gt; >
> > > > - Allow that ingress replication is default when PMSI
is
> > > > absent but accept PMSI that specifies ingress replication.
> > > >
> > >
> > > I don't think we should do that. It
iper.net]
> > > Sent: Friday, December 15, 2017 9:52 AM
> > > To: EXT - thomas.mo...@orange.com <thomas.mo...@orange.com>;
> Fedyk,
> > > Don <don.fe...@hpe.com>; Marco Marzetti <ma...@lamehost.it>
> > > Cc: bess@ietf.org
ber 15, 2017 at 10:24
To: <bess@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [bess] draft-ietf-bess-evpn-overlay-10 PMSI with Ingress
Replication
if the intent was to help people better understand the reasoning behind
the design, is it really best to remove it?
Wouldn't a rephrasing be more approp
> To: EXT - thomas.mo...@orange.com <thomas.mo...@orange.com>; Fedyk,
> > Don <don.fe...@hpe.com>; Marco Marzetti <ma...@lamehost.it>
> > Cc: bess@ietf.org
> > Subject: RE: [bess] draft-ietf-bess-evpn-overlay-10 PMSI with
Ingress
BESS [mailto:bess-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Thomas Morin
> > Sent: Friday, December 15, 2017 5:42 AM
> > To: Fedyk, Don <don.fe...@hpe.com>; Marco Marzetti <marco@lamehost.
> > it>
> > Cc: bess@ietf.org
> > Subject: Re: [bess] d
> -Original Message-
> > From: BESS [mailto:bess-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Thomas Morin
> > Sent: Friday, December 15, 2017 5:42 AM
> > To: Fedyk, Don <don.fe...@hpe.com>; Marco Marzetti <marco@lamehost.
> > it>
> > Cc: bess@ie
.fe...@hpe.com>; Marco Marzetti <ma...@lamehost.it>
Cc: bess@ietf.org
Subject: RE: [bess] draft-ietf-bess-evpn-overlay-10 PMSI with Ingress
Replication
Thomas,
I completely agree w/ your email, below.
Yours Irrespectively,
John
,
>
> John
>
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: BESS [mailto:bess-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Thomas Morin
> > Sent: Friday, December 15, 2017 5:42 AM
> > To: Fedyk, Don <don.fe...@hpe.com>; Marco Marzetti <marco@lamehost.
> > it>
>
;don.fe...@hpe.com>; Marco Marzetti <ma...@lamehost.it>
Cc: bess@ietf.org
Subject: RE: [bess] draft-ietf-bess-evpn-overlay-10 PMSI with Ingress
Replication
Thomas,
I completely agree w/ your email, below.
Yours Irrespectively,
John
> -Original Message-
> From: BESS [mailto:b
t; <ma...@lamehost.it>
> Cc: bess@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [bess] draft-ietf-bess-evpn-overlay-10 PMSI with Ingress
> Replication
>
> Hi Don,
>
> Fedyk, Don, 2017-12-14 20:33:
> > I think the gray area is that this draft talks about BUM traffic and
> > ingress r
a
> bit too much.
>
#MARCO
Agreed.
If their behavior is wrong we should ask them to fix it instead of
seconding what they're doing.
>
> Best,
>
> -Thomas
>
>
>
> > From: BESS [mailto:bess-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Marco Marzetti
> > Sent: Thurs
BESS [mailto:bess-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Marco Marzetti
> Sent: Thursday, December 14, 2017 9:21 AM
> To: Thomas Morin <thomas.mo...@orange.com>
> Cc: bess@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [bess] draft-ietf-bess-evpn-overlay-10 PMSI with Ingress
> Replication
>
> Hello,
&
.
Cheers
Don
From: BESS [mailto:bess-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Marco Marzetti
Sent: Thursday, December 14, 2017 9:21 AM
To: Thomas Morin <thomas.mo...@orange.com>
Cc: bess@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [bess] draft-ietf-bess-evpn-overlay-10 PMSI with Ingress
Replication
Hello,
I have encou
s Morin <thomas.mo...@orange.com>
Cc: "bess@ietf.org" <bess@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [bess] draft-ietf-bess-evpn-overlay-10 PMSI with Ingress
Replication
Hello,
I have encountered an implementation that is not attaching any PMSI to the IMET.
The authors think they don't really n
Hi Marco,
Marco Marzetti, 2017-12-14 12:25:
> I am writing this email asking you to clarify what's the suggested
> behavior when PMSI Tunnel Type is set to "Ingress Replication" (type
> 6) as draft-ietf-bess-evpn-overlay-10 only suggests what to do with
> multicast tunnel trees.
>
> I think the
Dear members of the WG and authors of the draft,
I am writing this email asking you to clarify what's the suggested behavior
when PMSI Tunnel Type is set to "Ingress Replication" (type 6) as
draft-ietf-bess-evpn-overlay-10 only suggests what to do with multicast
tunnel trees.
I think the
16 matches
Mail list logo
