Ginsberg and I believe updates
were discussed. Please continue this discussion with the working group version
of the document.
Thanks,
Acee
From: Acee Lindem (acee)
Date: Tuesday, November 22, 2022 at 3:01 PM
To: lsr@ietf.org
Subject: WG Adoption Call for "IS-IS Optimal Distributed Flo
RFC 8349 uses an unbounded string for control-plane-protocol so this definition
would be consistent. However, we've been putting bounds on strings that are
encoded in packets and this is probably something we should do for all strings.
container control-plane-protocols {
description
Speaking as a contributor and WG member:
I am not aware of any IPR. I support publication.
Thanks,
Acee
On 12/7/22, 9:07 AM, "Christian Hopps" mailto:cho...@chopps.org>> wrote:
This begins a 2 week WG Last Call, ending Dec 21, 2022, for:
Speaking as WG member:
I support publication.
Thanks,
Acee
On 12/7/22, 9:05 AM, "Christian Hopps" mailto:cho...@chopps.org>> wrote:
This begins a 2 week WG Last Call, ending Dec 21, 2022, for:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-lsr-rfc8919bis/
Speaking as WG member.
See one inline.
From: Lsr on behalf of Tony Li
Date: Tuesday, December 6, 2022 at 6:23 PM
To: "Les Ginsberg (ginsberg)"
Cc: Bruno Decraene , lsr
Subject: Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for
draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv-02.txt
Bruno, Les,
Some responses inline –
This version includes Ketan Talauikar's comments including clarification of
BGP-LS advertisement.
Thanks,
Acee
On 11/28/22, 3:14 PM, "Lsr on behalf of internet-dra...@ietf.org"
wrote:
A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts
directories.
This draft is a
LSR WG,
This begins a 2 week WG adoption call for the following draft:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-white-lsr-distoptflood/
The draft would be adopted on the Informational or Experimental track.
Please indicate your support or objection by December 7th, 2022.
Also indicate whether
Authors,
Are you aware of any IPR that applies to draft-white-lsr-distoptflood-03.txt?
The following IPR declarations have been disclosed:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/search/?submit=draft=draft-white-lsr-distoptflood
If so, has this IPR been disclosed in compliance with IETF IPR rules
All,
The NomCom is tasked with selecting the IETF leadership, like the IESG and the
IAB. For the NomCom to be able to make an informed decision, they need feedback
from the wider IETF community.
Please, allocate some time to provide feedback on people that you interacted
with to help the
x,
R.
On Thu, Nov 10, 2022 at 11:47 AM Acee Lindem (acee)
mailto:a...@cisco.com>> wrote:
Hi Robert,
From: Robert Raszuk mailto:rob...@raszuk.net>>
Date: Thursday, November 10, 2022 at 9:41 AM
To: Peter Psenak
mailto:40cisco@dmarc.ietf.org>>
Cc: Bruno Decraene
mailto:bru
Hi Robert,
From: Robert Raszuk
Date: Thursday, November 10, 2022 at 9:41 AM
To: Peter Psenak
Cc: Bruno Decraene , David Lamparter
, Acee Lindem , "lsr@ietf.org"
Subject: Re: [Lsr] draft-ppsenak-lsr-igp-ureach-prefix-announce / UPA IS-IS
semantics
Peter,
> But:
> - that is nonetheless a
Hi Robert,
From: Robert Raszuk
Date: Wednesday, November 9, 2022 at 10:37 AM
To: Acee Lindem , lsr
Subject: OSPF-GT
Hi Acee,
The point of sparse GT makes it much more attractive.
With that I have two questions/suggestions to make it even more useful.
#1 Would you consider adding reflection
Speaking as WG Participant:
Hi Bruno, David,
I guess I'd like to understand what one would accomplish with further
specification of prefix reachable? What
requirement would this satisfy? For the use case UPA is designed to handle
(triggering BGP PIC or other local
action) , I can't see that
All,
Based on the WG Last Call discussion, section 6.4 has been added to clarify
base algorithm exclusion in OSPFv3 E-Intra-Area-Prefix-LSAs. Please provide any
additional comment before Nov 5, 2022.
