Re: [bess] WG adoption poll for draft-wang-bess-sbfd-discriminator

Hi Matthew and Stephane, As a co-author, I support adoption of this draft by the BESS WG. I am not aware of any undisclosed IPR, other than already disclosed, related to this draft. Regards, Haibo From: BESS On Behalf Of slitkows.i...@gmail.com Sent: Thursday, May 18, 2023 12:39 AM To:

Re: [bess] WG Last Call and IPR Poll for draft-ietf-bess-bgp-sdwan-usage-05

Hi WG, I support the publication of this draft. Best wishes, Haibo Wang From: BESS [mailto:bess-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Bocci, Matthew (Nokia - GB) Sent: Monday, September 26, 2022 7:06 PM To: bess@ietf.org Subject: [bess] WG Last Call and IPR Poll for draft-ietf-bess-bgp-sdwan-usage-05

Re: [bess] Please send slot request for IETF-114

Hi Mankamana, If time permits, we'd like to request for a 10min time slot for a new draft https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-fu-bess-evpn-vpws-seamless/ Draft name: L2VPN VPWS Seamless with EVPN VPWS over SRv6 Presenter: Zheng Fu Duration: 10 mins Regards, Haibo From: BESS

Re: [bess] A question about the draft-wang-bess-sbfd-discriminator

Hi Greg, Thanks for your suggestion. I think your suggestion is good, we will modify it in the next version. Regards, Haibo |-Original Message- |From: Greg Mirsky [mailto:gregimir...@gmail.com] |Sent: Sunday, March 20, 2022 4:29 AM |To: Wanghaibo (Rainsword) |Cc: draft-wang-bess-sbfd

Re: [bess] A question about the draft-wang-bess-sbfd-discriminator

. Regards, Haibo From: Greg Mirsky [mailto:gregimir...@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 15, 2022 11:12 PM To: Wanghaibo (Rainsword) Cc: draft-wang-bess-sbfd-discrimina...@ietf.org; BESS ; rtg-bfd WG Subject: Re: A question about the draft-wang-bess-sbfd-discriminator Hi Haibo, thank you for your

Re: [bess] A question about the draft-wang-bess-sbfd-discriminator

would be clearer if the terms initiator and responder (as per RFC7880) are |used in the document. [Haibo]: We will modified it in the next version. Regards, Haibo From: Reshad Rahman [mailto:res...@yahoo.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 15, 2022 10:36 AM To: Wanghaibo (Rainsword) ; draft-wang

Re: [bess] A question about the draft-wang-bess-sbfd-discriminator

. The dual-homed PEs may not have enough resources to create BFD sessions. Regards, Haibo From: Greg Mirsky [mailto:gregimir...@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 15, 2022 12:44 AM To: Wanghaibo (Rainsword) ; draft-wang-bess-sbfd-discrimina...@ietf.org; BESS ; rtg-bfd WG Subject: A question about

Re: [bess] IPR call for draft-dskc-bess-bgp-car-03 (3/4 to 3/10) - Prior to adoption of CAR/CT solutions

Hello Sue, I'm not aware of any IPR. Regards Haibo From: BESS [mailto:bess-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Susan Hares Sent: Friday, March 4, 2022 3:54 AM To: bess@ietf.org; i...@ietf.org Cc: spring-cha...@ietf.org Subject: [bess] IPR call for draft-dskc-bess-bgp-car-03 (3/4 to 3/10) - Prior to

Re: [bess] Please send me slot request for IETF 113 (BESS is only remote )

Hi Mankamana, I would like to request a 10 minute time slot for the draft below: In this version, we have updated the detail usage about the scenario that we want to use. Also, we have revised our document according to the comments from the last meeting.

Re: [bess] I-D Action: draft-wang-bess-sbfd-discriminator-01.txt

Hi All, We have update the draft: Advertising S-BFD Discriminators in BGP. Thanks for Greg's comments. In this version , we have described the usage of the proposed mechanism in more detail. Welcome more review & comments. Thanks. Regards, Haibo -Original Message- From:

Re: [bess] A question to the Authors of draft-wang-bess-sbfd-discriminator

Hi Greg, Thanks for your comments. Please see my answers below under the [Habio] tag. Regards, Haibo From: Greg Mirsky [mailto:gregimir...@gmail.com] Sent: Saturday, November 6, 2021 1:03 AM To: Wanghaibo (Rainsword) Cc: draft-ietf-idr-bgp-ls-sbfd-extensi...@ietf.org; BESS ; idr wg Subject

Re: [bess] A question to the Authors of draft-wang-bess-sbfd-discriminator

3, 2021 10:15 AM To: Wanghaibo (Rainsword) Cc: draft-ietf-idr-bgp-ls-sbfd-extensi...@ietf.org; BESS ; idr wg Subject: Re: [bess] A question to the Authors of draft-wang-bess-sbfd-discriminator Hi Haibo, thank you for your detailed response to my question. I agree that drafts address different

Re: [bess] A question to the Authors of draft-wang-bess-sbfd-discriminator

Hi Greg, Thanks for you comments. I have read the draft-ietf-idr-bgp-ls-sbfd-extensions. The problems and scenarios he's trying to solve are different from the way we use them. The extension of the bgp-ls-sbfd-extension

Re: [bess] Please send slot request for IETF 112

Hi Mankamana, I would like to request one slot: Draft:Advertising S-BFD Discriminators in BGP Document: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-wang-bess-sbfd-discriminator/ Speaker: Haibo Wang Time: 10 minutes Regards, Haibo From: BESS

Re: [bess] SRv6 BGP based Overlay Services (draft-ietf-bess-srv6-services-07)

