On Behalf Of Christopher Morrow
> Sent: Wednesday, July 29, 2020 5:17 PM
> To: Alvaro Retana
> Cc: ; grow@ietf.org
> grow@ietf.org ; Warren Kumari
> Subject: Re: [GROW] Proposed updates to GROW charter
>
> On Wed, Jul 29, 2020 at 8:54 PM Alvaro Retana wrote:
> >
> &
Dear group,
Taking Alvaro's and other people's feedback into account, here is the
fourth version of the charter.
OK? good to go? Warren Kumari? :-)
Kind regards,
Job
GROW co-chair
Charter for Working Group
The purpose of GROW is to consider the operational problems associated
with the
Message-
From: GROW On Behalf Of Christopher Morrow
Sent: Wednesday, July 29, 2020 5:17 PM
To: Alvaro Retana
Cc: ; grow@ietf.org grow@ietf.org
; Warren Kumari
Subject: Re: [GROW] Proposed updates to GROW charter
On Wed, Jul 29, 2020 at 8:54 PM Alvaro Retana wrote:
>
> Job:
On July 29, 2020 at 5:17:04 PM, Christopher Morrow wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 29, 2020 at 8:54 PM Alvaro Retana wrote:
Chris:
Hi!
...
> > - The use of "Internet networks" doesn't sound right...perhaps "Internet-
> > connected networks"? Looking at the rest of the charter, I assume that,
>
> Job an
On Wed, Jul 29, 2020 at 8:54 PM Alvaro Retana wrote:
>
> Job:
>
> Hi!
>
>
> Thanks for addressing my comments!
>
>
> I have just a couple more things:
>
> - The use of "Internet networks" doesn't sound right...perhaps "Internet-
> connected networks"? Looking at the rest of the charter, I
Job:
Hi!
Thanks for addressing my comments!
I have just a couple more things:
- The use of "Internet networks" doesn't sound right...perhaps "Internet-
connected networks"? Looking at the rest of the charter, I assume that,
for example, the operations of BGP in a non-Internet-connected
Dear all,
Below is a third revision of the charter proposal, we attempted to
incorporate all the feedback received so far, specifically Alvaro's.
Please let us know your feedback!
Kind regards,
Job & Chris
--
Charter for Working Group
Job:
Hi!
You and I already talked before the meeting, but just for the WG…
Yes, we should talk. As I mentioned, idr is also in the process of
rechartering, so this would be a great time to be in sync.
Thanks!!
Alvaro.
On November 22, 2019 at 12:13:17 PM, Job Snijders (j...@ntt.net) wrote:
Dear Alvaro,
Thank you for your comments.
On Thu, Nov 21, 2019 at 07:42:05PM -0800, Alvaro Retana wrote:
> > Finally, where appropriate, the GROW documents the operational
> > aspects of measurement, monitoring, policy, security, and VPN
> > infrastructures, and safe default behavior of
Hi Job,
Very good input regarding „Devise a BGP Community Description System to IESG.
I think a YANG informational BGP community modell might be the right thing to
do. I would volunteer to support such an approach.
I think it is good to keep the charter generic. I like your proposal.
I would
On November 22, 2019 at 9:44:18 AM, Job Snijders wrote:
Job:
Hi!
I have a couple of comments.
...
> Finally, where appropriate, the GROW documents the operational aspects
> of measurement, monitoring, policy, security, and VPN infrastructures,
> and safe default behavior of implementations.
On Fri, Nov 22, 2019 at 10:19:06AM +0800, Christopher Morrow wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 22, 2019 at 9:55 AM Jeffrey Haas wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Nov 22, 2019 at 09:38:03AM +0800, Christopher Morrow wrote:
> > > I'd say: "Sure, make a protobuf definition, provide a common toolset
> > > to parse to/from
On Fri, Nov 22, 2019 at 9:55 AM Jeffrey Haas wrote:
>
> On Fri, Nov 22, 2019 at 09:38:03AM +0800, Christopher Morrow wrote:
> > I'd say: "Sure, make a protobuf definition, provide a common toolset
> > to parse to/from this, evangelize that to the networks you care to
> > interconnect with"
> >
On Fri, Nov 22, 2019 at 1:58 AM Jeffrey Haas wrote:
>
> On Fri, Nov 22, 2019 at 01:44:03AM +, Job Snijders wrote:
> > Goals
> > * Provide stewardship and maintenance for the Multi-Threaded Routing
> > Toolkit (MRT)
>
> I think you may wish to narrow the scope of this to the file format of
On Fri, Nov 22, 2019 at 01:44:03AM +, Job Snijders wrote:
> Goals
> * Provide stewardship and maintenance for the Multi-Threaded Routing Toolkit
> (MRT)
I think you may wish to narrow the scope of this to the file format of that
name.
I don't really believe you intend that the working group
On Fri, Nov 22, 2019 at 09:38:03AM +0800, Christopher Morrow wrote:
> I'd say: "Sure, make a protobuf definition, provide a common toolset
> to parse to/from this, evangelize that to the networks you care to
> interconnect with"
> seems great to me.