Thanks,
Acee
On 10/21/22, 4:20 AM, "Lsr on behalf of internet-dra...@ietf.org"
wrote:
This looks good to me though I'll defer final approval to the authors.
Thanks,
Acee
On 10/21/22, 1:38 PM, "Sabrina Tanamal via RT"
wrote:
Dear Authors:
ATTENTION: A RESPONSE TO THIS MESSAGE IS NEEDED
We've completed the registry actions for the following RFC-to-be:
In case you didn’t see the NomCom announcement.
Thanks,
Acee
The IETF Nomination Committee (NomCom) for 2022-2023 is seeking nominations
from now until October 24.
The list of open positions can be found at the NomCom home page:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/nomcom/2022/
This also includes
Hi Yingzhen,
Please allocate a 10 minute slot for OSPF-GT (Generalized Transport).
Thanks,
Acee
From: Yingzhen Qu
Date: Wednesday, October 12, 2022 at 7:40 PM
To: lsr-chairs , lsr
Subject: Slot request for LSR meeting at IETF 115
Resent-From:
Resent-To: Christian Hopps , Acee Lindem ,
anks,
Acee
Aijun Wang
China Telecom
> On Oct 13, 2022, at 18:07, Acee Lindem (acee)
wrote:
>
> Hi Zhibo,
>
> On 10/13/22, 2:26 AM, "Lsr on behalf of Huzhibo" wrote:
>
>Hi LSR:
>
>LSInfinity
>
Note that for LSR, we usually do this anyway so this really isn’t a change of
policy. At least as a document shepherd, I always try and remember.
Thanks,
Acee
From: Andrew Alston - IETF
Date: Wednesday, October 12, 2022 at 3:30 AM
To: "rtg-cha...@ietf.org"
Subject: Directorate Early Reviews
Hi Zhibo,
On 10/13/22, 2:26 AM, "Lsr on behalf of Huzhibo" wrote:
Hi LSR:
LSInfinity
The metric value indicating that the destination described by an
LSA is unreachable. Used in summary-LSAs and AS-external-LSAs
I want to clarify the meaning of unreachable in LSifinity,
Aijun Wang
China Telecom
> On Oct 12, 2022, at 18:22, Acee Lindem (acee)
wrote:
>
>
>
> On 10/12/22, 2:31 AM, "Lsr on behalf of Aijun Wang" wrote:
>
>Hi, Acee:
>
>Let me state some points more clearly:
l handling.
Best Regards
Aijun Wang
China Telecom
-Original Message-
From: lsr-boun...@ietf.org On Behalf Of Acee Lindem
(acee)
Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2022 11:20 PM
To: Peter Psenak (ppsenak) ; Aijun Wang
; 'Ketan Talaulikar'
Cc: lsr@ietf.org
S
> -Original Message-
> From: lsr-boun...@ietf.org On Behalf Of Peter
Psenak
> Sent: Monday, October 10, 2022 3:56 PM
> To: Aijun Wang ; 'Acee Lindem (acee)'
; 'Ketan Talaulikar' ;
'Peter Psenak'
> Cc: lsr@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [Lsr] RFC 8362
Hi Murray,
On 10/10/22, 12:26 PM, "Murray Kucherawy via Datatracker"
wrote:
Murray Kucherawy has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-lsr-pce-discovery-security-support-12: Discuss
When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email
Hi Peter, Ketan,
We’ll do another WG last call on the updated IP Flex Algo document and it will
update RFC 8362. As you probably surmised, this is useful for OSPFv3 IP Flex
Algorithm when you want don’t want to use the prefix with the base algorithm.
