.
>
> We still need one
IEEE ref: how to move quickly
>
> - ALTO Unified properties WGLC: status of review
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Sabine
>
>
>
> *From:* alto-weekly-meet...@googlegroups.com <
> alto-weekly-meet...@googlegroups.com> *On Behalf Of *Jensen Zhang
> *Sent:* Wedne
Hi ALTOers,
Just a friendly reminder that we will still continue our weekly meeting
this Wednesday at *9:00 am - 10:00 am US ET*.
Meeting bridge: https://yale.zoom.us/my/yryang
For this week, we are going to start the individual rechartering item
discussion from "Extension of ALTO to support
Dear ALTOers,
Sorry for the last-minute reminder. We will continue our weekly meeting
this Wednesday at 9:00 am - 10:00 am US ET.
Meeting bridge: https://yale.zoom.us/my/yryang
In the last few weeks, we have discussed and drafted the abstract of WG
rechartering items [1][2]. Any comments will
Dear ALTOers,
Just a friendly reminder that we will continue our weekly meeting this
Wednesday (*Sep-09*) at *9:00 am - 10:00 am US ET*.
The draft agenda*:
- Finalize the draft write-up for WG rechertering
- Open discussion slots
Meeting bridge: https://yale.zoom.us/my/yryang
*If you
Dear ALTOers,
Just a friendly reminder that we will have our weekly meeting this
Wednesday (*Aug-26*) at *9:00 am - 10:00 am US ET*.
We will keep the discussions about rechartering items from last week.
The draft agenda*:
- Remaining WG documents
- WG rechartering discussion
- Open
Dear ALTOers,
We will resume our weekly meeting this Wednesday (*Aug-19*) from *9:00 am *-*
10:00 am US ET*.
For tomorrow, the initial agenda will be:
- Very quick update about remaining WG documents status
- Planning for WG recharting and potential interim meeting
- Open discussion
Hi Sebastian, Ingmar, Danny, all,
First, thanks for all your discussions. I also have several comments.
Please see inline.
On Tue, Jul 14, 2020 at 2:39 PM Sebastian Kiesel wrote:
>
> Hi Ingmar, all,
>
> On Tue, Jul 14, 2020 at 01:33:37PM +0200, Ingmar Poese wrote:
> > Am 14.07.20 um 11:56
Hi Vijay,
Just a quick update. We will also submit the cdni document to follow the
unified-props updates today.
Best,
Jensen
On Mon, Jul 13, 2020 at 5:51 PM wrote:
> Hi Vijay,
>
>
> For path vector, I think we are on track. We will submit the document
> today.
>
>
> Best,
>
> Kai
>
>
>
1 - 100 of 187 matches
Mail list logo