, while SRv6 Policy is down. So I think maybe use “alternate steering mechanism” is better. Or maybe I misunderstood the sentence? Regards, Haibo From: Ketan Talaulikar (ketant) [mailto:ket...@cisco.com] Sent: Thursday, September 16, 2021 4:55 PM To: Wanghaibo (Rainsword) ; bess@ietf.org Cc: draft

[bess] Some YANG validator error info about draft-ietf-bess-l3vpn-yang

Hi Authors, Recently, we are preparing to use the L3VPN yang model, we check it with the yang-validator at https://yangcatalog.org/yangvalidator, and found the following errors: Pyang Validation /var/yang/tmp/yangvalidator/yangvalidator-v2-workdir-TwlCIaOZ/ietf-bgp-l3...@2018-04-17.yang:508:

[bess] Mail regarding draft-ietf-bess-srv6-services

Hi authors, I have a question about the SRv6 Service Data Sub-Sub-TLVs, whether it should be mandatory or optional. >From a practical point of view, this TLV can help identifier the locator or >optimize packaging efficiency by transposition. But it doesn't seem it's must to do like this.

Re: [bess] WG Last Call, IPR and Implementation Poll for draft-ietf-bess-srv6-services-05

Hi Matthew & Stephane, Support for publication. Thanks, Haibo From: BESS [mailto:bess-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Bocci, Matthew (Nokia - GB) Sent: Tuesday, December 1, 2020 1:16 AM To: draft-ietf-bess-srv6-servi...@ietf.org; bess@ietf.org Subject: [bess] WG Last Call, IPR and

Re: [bess] WG Last Call, IPR and Implementation Poll for draft-ietf-bess-srv6-services-05

n, I think it's okay. Regards, Haibo From: Rabadan, Jorge (Nokia - US/Mountain View) [mailto:jorge.raba...@nokia.com] Sent: Thursday, December 3, 2020 9:50 PM To: Ketan Talaulikar (ketant) ; Wanghaibo (Rainsword) ; Bocci, Matthew (Nokia - GB) ; draft-ietf-bess-srv6-servi...@ietf.org; bess@ietf

Re: [bess] WG Last Call, IPR and Implementation Poll for draft-ietf-bess-srv6-services-05

worried about that the change may cause incompatible interop. Regards， Haibo From: Ketan Talaulikar (ketant) [mailto:ket...@cisco.com] Sent: Thursday, December 3, 2020 5:01 PM To: Wanghaibo (Rainsword) ; Bocci, Matthew (Nokia - GB) ; draft-ietf-bess-srv6-servi...@ietf.org; bess@ietf.org Subject: RE

Re: [bess] WG Last Call, IPR and Implementation Poll for draft-ietf-bess-srv6-services-05

Dear authors and all, I find the following changes in the new version, which may cause incompatible changes in the implemented version. [cid:image001.png@01D6C95C.F862B140] The label field described in RFC4364: 4.3.4. How VPN-IPv4 NLRI Is Carried in BGP The labeled VPN-IPv4 NLRI itself

[bess] Mail regarding draft-ietf-bess-bgp-sdwan-usage

Hi authors, About the section 4.1 BGP Walk Through for Homogeneous SDWAN. It shows an example that: - MP-NLRI Path Attribute: to indicate multiple routes attached to the C-PE2: 10.1.x.x/16 VLAN #15 12.1.1.x/24 - Tunnel-Encap Path Attribute: to

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

Support adoption of this draft. Regards, Haibo 发件人: BESS [mailto:bess-boun...@ietf.org] 代表 Bocci, Matthew (Nokia - GB) 发送时间: 2019年11月27日 20:37 收件人: bess@ietf.org 抄送: bess-cha...@ietf.org 主题: [bess] WG Adoption and IPR Poll for draft-litkowski-bess-rfc5549revision-00 Hello, This email begins a

[bess] Some question about the evpn yang

Dear Editors of the EVPN YANG data model draft, 1. I have found that there are list ip-prefix-route under the evpn-instance, when will use this? +--rw evpn-instances +--rw evpn-instance* [name] +--ro routes | +--ro ip-prefix-route*

Re: [bess] A question regarding draft-wang-bess-evepn-control-word

(Tim) Cc: bess@ietf.org; draft-wang-bess-evpn-control-word.auth...@ietf.org; Wanghaibo (Rainsword) Subject: RE: A question regarding draft-wang-bess-evepn-control-word Hi, Comment inline Yours Irrespectively, John From: BESS mailto:bess-boun...@ietf.org>> On Behalf Of Alexander Vain

Re: [bess] A question regarding draft-wang-bess-evepn-control-word

...@ecitele.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2018 4:39 PM To: Yutianpeng (Tim) Cc: draft-wang-bess-evpn-control-word.auth...@ietf.org; bess@ietf.org; Wanghaibo (Rainsword) Subject: RE: A question regarding draft-wang-bess-evepn-control-word Tim, Lots of thanks for sharing your views. Unfortunately, I doubt

Re: [bess] A question regarding draft-wang-bess-evepn-control-word

. The forwarding packet must use that value as the CWI label. Regards, Haibo From: Alexander Vainshtein [mailto:alexander.vainsht...@ecitele.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2018 6:09 PM To: Wanghaibo (Rainsword) Cc: bess@ietf.org; draft-wang-bess-evpn-control-word.auth...@ietf.org Subject: RE: A question

[bess] 答复: A question regarding draft-wang-bess-evepn-control-word

Hi Alexander, The number of routes advertised by the Sender router in our solution will not change, but only carries a next hop capability attribute with control word capability The Receiver router determines whether to carry the control word when forwarding packets according to its own