From: Lsr on behalf of Ketan Talaulikar
Hi Tony,
From: Lsr on behalf of Tony Li
Date: Friday, October 7, 2022 at 11:21 AM
To: "Les Ginsberg (ginsberg)"
Cc: Christian Hopps , "Peter Psenak (ppsenak)"
, Robert Raszuk , Henk Smit
, "lsr@ietf.org"
Subject: Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for
draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv-01.txt
All,
Please see the attached minutes from the LSR Interim on 9/21/2022 as long as
the Meetecho chat log. Thanks to Yingzhen Qu for taking them.
https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/interim-2022-lsr-01/materials/minutes-interim-2022-lsr-01-202209211000-00.txt
Here are the complete meeting
Hi Ketan, Alvaro,
From: Ketan Talaulikar
Date: Thursday, October 6, 2022 at 8:10 AM
To: Alvaro Retana
Cc: Martin Duke , "lsr@ietf.org" ,
Christian Hopps , Acee Lindem ,
"lsr-cha...@ietf.org" , The IESG ,
"draft-ietf-lsr-ospf-reverse-met...@ietf.org"
Subject: Re: [Lsr] Martin Duke's Discuss
Hi Dhruv,
Thanks for the quick turnaround. It looks good to me. One nit, I believe a
period was added to “However, as noted in [RFC6952].,” by mistake.
Thanks,
Acee
From: Lsr on behalf of Dhruv Dhody
Date: Wednesday, October 5, 2022 at 9:06 AM
To: Lars Eggert
Cc: The IESG ,
Hi John,
On 10/5/22, 11:18 AM, "Lsr on behalf of John Scudder" wrote:
Hi Acee,
> On Oct 4, 2022, at 12:57 PM, Acee Lindem (acee)
wrote:
>
>> From: "Rob Wilton (rwilton)"
...
>> Is there somewhere for these new config knobs a
arrel" wrote:
Yeah, I like that suggestion.
A
-Original Message-
From: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg)
Sent: 04 October 2022 20:43
To: John Scudder
Cc: Acee Lindem (acee) ; Lars Eggert ; The
IESG ; draft-ietf-lsr-pce-discovery-security-supp...@ietf.org
Speaking as long-time LSR/OSPF WG Member and Co-author of RFC 4970 and RFC
7770:
When RFC 5088 was being standardized, there was concern over both advertising
non-routing information in OSPF and exceeding the maximum size of an OSPF
Router Information LSA which was limited to a single LSA
that base OSPF YANG module?
That would be better.
Is there somewhere for these new config knobs are being tracked - so that they
don’t get forgotten?
We have the Datatracker for that…
Thanks,
Acee
Thanks,
Rob
From: Acee Lindem (acee)
Sent: 04 October 2022 16:13
To: Ketan Talaulikar
Cc:
ink State Database for the advertisement of
the individual links. I think you can just say a future YANG draft as the
reference Is not mandatory.
Thanks,
Acee
Thanks.
Ketan
On Tue, Oct 4, 2022 at 8:07 PM Acee Lindem (acee)
mailto:a...@cisco.com>> wrote:
Hi Ketan,
See inlie.
From:
Hi Ketan,
See inlie.
From: Ketan Talaulikar
Date: Tuesday, October 4, 2022 at 10:23 AM
To: "Rob Wilton (rwilton)"
Cc: The IESG , "draft-ietf-lsr-ospf-l2bund...@ietf.org"
, "lsr-cha...@ietf.org"
, "lsr@ietf.org" , Christian Hopps
, Acee Lindem
Subject: Re: Robert Wilton's No Objection on
Hi Ketan, et al,
From: Ketan Talaulikar
Date: Tuesday, October 4, 2022 at 4:34 AM
To: Lars Eggert
Cc: The IESG , "draft-ietf-lsr-ospf-l2bund...@ietf.org"
, "lsr-cha...@ietf.org"
, "lsr@ietf.org" , Christian Hopps
, Acee Lindem , John Scudder
Subject: Re: Lars Eggert's Discuss on
Hi Renato,
From: Renato Westphal
Date: Friday, September 30, 2022 at 10:34 AM
To: Acee Lindem
Cc: "draft-ietf-ospf-y...@ietf.org" ,
"lsr@ietf.org"
Subject: Re: ietf-o...@2019-10-17.yang: questions
Em sex., 30 de set. de 2022 às 11:21, Acee Lindem (acee)
mailto:a...@
Hi Renato,
Thanks - see inline.