Protobufs is a weak schema language. Stick to
Dear all,
Below is a revision of the charter proposal.
Kind regards,
Job
Charter for GROW Working Group
===
The Border Gateway Protocol (BGP) is fundamental to the operation of the
Internet. In recent years, occurrences of BGP related operational issues
have
On Fri, Nov 22, 2019 at 8:51 AM Job Snijders wrote:
>
> Dear all,
>
> On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 07:21:13PM +, Job Snijders wrote:
> > Milestones
> > ==
> >
> > Jan 2020 - "Support for Local RIB in BGP Monitoring Protocol (BMP)" to IESG
> > Feb 2020 - "BMP Peer Up Message Namespace" to
Dear all,
On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 07:21:13PM +, Job Snijders wrote:
> Milestones
> ==
>
> Jan 2020 - "Support for Local RIB in BGP Monitoring Protocol (BMP)" to IESG
> Feb 2020 - "BMP Peer Up Message Namespace" to IESG
> Apr 2020 - "Revision to Registration Procedures for Multiple
Gert Doering wrote on 03/11/2019 19:15:
On Sun, Nov 03, 2019 at 03:10:29PM +, Martijn Schmidt wrote:
Maybe "BGP Deaggregation Slopping" as a working title?
Or "Scenic BGP Deaggregation", or "BGP Globetrotting", or "BGP
Castaways". If anything a connotation with the sea and/or submarine
Hi,
On Sun, Nov 03, 2019 at 03:10:29PM +, Martijn Schmidt wrote:
> > Maybe "BGP Deaggregation Slopping" as a working title?
> Or "Scenic BGP Deaggregation", or "BGP Globetrotting", or "BGP
> Castaways". If anything a connotation with the sea and/or submarine
> cables would be appropriate, I
On 11/2/19 9:57 PM, Job Snijders wrote:
> Yes, the inverse can be an issue as well. We can add that as a
> milestone! Perhaps:
>
> "Document impact of selectively announcing de-aggregated routes in the
> global routing system."
I would think more along the lines of: "Document impact of
On Sat, Nov 02, 2019 at 08:46:10AM +, Martijn Schmidt wrote:
> I see the following proposal, which I reckon references to
> de-aggregation oopsies by so-called "route optimizers":
>
> Jul 2020 - “Document negative consequences of de-aggregating received
> routes for traffic engineering
iard ; Job Snijders
Cc: ; grow@ietf.org grow@ietf.org
; war...@kumari.net
Subject: Re: [GROW] Proposed updates to GROW charter
Dears,
Please add Multi-threaded Routing Toolkit (MRT).
Paolo
> On 31 Oct 2019, at 16:55, Nick Hilliard wrote:
>
> Job Snijders wrote on 29/10/201
Dears,
Please add Multi-threaded Routing Toolkit (MRT).
Paolo
> On 31 Oct 2019, at 16:55, Nick Hilliard wrote:
>
> Job Snijders wrote on 29/10/2019 00:10:
>> My hope is that the proposed update aligns our description with our
>> activities.
>
> It does, but it also aligns with lots of
I would like to express my support for updating the GROW charter and I
think with the addition below it is going into the right direction.
On Thu, Oct 31, 2019 at 8:55 AM Nick Hilliard wrote:
> Job Snijders wrote on 29/10/2019 00:10:
> > My hope is that the proposed update aligns our
Job Snijders wrote on 29/10/2019 00:10:
My hope is that the proposed update aligns our description with our
activities.
It does, but it also aligns with lots of other things. Too generic is
not a good thing.
That said, GROW fulfils an important niche at IETF, not just for
producing its
Hi Job,
As others pointed out I think the goals would benefit from being more
precise.
As example I see third goal very generic which could include everything for
next years to come ;)
On the other hand if it is not explicit it may be harder for GROW to go via
IESG with some work.
Examples
> I don’t really know why the current goals were specified the way they
> are
because working groups used to have bounded and achievable goals
randy
___
GROW mailing list
GROW@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/grow
> The old goals were oddly specific; the new goals are oddly
> non-specific. I'm puzzled by the shift between these two opposites.
see ocean? see match?
___
GROW mailing list
GROW@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/grow
On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 19:03 Nick Hilliard wrote:
> Job Snijders wrote on 28/10/2019 19:21:
> > It is entirely possible we've overlooked something, we'd love your
> > feedback on the below charter, goals & milestones. Please share on-list
> > or off-list withgrow-cha...@ietf.org
>
> The old
Job Snijders wrote on 28/10/2019 19:21:
It is entirely possible we've overlooked something, we'd love your
feedback on the below charter, goals & milestones. Please share on-list
or off-list withgrow-cha...@ietf.org
The old goals were oddly specific; the new goals are oddly non-specific.
I'm
Dear working group, AD,
Warren asked us as chairs to assess whether revising the GROW charter
was warrented, and if so propose an update. We've come up with the
below.
It is entirely possible we've overlooked something, we'd love your
feedback on the below charter, goals & milestones. Please
33 matches
Mail list logo
