l 28, 2020 at 12:04 PM
To: John Scudder
Cc: "Mankamana Mishra (mankamis)" , "bess@ietf.org"
, "draft-ietf-bess-evpn-igmp-mld-pr...@ietf.org"
, "Jakob Heitz (jheitz)"
Subject: Re: [bess] IGMP / MLD Proxy Draft update (NLRI change)
Resent-From:
Resent-To: , , ,
ietf.org"
, "Jakob Heitz (jheitz)"
Subject: Re: [bess] IGMP / MLD Proxy Draft update (NLRI change)
Hi Ali,
Yes, making the field reserved would be fine from my point of view, thanks.
Also to repeat the point that was raised at the mic during the meeting just
now, there should b
l 28, 2020 at 5:27 PM
To: "Ali Sajassi (sajassi)" , John Scudder
, "chy...@arista.com"
Cc: "draft-ietf-bess-evpn-igmp-mld-pr...@ietf.org"
, "bess@ietf.org"
Subject: Re: [bess] IGMP / MLD Proxy Draft update (NLRI change)
++ Chris from arista to keep
ilto:bess@ietf.org>>,
"draft-ietf-bess-evpn-igmp-mld-pr...@ietf.org<mailto:draft-ietf-bess-evpn-igmp-mld-pr...@ietf.org>"
mailto:draft-ietf-bess-evpn-igmp-mld-pr...@ietf.org>>
Subject: Re: [bess] IGMP / MLD Proxy Draft update (NLRI change)
Hi Ali,
Your option 1 is subs
-ietf-bess-evpn-igmp-mld-pr...@ietf.org<mailto:draft-ietf-bess-evpn-igmp-mld-pr...@ietf.org>"
mailto:draft-ietf-bess-evpn-igmp-mld-pr...@ietf.org>>
Subject: Re: [bess] IGMP / MLD Proxy Draft update (NLRI change)
Hi Ali,
Your option 1 is substantially what I proposed, the sole difference be
ankamis)"
mailto:manka...@cisco.com>>,
"bess@ietf.org<mailto:bess@ietf.org>" mailto:bess@ietf.org>>,
"draft-ietf-bess-evpn-igmp-mld-pr...@ietf.org<mailto:draft-ietf-bess-evpn-igmp-mld-pr...@ietf.org>"
mailto:draft-ietf-bess-evpn-igmp-mld-pr...@ietf.org&g
] IGMP / MLD Proxy Draft update (NLRI change)
Hi All,
Regarding the proposal to remove the Leave Group Synchronization field from the
Multicast Leave Synch Route, the current proposal is inadequate. Below I
discuss why, and provide an alternate suggestion. For those who don’t want to
read my wall
ishra (mankamis)" , "bess@ietf.org"
, "draft-ietf-bess-evpn-igmp-mld-pr...@ietf.org"
Subject: Re: [bess] IGMP / MLD Proxy Draft update (NLRI change)
Hi All,
Thank you for bringing up the discussion on the WG mailing list.
I don’t think RT-4 is a good example to fo
vendors today.
Thanks,
Wen
From: "Ali Sajassi (sajassi)"
Date: Sunday, April 26, 2020 at 6:08 PM
To: John Scudder
Cc: "Mankamana Mishra (mankamis)" , "bess@ietf.org"
, "draft-ietf-bess-evpn-igmp-mld-pr...@ietf.org"
Subject: Re: [bess] IGMP / MLD Prox
ishra (mankamis)" , "bess@ietf.org"
, "draft-ietf-bess-evpn-igmp-mld-pr...@ietf.org"
Subject: Re: [bess] IGMP / MLD Proxy Draft update (NLRI change)
Hi Ali,
Your option 1 is substantially what I proposed, the sole difference being that
I propose following normal IETF proc
n-igmp-mld-pr...@ietf.org"
Subject: Re: [bess] IGMP / MLD Proxy Draft update (NLRI change)
Resent-From:
Resent-To: Cisco Employee , ,
, ,
Resent-Date: Friday, April 24, 2020 at 3:01 PM
Hi All,
Regarding the proposal to remove the Leave Group Synchronization field from the
Multicast
kamis)"
Cc: "bess@ietf.org" ,
"draft-ietf-bess-evpn-igmp-mld-pr...@ietf.org"
Subject: Re: [bess] IGMP / MLD Proxy Draft update (NLRI change)
Resent-From:
Resent-To: Cisco Employee , ,
, ,
Resent-Date: Friday, April 24, 2020 at 3:01 PM
Hi All,
Regarding the prop
Of John Scudder
Sent: Friday, April 24, 2020 6:01 PM
To: Mankamana Mishra (mankamis)
Cc: draft-ietf-bess-evpn-igmp-mld-pr...@ietf.org; bess@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [bess] IGMP / MLD Proxy Draft update (NLRI change)
Hi All,
Regarding the proposal to remove the Leave Group Synchronization field from
f-bess-evpn-igmp-mld-pr...@ietf.org"
Subject: Re: [bess] IGMP / MLD Proxy Draft update (NLRI change)
I agree with Jorge and Mankamana. We don’t need leave group sequence number. I
would keep it out for now.
Regards,
Keyur
From: "Rabadan, Jorge (Nokia - US/Mountain View)"
Date:
Hi All,
Regarding the proposal to remove the Leave Group Synchronization field from the
Multicast Leave Synch Route, the current proposal is inadequate. Below I
discuss why, and provide an alternate suggestion. For those who don’t want to
read my wall of text, my key motivation is simple:
-
a.com>
> *Date: *Thursday, April 23, 2020 at 1:18 AM
> *To: *"Mankamana Mishra (mankamis)" ,
> "bess@ietf.org"
> *Cc: *"draft-ietf-bess-evpn-igmp-mld-pr...@ietf.org" <
> draft-ietf-bess-evpn-igmp-mld-pr...@ietf.org>
> *Subject: *Re:
ot;
Cc: "draft-ietf-bess-evpn-igmp-mld-pr...@ietf.org"
Subject: Re: [bess] IGMP / MLD Proxy Draft update (NLRI change)
Resent-From:
Resent-To: , , ,
,
Resent-Date: Thursday, April 23, 2020 at 1:18 AM
Thank you Mankamana.
From Nokia’s perspective I confirm your reference below. We im
)
Sent: Thursday, April 23, 2020 1:19 AM
To: Mankamana Mishra (mankamis) ;
bess@ietf.org
Cc: draft-ietf-bess-evpn-igmp-mld-pr...@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [bess] IGMP / MLD Proxy Draft update (NLRI change)
Thank you Mankamana. From Nokia’s perspective I confirm your reference below.
We implemented
etf.org"
Subject: [bess] IGMP / MLD Proxy Draft update (NLRI change)
All,
Post WGLC before IETF Singapore it came to our notice that there were
implementation discrepancies of this draft
(https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-bess-evpn-igmp-mld-proxy-04#section-9.3).
Th
All,
Post WGLC before IETF Singapore it came to our notice that there were
implementation discrepancies of this draft
(https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-bess-evpn-igmp-mld-proxy-04#section-9.3).
Though draft had NLRI definition as
20 matches
Mail list logo