On 9/30/22, 10:14 AM, "Renato Westphal" wrote:
Hi Acee,
Em sex., 30 de set. de 2022 às 09:32, Acee Lindem (acee)
escreveu:
> Hi Renato,
>
>
>
> *From: *Renato Westphal
> *Date: *Thursday, S
.
Em qua., 7 de set. de 2022 às 18:05, Acee Lindem (acee)
mailto:a...@cisco.com>> escreveu:
Thanks for you comments. However, at this point in the cycle, we’re not going
to make any additions to the model since it is has already been through the
complete review cycle. We will however
Hi Tom,
On 9/28/22, 5:41 AM, "tom petch" wrote:
On 26/09/2022 18:02, The IESG wrote:
>
> The IESG has received a request from the Link State Routing WG (lsr) to
> consider the following document: - 'IS-IS Flood Reflection'
> as Experimental RFC
>
> The IESG
6 Interface Address" with "non-link-local IPv6
address" - but let's wait for Alvaro's response in case he wants further
changes.
Sure.
Thanks,
Acee
Les
> -Original Message-
> From: Acee Lindem (acee)
> Sent: Saturday, September 24, 2022 2:36
Hi Les,
Looks good. See one suggestion.
On 9/24/22, 5:23 PM, "Les Ginsberg (ginsberg)" wrote:
Alvaro -
I have given your comments regarding clearer guidance on what value to use
for router id more thought and tried to address this in V5 of the document
(recently posted).
I
We will have an interim working group meeting tomorrow (Sept 21st, 2022) from
14:00 UTC to 16:00 UTC.
Here is the official information link:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/interim-2022-lsr-01/session/lsr
Themes for this interim are IGP flex algorithm and SRv6 advertisement.
Thanks Martin - Thanks for the Routing Directorate review!!
On 9/16/22, 12:49 PM, "Lsr on behalf of Martin Vigoureux"
wrote:
Hi,
I apologize for providing this review way past the deadline.
The document is of very good quality and clearly the result of careful
work, which
Hi John, Eric,
On 9/16/22, 9:36 AM, "Eric Vyncke (evyncke)" wrote:
John
Thanks for your reply, it made me dig further... and I am afraid that I
mixed up OSPF and IS-IS... (hey, I am just an INT AD ;-) )
I.e., AFAIK the router ID in OSPF is indeed a 32-bit value that must be
er:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-lsr-ospfv3-srv6-extensions-07#section-13.3
Thanks,
Ketan
On Wed, Aug 24, 2022 at 12:11 AM Acee Lindem (acee)
mailto:a...@cisco.com>> wrote:
The Working Group Last Call (WGLC) has completed. There is more than sufficient
support for public
Thanks John - I the changes in -21 and -22 improve the specification.
Acee
On 9/12/22, 8:41 AM, "Lsr on behalf of John Scudder" wrote:
Hi Peter,
Thanks. I’ve requested IETF LC.
—John
> On Sep 12, 2022, at 7:36 AM, Peter Psenak wrote:
>
>
> Hi John,
>
Hi John,
Agree - this can go straight to verified.
Thanks,
Acee
On 9/12/22, 8:54 AM, "Lsr on behalf of RFC Errata System"
wrote:
The following errata report has been submitted for RFC3277,
"Intermediate System to Intermediate System (IS-IS) Transient Blackhole
Avoidance".
Hi Chris,
From: Christian Hopps
Date: Thursday, September 8, 2022 at 6:02 AM
To: "Acee Lindem (acee)"
Cc: Christian Hopps , Renato Westphal
, "draft-ietf-ospf-y...@ietf.org"
, "lsr@ietf.org"
Subject: Re: [Lsr] ietf-o...@2019-10-17.yang: questions
Resent-F
Hi Renato,
Thanks for you comments. However, at this point in the cycle, we’re not going
to make any additions to the model since it is has already been through the
complete review cycle. We will however fix things that are broken.
See inline responses below.
