Tom,
I find your draft very interesting. I have a couple of questions:
- what kind of applications are capable of sending signals/requests to
the network?
- Section 2.3 Network Services: do you see UE sending signals to the
network? Or should it be the Application Controller notify
with their specific controllers for the types of
services they need. Then the Controller exchange with the network.
Linda Dunbar
From: Int-area mailto:int-area-boun...@ietf.org>> On
Behalf Of Sørensen, Frode
Sent: Sunday, July 4, 2021 12:54 AM
To: int-area@ietf.org<mailto:int-area@ietf.org
omains, such as using the IPsec IKE method between controllers of the two
domains to negotiate the labels used in the data plane
My two cents,
Linda Dunbar
From: Apn On Behalf Of Pengshuping (Peng Shuping)
Sent: Wednesday, February 3, 2021 7:40 PM
To: a...@ietf.org
Cc: int-area@ietf.org; rt...@ietf.org
S
Shuping,
Some comments to the draft-peng-apn-scope-gap-analysis-00:
I find Page 4 last sentence really hit the key purpose of APN: at the headend
to steer into corresponding path, at the midpoint to collect corresponding
performance measurement data, and at the service function to execute
Fred,
How does my phone (being IPv6 address) communicate with a web server that is
IPv4 public address?
Linda
-Original Message-
From: Fred Baker [mailto:fredbaker.i...@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, November 05, 2018 5:42 PM
To: Linda Dunbar
Cc: tom petch ; Joel Jaeggli ;
i...@ietf.org
...@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, November 05, 2018 1:07 PM
To: Linda Dunbar
Cc: tom petch ; Joel Jaeggli ;
i...@ietf.org; int-area@ietf.org; i...@ietf.org
Subject: Re: Using BGP to advertise SD-WAN tunnels end point's private IPv6
addresses. (was registering tunnel types
Linda, I see a couple of issues
e IP address after the NAT.
o Public Port：The Port after the NAT.
Thank you very much for feedback.
Linda Dunbar
-Original Message-
From: ipv6 [mailto:ipv6-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of tom petch
Sent: Friday, November 02, 2018 11:26 PM
To: Joel Jaeggli
Cc: i...@ietf.org
Subject
ect
> multiple network sites over IP backbone networks. We will present this in
> Seoul meeting and look forward to hearing comments and suggestions on this
> work.
>
> Thanks,
> Authors
>
> -Original Message-
> From: internet-dra...@ietf.org [mailto:inter
:33 AM
To: Linda Dunbar <linda.dun...@huawei.com>
Cc: towns...@cisco.com; int-area@ietf.org
Subject: Re: Questions to draft-intarea-tunnels-03
On Oct 7, 2016, at 8:15 AM, Linda Dunbar
<linda.dun...@huawei.com<mailto:linda.dun...@huawei.com>> wrote:
Joe,
You said “The egr
or a tunnel.”
An overlay “ tunnel” described in your draft appears as one “link” from
“transiting IP” (or IP routing) perspective, but it is not from MTU perspective.
Linda
From: Joe Touch [mailto:to...@isi.edu]
Sent: Friday, October 07, 2016 11:08 AM
To: Linda Dunbar <linda.dun...@huawei.com&
the Tunnel MTU is 1500, not the 2000 at the Tunnel egress node,
correct?
Linda
From: Joe Touch [mailto:to...@isi.edu]
Sent: Thursday, October 06, 2016 11:48 PM
To: Linda Dunbar <linda.dun...@huawei.com>; towns...@cisco.com
Cc: int-area@ietf.org
Subject: Re: Questions to draft-intarea
t;inner")..", is the ")" extra?
Section 4.2 first sentence: " It messages might be ...", do you mean "...
its messages might be..."
Linda
From: Joe Touch [mailto:to...@isi.edu]
Sent: Thursday, October 06, 2016 4:10 PM
To: Linda Dunbar <linda.dun...@huawei.
Joe and Mark,
You said "Because tunnels are links, they are subject to the same issues as any
link, e.g. MTU.."
