2023 at 13:21
To: Eric Vyncke (evyncke) , The IESG
Cc: draft-ietf-bess-pbb-evpn-isid-cmacfl...@ietf.org
, bess-cha...@ietf.org
, bess@ietf.org , Matthew Bocci (Nokia)
Subject: Re: Éric Vyncke's No Objection on
draft-ietf-bess-pbb-evpn-isid-cmacflush-08: (with COMMENT)
Hi Éric,
Thanks very much
Thank you, Jorge, for taking the time to reply.
I can only regret the use of “DP” rather than “DNP”, but you have a point if
there are existing implementations.
Regards
-éric
From: Jorge Rabadan (Nokia)
Date: Friday, 6 October 2023 at 21:51
To: Eric Vyncke (evyncke) , The IESG
Cc: draft
Hello Jeffrey,
Thanks again for your reply. Please look below for EV>
-éric
From: Jeffrey (Zhaohui) Zhang
Date: Wednesday, 4 October 2023 at 20:24
To: Eric Vyncke (evyncke) , The IESG
Cc: draft-ietf-bess-mvpn-evpn-aggregation-la...@ietf.org
, bess-cha...@ietf.org
, bess@ietf.
Thank you, let's wait until the shepherd updates his write-up, then I am
clearing my DISCUSS
-éric
On 29/09/2023, 16:38, "Jeffrey (Zhaohui) Zhang" mailto:zzh...@juniper.net>> wrote:
Hi Eric,
Thanks for your thorough review.
I have submitted the -12 revision that fixes the reference error
As the L3VPN activities have been transferred to the BESS WG, I would
appreciate feedback from the BESS WG on this errata.
https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?eid=7180
The section 4.3.4 text
" Note that this VPN architecture does not require the capability to
distribute unlabeled
Thank you, Parag, for the changes.
As you have seen by now, I have cleared my previous DISCUSS ballot.
Regards
-éric
PS: please accept my apologies for delayed reaction
From: "Parag Jain (paragj)"
Date: Monday, 8 May 2023 at 19:22
To: Eric Vyncke , The IESG
Cc:
Luc André
Luc André Burdet | Cisco | laburdet.i...@gmail.com | Tel: +1 613 254 4814
From: BESS on behalf of Mankamana Mishra (mankamis)
Date: Friday, March 4, 2022 at 12:09
To: Eric Vyncke (evyncke) , John E Drake
, The IESG
Cc: draft-ietf-bess-evpn-igmp-mld-pr...@ietf.org
, bess-cha...@
embership queries to find out if there are hosts
on that subnet that are still interested in receiving multicast
traffic for that group. The IGMP/MLD Proxy solution described in
this draft accomplishes has three objectives:
does this change look ok ?
From: Eric Vyncke (evyncke)
Date: Frida
Hello John,
Thanks for your quick reply, even if I am unsure how to read " Yours
Irrespectively," as I am not an English-native person.
Thank you for pointing me to the new sections 9.1.2 & others => I will update
my DISCUSS on this point w/o sending another email.
But section 1 still
Hello Mankamana,
Thanks for your reply, see below for EV> (I have elided the original DISCUSS
part). As soon as a revised I-D is uploaded, then I am clearing my DISCUSS.
Regards
-éric
From: "Mankamana Mishra (mankamis)"
Date: Friday, 11 February 2022 at 00:33
To: Eric Vyncke , The IESG
Cc:
Hello Ketan
Thank you for your prompt reply and for uploading a revised I-D. I am also
sorry for my belated reply :-(
The revised I-D addresses all my DISCUSS points, i.e., I am clearing my ballot
into a NO OBJECTION in a couple of hours (I have a call now).
About the non-blocking COMMENT, I
Hello Mankamana and other authors,
Is there a plan to solve my remaining blocking DISCUSS point ? I.e., how can a
recipient EVPN speaker can translate back the BGP information into MLD/IGMP
packets?
Section 4.1 contains " The information is again translated back to IGMP message
at the
Hello Mankamana,
Thank you for your constructive reply, please see below for EV> as I am afraid
that your answers do not address completely my concerns.
Regards
-éric
From: "Mankamana Mishra (mankamis)"
Date: Monday, 25 October 2021 at 20:26
To: Eric Vyncke , The IESG
Cc:
Zhaohui
Thank you for your reply, I am OK with your answers.
Regards
-éric
On 19/10/2021, 20:56, "Jeffrey (Zhaohui) Zhang" wrote:
Hi Eric,
Thanks for your comments. Please see zzh> below.