From: Renato Westphal
Date:
Speaking as WG Member and primary author of RFC 8362:
Hi John,
On 9/6/22, 1:17 PM, "John Scudder" wrote:
Hi Acee,
> On Sep 5, 2022, at 1:23 PM, Acee Lindem (acee) wrote:
>
> First of all, I think this IANA OSPFv3 Extended-LSA Sub-TLV
specification,
Hi Ketan, John,
First of all, I think this IANA OSPFv3 Extended-LSA Sub-TLV specification, if
it is to be done at all, should be done in a separate draft.
When we originally created the registry for RFC 8362, the purpose was avoid
Sub-TLV code point collisions while affording maximum reuse of
Agreed. This is clearly documented section 10.6 on page 100.
Thanks,
Acee
On 9/1/22, 4:52 PM, "Lsr on behalf of John Scudder" wrote:
This looks right. If there are any objections to verifying it, please let
me know.
—John
> On Sep 1, 2022, at 2:39 PM, RFC Errata System
wrote:
Hi Les, John, Authors,
I agree with Les that we should not pad in IS-IS and should have separate
encodings. I’m not sure why I didn’t notice this when I did the shepherd
review.
Thanks,
Acee
From: Lsr on behalf of "Les Ginsberg (ginsberg)"
Date: Friday, August 26, 2022 at 3:05 PM
To: John
Date: Thursday, August 25, 2022 at 12:18 PM
To: "Acee Lindem (acee)"
Cc: Gunter Van de Velde , Tony Li
, lsr
Subject: Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for
draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv-01.txt
All,
I am actually finding this capability useful. If for nothing else then to help
th
Speaking as WG member:
Hi Gunder, Tony, Les,
I'm also not a fan of the Multi-Part TLV Capability flag. While the intent of
the draft is to encourage multi-part TLV advertisement and usage, the addition
of this flag and the requirement for advertisement will most likely have the
opposite
Speaking as document shepherd and WG member:
Hi John, Qin, and Dhruv,
See a couple inlines.
From: Lsr on behalf of Dhruv Dhody
Date: Thursday, August 25, 2022 at 7:02 AM
To: Qin Wu
Cc: John Scudder ,
"draft-ietf-lsr-pce-discovery-security-supp...@ietf.org"
, "lsr@ietf.org"
Subject: Re:
of "Acee Lindem (acee)"
Date: Friday, July 29, 2022 at 1:18 PM
To: lsr
Cc: "draft-ietf-lsr-ospfv3-srv6-extensi...@ietf.org"
Subject: [Lsr] Working Group Last Call for "OSPFv3 Extensions for SRv6" -
draft-ietf-lsr-ospfv3-srv6-extensions-06.txt (Corrected Address)
ietf-lsr-ospfv3-srv6-extensions-06.txt (Corrected Address)
Hi Aijun,
Thanks for your detailed review and please check inline below for responses.
From: Lsr [mailto:lsr-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Aijun Wang
Sent: Friday, August 19, 2022 5:55 PM
To: 'Acee Lindem (acee)' ; 'lsr'
Cc: draft-
Hi John,
On 8/18/22, 1:29 PM, "John Scudder" wrote:
Hi Acee,
> On Aug 18, 2022, at 1:10 PM, Acee Lindem (acee)
wrote:
>
> Speaking as Document Shepherd:
>
> Hi John,
>
> Thanks much for your review and suggested te
G and RTGWG WGs on
redundancy and protection features that leverage anycast.
I think we’re agreeing, I’ve seen the same use case presentations and it is,
IMO, a far better usage than prefix unreachability
Thanks,
Acee
Thanks,
Ketan
On Wed, Aug 17, 2022 at 8:44 PM Acee Lindem (acee)
mailto:a.
r SRv6" -
draft-ietf-lsr-ospfv3-srv6-extensions-06.txt (Corrected Address)
Hi Acee,
Please check inline below.
On Wed, Aug 17, 2022 at 8:06 PM Acee Lindem (acee)
mailto:a...@cisco.com>> wrote:
Hi Ketan,
From: Lsr mailto:lsr-boun...@ietf.org>> on behalf of
Ketan Talaulikar mail
ingzhen
On Jul 29, 2022, at 10:16 AM, Acee Lindem (acee)
mailto:acee=40cisco@dmarc.ietf.org>> wrote:
As promised in today’s LSR WG meeting, this begins a 3 week WG Last Call,
ending on August 19th, 2022, for draft-ietf-lsr-ospfv3-srv6-extensions. The
extra week is to account for
re moving.