The MTU issue exist between any two points in a network. The MTU issue for
tunnel is more like the MTU issue between any two points in the network (i.e.
traverse many links, and can
I support adoption of this draft.
I think that this draft is very useful, especially to SFC, NVO3 WGs. Those
groups are defining new encapsulation headers. MTU issues practices should
be visible to the participants of those groups.
Linda Dunbar
-Original Message-
From: Int-area
I am confused of the math here. If most physical links MTU is 1500 bytes (or
2000 bytes for some), how do we have4GB minus the encapsulation overhead
for IPv6, as the tunnel link Maximum Transmission Unit (MTU).
Is 4GB correct ???
Linda
-Original Message-
From: Int-area
To: Linda Dunbar; Black, David; ts...@ietf.org; tsv-a...@ietf.org
Cc: Mark Townsley; int-area@ietf.org
Subject: RE: [Int-area] Fragmentation and Path MTU text in nvo3 dataplane reqts
draft
Hi Linda,
The maximum MTU for an IPv4 link is 64KB (per RFC0791) and the maximum MTU for
an IPv6 link
-
From: Templin, Fred L [mailto:fred.l.temp...@boeing.com]
Sent: Friday, May 16, 2014 2:10 PM
To: Linda Dunbar; Black, David; ts...@ietf.org; tsv-a...@ietf.org
Cc: Mark Townsley; int-area@ietf.org
Subject: RE: [Int-area] Fragmentation and Path MTU text in nvo3
dataplane reqts draft
Hi Linda
Wes,
-Original Message-
[WEG] One might also argue that MS Outlook is a key component in many
corporate environments, but it's false equivalence to then assume that
this is because it's the best solution, rather than the truth, which is
that it's the least bad alternative. At
Ted,
-Original Message-
What matters is that an observation has been made that a L2 VPN could
have severe negative behavior characteristics in plausible
circumstances. This is a really strong reason not to use an L2 VPN.
[Linda] I understand that many people are still not
David,
-Original Message-
What this means is any non-IP E2E protocol (CFM, QCN etc.) is broken
and how one would instrument and fault sectionalize this network is
unclear.
[Linda] The proposed proxy gateway only represents the IP applications' end
hosts address by the gateway
. Those addresses are limited
no matter how subnet is spread and how diverse servers are virtualized.
Linda
-Original Message-
From: David Allan I [mailto:david.i.al...@ericsson.com]
Sent: Friday, September 27, 2013 4:41 PM
To: Linda Dunbar; Ted Lemon
Cc: int-area@ietf.org
Subject: RE
Support!
This draft is about the proxy gateway to make switch's FDB not explode in DC
environment where hosts in one VLAN (or subnet) can be placed anywhere.
NVo3 and TRILL can hide hosts' addresses from switches/routers in the core. But
If NVO3 edges (NVE) are Top of Rack switches or End of
I am just repeating my comments made to
draft-matsushima-stateless-uplane-vepc-01 during the InterArea WG session.
It seems to me that the case presented is the motivation for needing
routers/switches in the network to dynamically change forwarding behavior that
are triggered by external
, this access switch's MAC table
potentially has 200*4000 = 800,000 entries.
Thank you very much for your feedback.
Linda Dunbar
___
Int-area mailing list
Int-area@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
NVO3 provides an overlay mechanism so that the hosts (or VMs) addresses are
hidden from the switches in the core.
However, for the L2 in IP case of NVO3, all the overlay edge nodes are still
exposed to all the hosts MAC addresses on the VLANs that are enabled on the
edges, which can cause
Ted,
Thank you very much for the advice. We will clean up the acronyms in the next
revision.
Linda
-Original Message-
From: Ted Lemon [mailto:ted.le...@nominum.com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2013 10:09 PM
To: Linda Dunbar
Cc: Internet Area; Suresh Krishnan; Tal Mizrahi
Subject
Ted,
Thank you very much for the suggested text.
I tweaked a little bit. How about the following text added to the Introduction
section?
This document describes a proxy gateway technique, which is called SARP
throughout this document, to reduce switches' FDB (MAC table) sizes and ARP/ND
Support.
