Hi, LSR chairs:
Along the adoption call procedure, I think we all noticed that there are some
limitations for the p2p(RFC9346/RFC5392) based existing solutions for the
potential scenarios(A.1-A.3) that mentioned in the draft.
Then we want to apply for extending the adoption call for one
Hi, Les:
Let’s top post my responses to your specific questions:
1) LAN partitioning can occur. So R1 and R2 may be able to talk to each
and R3 and R4 may be able to talk to each – but the two partitions have no
connectivity. Yet all nodes will advertise the LAN subnet – which in
Hi Tom,
Thanks for the review. Version -20 includes the fixes. Please see my
answers below inline.
Thanks,
Yingzhen
On Thu, Jan 18, 2024 at 4:13 AM tom petch wrote:
> This I-D changes the names of some bits in the identity cf RFC8667. I
> think that the description clause should then give
HI Reshad,
Thanks for the review. I've uploaded version -20 to address your comments.
Details below inline.
Thanks,
Yingzhen
On Sat, Jan 13, 2024 at 4:24 PM Reshad Rahman via Datatracker <
nore...@ietf.org> wrote:
> Reviewer: Reshad Rahman
> Review result: Ready with Issues
>
> Hi all,
>
>
Internet-Draft draft-ietf-ospf-sr-yang-30.txt is now available. It is a work
item of the Link State Routing (LSR) WG of the IETF.
Title: A YANG Data Model for OSPF Segment Routing for the MPLS Data Plane
Authors: Yingzhen Qu
Acee Lindem
Jeffrey Zhang
Internet-Draft draft-ietf-isis-sr-yang-20.txt is now available. It is a work
item of the Link State Routing (LSR) WG of the IETF.
Title: A YANG Data Model for IS-IS Segment Routing for the MPLS Data Plane
Authors: Stephane Litkowski
Yingzhen Qu
Pushpasis Sarkar
Roman Danyliw has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-lsr-isis-area-proxy-12: 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
Hi Roman,
>>> -- What are the relevant pointers to IS-IS security considerations?
>>
>>
>> AFAIK, there is no overall document for IS-IS’ security architecture. The
>> only
>> pointers I can suggest are to RFC 5304 and 5310. I will happily add
>> references
>> to these if folks feel that’s
Another update addressing IESG comments.
T
> Begin forwarded message:
>
> From: internet-dra...@ietf.org
> Subject: New Version Notification for draft-ietf-lsr-isis-area-proxy-12.txt
> Date: January 18, 2024 at 10:40:00 AM PST
> To: "Gyan S. Mishra" , "Gyan Mishra"
> , "Sarah Chen" , "Tony
Internet-Draft draft-ietf-lsr-isis-area-proxy-12.txt is now available. It is a
work item of the Link State Routing (LSR) WG of the IETF.
Title: Area Proxy for IS-IS
Authors: Tony Li
Sarah Chen
Vivek Ilangovan
Gyan S. Mishra
Name:
Aijun –
Frankly, I have a limited tolerance for these exchanges because your responses
to specific points are evasive.
You are like a boxer whose main goal is to avoid any punch thrown by your
opponent from landing directly. This is a pretty useful skill in a boxing ring,
but pretty tiresome
Roman Danyliw has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-lsr-isis-area-proxy-11: Discuss
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 to
Hi Tony!
Thanks for the explanation. See below.
> -Original Message-
> From: Tony Li On Behalf Of Tony Li
> Sent: Tuesday, January 9, 2024 5:31 PM
> To: Roman Danyliw
> Cc: The IESG ; draft-ietf-lsr-isis-area-pr...@ietf.org;
> lsr-chairs
> ; lsr ; Christian Hopps
> Subject: Re:
This I-D changes the names of some bits in the identity cf RFC8667. I think
that the description clause should then give the mapping to the RFC8667 name.
I see this for
lo-bit
pe-bit
af-bit
These may be excellent names but they are not what RFC8667 specifies!
As the YANG doctor review says,
And, for broadcast networks, if you can only encode them via the p2p link style, there are still the following questions:1) whether one interface can be appointed to different neighbor? Will the latter override the former? 2) The efficiency. The total neighbor information will be O(N*N), the
Hi, Les:
发件人: forwardingalgori...@ietf.org [mailto:forwardingalgori...@ietf.org] 代表 Les
Ginsberg (ginsberg)
发送时间: 2024年1月18日 0:16
收件人: Aijun Wang
抄送: Christian Hopps ; Huzhibo ; Acee
Lindem ; Yingzhen Qu ;
lsr@ietf.org
主题: Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call - draft-wang-lsr-stub-link-attributes
Hi, Robert:
For VRF interface, we can treat it specially, similar as the unnumbered
interface in the draft. (Add one “V” bit to identify them and attach the remote
identifier manually---there is no other automatic way to accomplish the
topology recovery )
But for other non-VRF interfaces,
17 matches
Mail list logo
