Hi Linda,
Thank you for your reply. I now understand the solution described in the draft
and I support its WG adoption.
Best Regards,
Shunwan
From: Linda Dunbar [mailto:linda.dun...@futurewei.com]
Sent: Friday, October 6, 2023 4:42 AM
To: Zhuangshunwan ; bess@ietf.org
Subject: RE: Mail
I support WG adoption.
Best regards,
Shunwan
From: BESS [mailto:bess-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Matthew Bocci (Nokia)
Sent: Thursday, October 5, 2023 6:45 PM
To: bess@ietf.org
Cc: draft-ietf-bess-bgp-sdwan-us...@ietf.org
Subject: [bess] WG Adoption Poll for
Dear Co-Authors,
Regarding the "ID Length" in the Base (Minimal Set) DIM Sub-TLV, Figure 6 of
draft-ietf-bess-secure-evpn shows the following:
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0
Dear authors,
Some of the text in the section 5.2 of draft-ietf-bess-bgp-sdwan-usage-15
describes the following:
"
5.2. BGP Walk Through for Homogeneous Encrypted SD-WAN
...
UPDATE U1:
- MP-NLRI Path Attribute:
192.0.2.4/30
192.0.2.8/30
- Nexthop: 192.0.2.2
Dear Co-Authors,
Thank you for contributing this very useful document! I support the adoption of
this document.
One comment:
Regarding the "ID Length" and "Nonce Length" in the Base (Minimal Set) DIM
Sub-TLV, Figure 6 shows the following:
0 1 2
Hi Matthew and Stephane,
I have read this draft, it provides the useful mechanism of distributing S-BFD
discriminators with VPN service routes, I support adoption of this draft.
Best Regards,
Shunwan
From: BESS [mailto:bess-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of slitkows.i...@gmail.com
Sent: Thursday,
Hi Everyone,
I support the publication of this draft.
Best Regards,
Shunwan
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
Hi all,
+1 for Robert.
Yes, especially when MPLS in GRE or MPLS in UDP is deployed, packets carrying
MPLS labels can traverse all IP-reachable networks and reach remote PEs.
BR,
Shunwan
From: Robert Raszuk [mailto:rob...@raszuk.net]
Sent: Thursday, February 17, 2022 11:28 PM
To: Warren Kumari
Hi all,
I agree with Vasilenko and Ketan.
The meaning of the label is given by the encapsulation. According to
RFC8365[https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc8365], there are already a
precedent for using the label field to carry VNI and without the new AFI/SAFI,
and there are a large
Hi,
I support publishing this draft as standards track RFC.
Thanks,
Shunwan
From: BESS [mailto:bess-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of slitkows.i...@gmail.com
Sent: Friday, December 11, 2020 11:53 PM
To: draft-ietf-bess-mvpn-evpn-aggregation-la...@ietf.org; bess@ietf.org
Cc: bess-cha...@ietf.org
Matthew, Stephane and WG,
I'm not aware of any relevant IPR.
As a co-author, I support publishing this draft as a standards track RFC.
I know that there are many implementations and interoperability tests that have
already been listed in the document:
I support this draft.
Thanks,
Shunwan
From: BESS [mailto:bess-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Bocci, Matthew (Nokia -
GB)
Sent: Monday, June 15, 2020 6:56 PM
To: draft-ietf-bess-evpn-oam-req-fr...@ietf.org; bess@ietf.org
Subject: [bess] WG Last Call and IPR Poll for
I support WG adoption of this draft.
Thanks,
Shunwan
From: BESS [mailto:bess-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of slitkows.i...@gmail.com
Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2020 8:14 PM
To: bess@ietf.org
Subject: [bess] WG adoption and IPR poll for
draft-dunbar-bess-bgp-sdwan-usage-07
Hello,
This email
I support WG adoption of this draft.
Thanks,
Shunwan
From: BESS [mailto:bess-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Bocci, Matthew (Nokia -
GB)
Sent: Wednesday, February 26, 2020 10:42 PM
To: draft-gmsm-bess-evpn-...@ietf.org; bess@ietf.org
Cc: bess-cha...@ietf.org
Subject: [bess] WG adoption poll for
Support.
Huawei has an implementation that is consistent with this draft.
Kind regards
Shunwan
From: BESS [mailto:bess-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Bocci, Matthew (Nokia -
GB)
Sent: Tuesday, January 07, 2020 1:53 AM
To: bess@ietf.org
Subject: [bess] WG Last Call and Implementation Poll for
Hi Robert,
Inline with [Shunwan]
Best Regards,
Shunwan
From: BESS [mailto:bess-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Robert Raszuk
Sent: Tuesday, December 03, 2019 7:37 AM
To: Acee Lindem (acee)
Cc: Bocci, Matthew (Nokia - GB) ;
bess-cha...@ietf.org; slitkows.i...@gmail.com; bess@ietf.org
Subject:
Support adoption of this draft. This draft reflects current multiple existing
running implementations.
Thanks,
Shunwan
From: BESS [mailto:bess-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Bocci, Matthew (Nokia -
GB)
Sent: Wednesday, November 27, 2019 8:37 PM
To: bess@ietf.org
Cc: bess-cha...@ietf.org
Hello Matthew and Stephane,
I support the adoption of this draft as co-author.
And I am not aware of any IPR applicable to this draft.
Best Regards,
Shunwan
From: Bocci, Matthew (Nokia - GB) [mailto:matthew.bo...@nokia.com]
Sent: Friday, September 27, 2019 7:00 PM
To:
Hi all,
For L3VPN features, there are some differences:
Per RFC4634, the IPv4-VPN routes shall carry the V4 Next-hop, beginning with an
8-octet RD and ending with a 4-octet IPv4 address.