Linda
From: int-area-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:int-area-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
Qiong
Sent: Thursday, July 11, 2013 1:20 PM
To: Suresh Krishnan
Cc: Internet Area
Subject: Re: [Int-area] Working group last call for
draft-ietf-intarea-flow-label-balancing-01
Dear all,
I think
traffic to some physical
link segments.
Hope those points are more clear.
Linda
-Original Message-
From: internet-dra...@ietf.org [mailto:internet-dra...@ietf.org]
Sent: Thursday, July 11, 2013 3:13 PM
To: Linda Dunbar; Youval Nachum; Ilan Yerushalmi; Tal Mizrahi
Subject: New
: Ronald Bonica [mailto:rbon...@juniper.net]
Sent: Wednesday, June 26, 2013 8:00 AM
To: Linda Dunbar; Joe Touch; Carlos Pignataro (cpignata)
Cc: Internet Area
Subject: RE: [Int-area] New Version Notification for draft-bonica-
intarea-gre-mtu-00.txt
Linda,
What do these platforms do when
Ron,
Your draft recommends that the ingress node discards the frame and sends ICMP
msg to the source node when the size of GRE encapsulated frame exceeds link
MTU.
We experienced that Window XP doesn't adjust frame size after receiving ICMP
message. Many Linux based applications don't do
Ron,
Comments are inserted below:
-Original Message-
Just to be sure that we aren't talking past each other, let's ensure
that we are talking about the same scenario. The GRE egress router
receives
complete, non-fragmented packets, containing fragmented payloads.
[Linda] The
Label
(you can describe how Flow Label improve the LB algorithms currently being
deployed).
Linda
-Original Message-
From: Sheng Jiang
Sent: Monday, April 01, 2013 9:04 PM
To: Linda Dunbar
Subject: RE: Reviewing of flow label balancing
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf
the FDB.
This draft also addresses the FDB entries explosion issue.
Is it clear enough?
We can update the draft with this explanation.
Linda
-Original Message-
From: int-area-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:int-area-boun...@ietf.org] On
Behalf Of Linda Dunbar
Sent: Tuesday, November 27
to scope the ND multicast and
alleviates the burden on router when subnets are spread across multiple
links/ToRs.
Linda
-Original Message-
From: Greg Daley [mailto:gda...@au.logicalis.com]
Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2012 6:13 PM
To: Linda Dunbar; Suresh Krishnan
Cc: julien.i
[mailto:suresh.krish...@ericsson.com]
Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2012 5:58 PM
To: Linda Dunbar
Cc: int-area@ietf.org; julien.i...@gmail.com; Tal Mizrahi
Subject: Re: IPv6 ND applicability in draft-nachum-sarp-03
Hi Linda,
On 11/20/2012 01:05 PM, Linda Dunbar wrote:
Suresh,
Are you saying
-Original Message-
From: Suresh Krishnan [mailto:suresh.krish...@ericsson.com]
Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2012 10:48 AM
To: Linda Dunbar
Cc: int-area@ietf.org; julien.i...@gmail.com; Tal Mizrahi
Subject: Re: IPv6 ND applicability in draft-nachum-sarp-03
Hi Linda,
On 11/19/2012 07:11 PM
Suresh,
-Original Message-
Because it is :-). As an example, if you take an fat tree architecture,
the number of access switch ports on a subnet is not directly related
to
the number of ports on the L3 gateway that are on the same subnet.
For the following network, if one
, or IS-IS) to prevent loops for Ethernet data
frames which don't have TTL.
The same mechanism should prevent the loops of ARP/ND frames.
Can you draw a scenario on how/why the loop prevention mechanism for Ethernet
data frames won't work for ARP/ND frames?
Thank you very much.
Linda Dunbar
Suresh and Julien,
When the draft-nachum-sarp-02 was presented at InterArea WG in 84th IETF, the
feedback was that the draft needs to be updated to include the processing for
IPv6.
So we updated the draft to include the processing of ND for IPv6.
When the revised draft (draft-nachum-sarp-03)
40 matches
Mail list logo