Looking for feedback/input from the WG on this proposed change.
I think we’d just need to get feedback from Dirk (who made the comment that
initiated this) and the co-authors. Of course, anyone with know of OSPFv3 SRv6
can comment.
Thanks,
Acee
Thanks,
Ketan
On Fri, Jul 29, 2022 at 10:47 PM
Speaking as WG member:
I agree with Les. A non-backward compatible change is a non-starter.
I’m not sure why you’d need to present this again at the Interim unless you
provide backward compatibility.
Thanks,
Acee
From: Lsr on behalf of "Les Ginsberg (ginsberg)"
Date: Friday, August 12,
Speaking as WG member:
I support publication of this draft. I reviewed the draft and my comments have
been incorporated.
Thanks,
Acee
From: Lsr on behalf of "Acee Lindem (acee)"
Date: Friday, July 29, 2022 at 1:18 PM
To: lsr
Cc: "draft-ietf-lsr-ospfv3-srv6-extensi...@ietf
Hey Robin,
Haven't received your WG last call IPR poll response yet - I guess you were
waiting for this to be posted?
Thanks,
Acee
On 8/11/22, 10:47 AM, "Lsr on behalf of IETF Secretariat"
wrote:
Dear Zhenbin Li, Zhibo Hu, Ketan Talaulikar, Peter Psenak:
An IPR disclosure that
Moved the meeting to avoid both US Labor Day week and Chinese Autumn Holiday
week...
Thanks,
Acee
On 8/10/22, 2:55 PM, "Lsr on behalf of IESG Secretary" wrote:
MEETING DETAILS HAVE CHANGED. SEE LATEST DETAILS BELOW.
The Link State Routing (lsr) WG will hold
a virtual interim
run
>> different SPF algorithm, update at different frequencies, forming
different
>> forwarding tables etc. It is necessary to divide/group all the above
items based
>> on application, not just the attributes.
>>
>>
>> Aij
Hi Aijun,
And the BIS changes are more clarifications than changes to the existing RFC
8919 and RFC 8920 RFCs.
Thanks,
Acee
On 8/9/22, 5:57 AM, "Peter Psenak" wrote:
Aijun,
On 09/08/2022 05:35, Aijun Wang wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am wondering why we are so hurry to
As a contributor, I'm not aware of any IPR related to the draft.
Thanks,
Acee
On 8/8/22, 9:55 AM, "Peter Psenak" wrote:
Hi Chris,
I am not aware of any IPR related to this draft.
thanks,
Peter
On 08/08/2022 06:17, Christian Hopps wrote:
>
> Hi Folks,
>
I support WG adoption. The clarifications in the BIS document were discussed in
the course of the flex algorithm draft.
Thanks,
Acee
On 8/8/22, 6:21 AM, "Christian Hopps" wrote:
Hi Folks,
This begins a 2 week WG Adoption Call for the following draft:
I support WG adoption. The clarifications in the BIS document were discussed in
the course of the flex algorithm draft.
Thanks,
Acee
On 8/8/22, 6:22 AM, "Christian Hopps" wrote:
Hi Folks,
This begins a 2 week WG Adoption Call for the following draft:
r SRv6" - draft-ietf-lsr-ospfv3-srv6-extensions-06.txt
Hi Acee,
I am not aware of any undisclosed IPR that applies to
draft-ietf-lsr-ospfv3-srv6-extensions-06.txt
thanks,
Zhibo
From: Lsr [mailto:lsr-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Acee Lindem (acee)
Sent: Saturday, July 30, 2022 1:15 A
on’t aren’t
without significant issues.
Thanks,
Acee
--- tony
From: Acee Lindem (acee)
Date: Monday, 1 August 2022 at 07:42
To: Antoni Przygienda , Les Ginsberg (ginsberg)
, lsr@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Lsr] Comments on draft-white-lsr-distoptflood-03
[External Email. Be cautious of content]
S
Speaking as WG member:
Hi Tony,
Great improvement to the prior version of the draft – I’d now support adoption.