Per RFC4659, the IPv6-VPN routes shall carry the V6 Next-hop, beginning with an
8-octet RD and ending with
, and some of the current
implementations are also doing this way.
I hope that the WGs can give a consistent opinion on this issue and avoid
interoperability problem in the future.
Thanks,
Shunwan
From: ianfar...@gmx.com [mailto:ianfar...@gmx.com]
Sent: Monday, June 24, 2019 8:08 PM
To: Zhuangshunwan
Support the adoption of this document.
Thanks,
Shunwan
From: BESS [mailto:bess-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Bocci, Matthew (Nokia -
GB)
Sent: Wednesday, February 06, 2019 6:23 PM
To: bess@ietf.org
Cc: draft-salam-bess-evpn-oam-req-fr...@ietf.org
Subject: [bess] WG adoption and IPR poll for
I support adoption.
Thanks,
Shunwan
From: BESS [mailto:bess-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Bocci, Matthew (Nokia -
GB)
Sent: Monday, December 03, 2018 10:53 PM
To: bess@ietf.org
Cc: draft-liu-bess-mvpn-y...@ietf.org
Subject: [bess] Wg Adoption and IPR poll for draft-liu-bess-mvpn-yang-07
This
Yes/support
Regards,
Shunwan
From: BESS [mailto:bess-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
stephane.litkow...@orange.com
Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2018 4:22 PM
To: bess@ietf.org
Subject: [bess] WG adoption poll for
draft-zzhang-bess-mvpn-evpn-aggregation-label-01
Hi WG,
This email begins a
Hi Jorge,
8.4. Aliasing and Backup Path of RFC7432 says:
. The backup path is a closely related function, but it is used in
. Single-Active redundancy mode. In this case, a PE also advertises
. that it has reachability to a given EVI/ES using the same combination
. of Ethernet A-D per
It looks good to me. I have not found any specific purposes of these bits in
RFC7432. Maybe I missed something.
Thanks,
Shunwan
-Original Message-
From: Jakob Heitz (jheitz) [mailto:jhe...@cisco.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2018 9:24 AM
To: Zhuangshunwan ; BESS
Subject: RE
It is good to make this explicit. This ambiguity has led to some unnecessary
interworking problems.
Should we also need to explicitly define the "bottom of stack" bit in the
low-order bit of the 3-octet label field?
Thanks,
Shunwan
-Original Message-
From: BESS
Dear authors,
I have some questions regarding draft-ietf-bess-evpn-inter-subnet-forwarding-05.
The last paragraph of
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-bess-evpn-inter-subnet-forwarding-05#section-4.1.2
(Page 21) said:
If EVPN-IRB NVEs are configured not to advertise MAC-only routes,
Support adoption.
Thanks
Shunwan
发件人: BESS [mailto:bess-boun...@ietf.org] 代表 stephane.litkow...@orange.com
发送时间: 2018年4月18日 21:28
收件人: bess@ietf.org
主题: Re: [bess] WG adoption and IPR poll on draft-liu-bess-mvpn-yang-05
Hi WG,
This is a gentle reminder that this poll is currently running.
We
Support and I am not aware of any IPR on this draft.
Best Regards,
Shunwan
-邮件原件-
发件人: Thomas Morin [mailto:thomas.mo...@orange.com]
发送时间: 2016年8月16日 20:42
收件人: bess@ietf.org
抄送: draft-dhjain-bess-bgp-l3vpn-y...@ietf.org
主题: Call for adoption: draft-dhjain-bess-bgp-l3vpn-yang-01
Hello
I have read this draft and I support its publication as an informational RFC.
Best Regards,
Shunwan
-邮件原件-
发件人: BESS [mailto:bess-boun...@ietf.org] 代表 Martin Vigoureux
发送时间: 2016年8月16日 20:48
收件人: BESS
抄送: draft-ietf-bess-virtual-subnet-fib-reduct...@ietf.org
主题: [bess] WG Last Call for
Hi,
As a co-author, I support this draft.
I am not aware of any IPR that applies to this document.
Best Regards,
Shunwan
-邮件原件-
发件人: BESS [mailto:bess-boun...@ietf.org] 代表 Thomas Morin
发送时间: 2016年5月4日 22:18
收件人: bess@ietf.org
抄送: draft-shah-bess-l2vpn-y...@tools.ietf.org
主题: [bess] Poll
I have read this document, and I think that it is a useful solution to connect
the IPv4-only islands across the IPv6-only network running with MPLS.
Regards,
Shunwan
发件人: BESS [mailto:bess-boun...@ietf.org] 代表 li_zhenqi...@hotmail.com
发送时间: 2016年3月10日 17:32
收件人: Eric C Rosen; bess
主题: Re:
derickx, Wim (Wim):
>> >>> WH> I vote for a an evolution of switches/TORs that have proper
>> >>> support for this. I hope some HW vendors of TOR chips shime in,
>> >>> but I am told the MPLS solution is possible in the next
>> >>> generation chips t
Support.
This draft provides a highly scalable inter-as option between NVO3 network and
MPLS/IP VPN network.
Shunwan
-邮件原件-
发件人: BESS [mailto:bess-boun...@ietf.org] 代表 Thomas Morin
发送时间: 2015年10月22日 23:31
收件人: bess@ietf.org
抄送: draft-hao-bess-inter-nvo3-vpn-opti...@tools.ietf.org
主题:
Dear Authors,
I have a comment, see inline with [Shunwan].
5.2.1. Service startup procedures
As soon as the EVIs are created in PE1, PE2 and PE3, the following
control plane actions are carried out:
o Flooding tree setup per EVI (4k routes): Each PE will send one
Inclusive
35 matches
Mail list logo
