Martin -
Thanx for your review.
Responses inline.
> -Original Message-
> From: Martin Duke via Datatracker
> Sent: Saturday, July 11, 2020 9:08 AM
> To: The IESG
> Cc: draft-ietf-lsr-isis-invalid-...@ietf.org; lsr-cha...@ietf.org;
> lsr@ietf.org;
> Christian Hopps ;
Using TTZ for network scalability will keep good customer experience. TTZ
draft should be adopted.
I would support the IS-IS TTZ solution for WG adoption.
Vic
Anil Kumar 于2020年7月11日周六 上午9:22写道：
>
> I would support the IS-IS TTZ solution for WG adoption.
>
> With Regards
> Anil S N
>
> On Sat,
I would support the IS-IS TTZ solution for WG adoption.
With Regards
Anil S N
On Sat, Jul 11, 2020 at 4:38 AM Uma Chunduri wrote:
> I would support the IS-IS TTZ solution for WG adoption.
>
>
> Of course, obviously not with OSPF encodings or concepts only relevant to
> OSPF (thx for the
Martin Duke has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-lsr-isis-invalid-tlv-02: No Objection
When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)
Please refer
> On Jul 10, 2020, at 7:07 PM, Uma Chunduri wrote:
>
> I would support the IS-IS TTZ solution for WG adoption.
>
> Of course, obviously not with OSPF encodings or concepts only relevant to
> OSPF (thx for the updated version).
> Thanks for the good work which was started way back on TTZs
> On Jul 10, 2020, at 4:39 PM, Linda Dunbar wrote:
>
> I also support the adoption of TTZ draft.
>
> The Virtual Zone concept would be very useful for the Overlay networks. The
> proposed TTZ can group a set of nodes not geographically together into one
> virtual area to scale virtual