My two comments at the mike were:
1. Potentially add text to text to section 2.1 and 2.2 to allow for N
flooding paths t the neighbors on the TNL.
2. Suggested clarificiton
Co-authors,
Are you aware of any IPR that applies to
draft-ietf-lsr-ospfv3-srv6-extensions-06.txt?
If so, has this IPR been disclosed in compliance with IETF IPR rules
(see RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669 and 5378 for more details).
If you are listed as a document author or contributor please respond
to
As promised in today’s LSR WG meeting, this begins a 3 week WG Last Call,
ending on August 19th, 2022, for draft-ietf-lsr-ospfv3-srv6-extensions. The
extra week is to account for PIST (Post-IETF Stress Syndrome). The
corresponding IS-IS draft is already on the RFC Queue and there are
Co-authors,
Are you aware of any IPR that applies to
draft-ietf-lsr-ospfv3-srv6-extensions-06.txt?
If so, has this IPR been disclosed in compliance with IETF IPR rules
(see RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669 and 5378 for more details).
If you are listed as a document author or contributor please respond
to
As promised in today’s LSR WG meeting, this begins a 3 week WG Last Call,
ending on August 19th, 2022, for draft-ietf-lsr-ospfv3-srv6-extensions. The
extra week is to account for PIST (Post-IETF Stress Syndrome). The
corresponding IS-IS draft is already on the RFC Queue and there are
Hi Peter, Ketan,
See one inline.
On 7/28/22, 10:08 AM, "Lsr on behalf of Peter Psenak" wrote:
Hi Ketan,
On 28/07/2022 02:27, Ketan Talaulikar wrote:
> Hello Authors,
>
> Sharing some comments upfront on this draft given the packed LSR agenda.
>
> 1) There is
Speaking as WG Member:
Hi Ketan,
Thanks for pointing out the similarities. Even after the recent changes, there
are still some difference between the drafts which I’ll describe in the
baseless comments which follow. For conciseness, I’ll refer to the drafts as
PUA (Draft Wang) and UPA (Draft
Hi Ketan,
I’m glad you brought this up. The primary (and AFAIK only) reason for this
draft is to get the stub-link information to a router in the IGP domain running
BGP-LS so that it can be advertised to the controller. For reference, see
Hi All.
What is the expected action if all routers in the area do not support
multi-part TLVs? Does the advertising router simply not advertise the
information that doesn’t fit? This needs to be specified.
In general, I’m not a fan of these all or none IGP capabilities but sometimes
they
Hi Chenxi,
I guess you don’t normally follow the LSR list…
Our agenda is more than full for IETF 114 and we intend to have an interim.
Thanks,
Acee
From: "lichenxi (A)"
Date: Friday, July 15, 2022 at 8:30 AM
To: Yingzhen Qu , "lsr@ietf.org"
Cc: "lsr-cha...@ietf.org"
Subject: 答复: [Lsr] IETF
See one typo.
From: GROW on behalf of "Acee Lindem (acee)"
Date: Monday, July 11, 2022 at 10:45 AM
To: Gyan Mishra , Yingzhen Qu
Cc: IDR List , "g...@ietf.org g...@ietf.org" ,
lsr
Subject: Re: [GROW] [Idr] [Lsr] IGP Monitoring Protocol
Hi Gyan,
From: GROW on behalf o
ilto:jefftant.i...@gmail.com>>
Sent: Saturday, July 9, 2022 3:40 PM
To: Robert Raszuk mailto:rob...@raszuk.net>>
Cc: Acee Lindem (acee) mailto:a...@cisco.com>>; lsr
mailto:lsr@ietf.org>>; i...@ietf.org<mailto:i...@ietf.org>; Susan
Hares mailto:sha...@ndzh.com>&
t Raszuk mailto:rob...@raszuk.net>>
Cc: Acee Lindem (acee) mailto:a...@cisco.com>>; lsr
mailto:lsr@ietf.org>>; i...@ietf.org<mailto:i...@ietf.org>; Susan
Hares mailto:sha...@ndzh.com>>;
g...@ietf.org<mailto:g...@ietf.org> g...@ietf.org<mailto:g...@ietf.