-Original Message-
From: Éric Vyncke via Datatracker
Sent: Monday,
Thank you Pascal
I have entered a NO OBJECTION ballot on this document with a request to the
authors (in copy) to reply to all points of your review.
Regards
-éric
On 15/10/2021, 15:44, "Int-dir on behalf of Pascal Thubert via Datatracker"
wrote:
Reviewer: Pascal Thubert
Review
eplies with NA messages, assuming a successful
lookup on the Proxy-ND table. An unsuccessful lookup will result
on a ‘forward’ behavior (i.e., flood the NS message based on
the MAC DA.
Please let me know if you are ok with it.
Thank you!
Jorge
From: Eric Vyncke (ev
ee my comments and resolutions below with [jorge3]. Revision 15
incorporates all the changes.
Assuming this can clear your DISCUSS and COMMENTs (please let us know
otherwise), I think the document also addresses Erik Kline’s comments, and it
is now ready to go.
Thanks.
Jorge
From: Eric Vyncke (evyncke)
Hello Jorge,
Sorry for belated reply… IETF week and some holidays were on the path...
The -14 revision has vastly improved the document and has addressed the
majority of my points. There are anyway still one open blocking DISCUSS point
and three COMMENT points (but feel free to ignore them).
] to the outstanding points (I believe I
addressed all pending points), and please let me know if that is enough to
clear your DISCUSS.
Thanks!
Jorge
From: Eric Vyncke (evyncke)
Date: Monday, May 3, 2021 at 4:37 PM
To: Rabadan, Jorge (Nokia - US/Mountain View) , The
IESG
Cc: draft-ietf-bess-evpn
Hello Adrian,
Thank you for your reply. As you know all my comments are non-blocking, please
have a look below for EV>
Regards,
-éric
-Original Message-
From: Adrian Farrel
Organization: Old Dog Consulting
Reply-To: "adr...@olddog.co.uk"
Date: Monday, 17 May 2021 at 16:21
To: Eric
Alvaro
Thank you for the added piece of information. I am clearing my DISCUSS tomorrow
(past midnight here).
Regards
-éric
-Original Message-
From: iesg on behalf of Alvaro Retana
Date: Monday, 17 May 2021 at 23:34
To: Éric Vyncke via Datatracker , Eric Vyncke
, The IESG
Cc:
Hello Jorge,
Sorry for belated reply… Your email was kind of lost in my post-IETF-110 filled
in-tray...
See below for EV> (for the many comments, as you have addressed them, I replied
nothing).
Once I am clear about how normal DAD (i.e., non optimized by your document)
continues to work,
And as shared John’s concern, the new text looks like fixing the problem
Thank for having updated the document
-éric
From: iesg on behalf of John Scudder
Date: Monday, 12 April 2021 at 19:39
To: Donald Eastlake
Cc: Matthew Bocci , "bess-cha...@ietf.org"
,
Donald,
Thank you for your reply as well as for answering all the questions. I like
your suggestion about MA/MEP/MIP.
About the last point (synthetic traffic or iOAM), while I understand the point
that OAM should work in the absence of actual traffic (pretty obvious indeed),
I am still
Hello Greg,
Thank you very much for addressing all my points were applicable. I am changing
my ABSTAIN into a NO OBJECTION (even if it does not really matter)
Regards
-éric
From: iesg on behalf of Greg Mirsky
Date: Monday, 21 December 2020 at 01:56
To: Eric Vyncke
Cc: Stephane Litkowski ,
Jeffrey
This would be quite positive to post this on the BESS list like you just did ;-)
And, Stéphane, I agree that the topic of "lack of implementations for a
standards track document" is wider than this document: it was really a comment
of mine and not one asking for a reply (but yours was
Jorge
Thank you for the prompt reply: I appreciate the explanation for the ‘missing’
bit always nice to hear such stories ;-)
Regards,
-éric
From: "Rabadan, Jorge (Nokia - US/Mountain View)"
Date: Thursday, 17 September 2020 at 11:39
To: Eric Vyncke , The IESG
Cc:
Pv4 and that NVE receives
IPv6 traffic on the corresponding VLAN, then the IPv6 traffic is
treated as L2 traffic and it is bridged."
Cheers,
Ali
On 9/1/20, 1:46 AM, "Eric Vyncke (evyncke)" wrote:
Thank you Ali for your reply.
My comments are
Thank you Ali for your reply.
My comments are non-blocking anyway but I am still not too happy with your
reply to
- section 2, I still find the text not really clear
- unsure whether I understand the reasoning on section 4.1
Else, happy with all your changes => they will improve the document
29 matches
Mail list logo