7120 Section 2 conditions being
met?
Yes – I recently reviewed the document and I don’t expect non-backward
compatible changes to the specifications since an implementation is in progress.
Thanks,
Acee
Thanks,
—John
On Jul 8, 2022, at 6:38 PM, Acee Lindem (acee) wrote:
Hi IANA Team, John
Hi IANA Team, John,
The authors of the subject draft have requested early codepoint allocation as
there are implementations in progress and I, as document shepherd, believe that
this is overdue. Can we start the approval/allocation process?
Thanks,
Acee
On Fri, Jul 8, 2022 at 9:54 PM Acee Lindem (acee)
mailto:a...@cisco.com>> wrote:
Speaking as WG chair:
From: Lsr mailto:lsr-boun...@ietf.org>> on behalf of
Robert Raszuk mailto:rob...@raszuk.net>>
Date: Friday, July 8, 2022 at 3:21 PM
To: lsr mailto:lsr@ietf.org>>
Cc:
Speaking as WG chair:
From: Lsr on behalf of Robert Raszuk
Date: Friday, July 8, 2022 at 3:21 PM
To: lsr
Cc: IDR List , Susan Hares
Subject: [Lsr] IGP Monitoring Protocol
Dear LSR WG,
Based on ongoing discussion in respect to the future of BGP-LS I committed
myself to put together an
Speaking as WG Member:
Here is the update I intend to submit today:
Additionally, in Section 2.4.,first paragraph, "Changes to the Hello
Packet Processing", the text is updated to remove the non-inclusive
terms pertaining to unreachability handling as follows:
When an OSPFv3
Hi John,
I’ve received multiple queries as to what is holding up this draft.
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-lsr-flex-algo/
it is referenced by several drafts awaiting publication in cluster 447.
https://www.rfc-editor.org/cluster_info.php?cid=C447
Can you please make this a
From: Lsr on behalf of "Acee Lindem (acee)"
Date: Tuesday, July 5, 2022 at 5:23 PM
To: Robert Raszuk , Jeff Haas
Cc: Susan Hares , IDR List , lsr
Subject: Re: [Lsr] [Idr] YANG requirements for IDR drafts (was Re:
draft-head-idr-bgp-ls-isis-fr-01 - WG adoption call (6/6 to 6/20))
Hi Robert,
Like the SNMP MIBs before them, the YANG models trail the routing protocol
functional drafts. We have enough trouble satisfying all the references without
requiring YANG models. If you pay attention during the WG document status at
IETF 114, you’ll get a picture of where the base
I think this is a great idea – I have heard rumors that there is an
implementation in progress. I’ll send an Email to the AD and IANA…
Thanks,
Acee
From: Lsr on behalf of Ketan Talaulikar
Date: Friday, July 1, 2022 at 8:20 AM
To: "lsr-cha...@ietf.org"
Cc: lsr
Subject: [Lsr] Early allocation
consensus within the LSR and IDR chairs
on the rules for BGP-LS TLVs In LSR drafts by IETF-114,
we will go back to the previous mechanism of
requiring drafts in LSR and IDR.
Cheers, Sue
PS – I was going to work on the slides and a YouTube
Video for the slides this weekend.
From: Acee Lindem (a
Note that to the best of my knowledge, the LSR chairs have not agreed to these
slides so I must assume the agreement is amongst the IDR chairs?
Acee
From: Lsr on behalf of Susan Hares
Date: Thursday, June 30, 2022 at 12:24 PM
To: "lsr@ietf.org"
Subject: [Lsr] Request 5-10 minutes
The IDR
Yes, we will. We’re still discussing about who will present. I can if there
are no other volunteers. You’re welcome to put my name down for now.
T
On Jun 29, 2022, at 11:26 AM, Acee Lindem (acee)
mailto:a...@cisco.com>> wrote:
Speaking as WG chair:
Can someone present this at IE
1 - 100 of 830 matches
Mail list logo
