Re: [Lsr] WG Last Call draft-ietf-lsr-ospf-prefix-originator-06

2020-10-19 Thread John E Drake
No, as I indicated previously, this discussion has been had many times - it reminds me of 'Groundhog Day'. Yours Irrespectively, John Juniper Business Use Only > -Original Message- > From: Aijun Wang > Sent: Monday, October 19, 2020 11:00 AM > To: John E Drake

Re: [Lsr] WG Last Call draft-ietf-lsr-ospf-prefix-originator-06

2020-10-19 Thread John E Drake
19, 2020 10:41 AM > To: John E Drake > Cc: Peter Psenak ; Peter Psenak ; > Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) ; Christian Hopps > ; Aijun Wang ; lsr- > cha...@ietf.org; lsr@ietf.org; Jeff Tantsura ; draft- > ietf-lsr-ospf-prefix-origina...@ietf.org; lsr-...@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [Ls

Re: [Lsr] WG Last Call draft-ietf-lsr-ospf-prefix-originator-06

2020-10-19 Thread John E Drake
un Wang ; Peter Psenak > > Cc: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) ; Aijun Wang > ; Christian Hopps ; John E > Drake ; lsr-cha...@ietf.org; lsr@ietf.org; Jeff Tantsura > ; draft-ietf-lsr-ospf-prefix-origina...@ietf.org; > lsr- > a...@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [Lsr] WG Last Call draft-iet

Re: [Lsr] WG Last Call draft-ietf-lsr-ospf-prefix-originator-06

2020-10-19 Thread John E Drake
move the Appendices I cannot support the draft. > > Please discuss this with your co-authors and come to consensus on your next > step. > >Les > > > > -Original Message- > > From: Aijun Wang > > Sent: Monday, October 19, 2020 12:06 AM > &g

Re: [Lsr] WG Last Call draft-ietf-lsr-ospf-prefix-originator-06

2020-10-15 Thread John E Drake
Hi, I agree with Les. This is a simple protocol extension for a specific purpose and there is no reason to include speculation about its use for other purposes, particularly when it is inherently not suited for them. Yours Irrespectively, John Juniper Business Use Only > -Original

Re: [Lsr] LSR WG Adoption Poll for "IS-IS Topology-Transparent Zone" - draft-chen-isis-ttz-11.txt

2020-09-03 Thread John E Drake
Hi, The proponents of this draft seem to be arguing by repeated assertion. Yours Irrespectively, John Juniper Business Use Only From: Lsr On Behalf Of Kiran Makhijani Sent: Thursday, September 3, 2020 5:07 PM To: Gyan Mishra ; Robert Raszuk Cc: Les Ginsberg ; tony...@tony.li; Acee Lindem

Re: [Lsr] LSR WG Adoption Poll for "IS-IS Topology-Transparent Zone" - draft-chen-isis-ttz-11.txt

2020-08-18 Thread John E Drake
As am I. Yours Irrespectively, John Juniper Business Use Only From: Lsr On Behalf Of Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2020 5:07 PM To: Acee Lindem (acee) ; lsr@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Lsr] LSR WG Adoption Poll for "IS-IS Topology-Transparent Zone" -

Re: [Lsr] Request WG adoption of TTZ

2020-07-15 Thread John E Drake
I agree w/ Henk. The TTZ seems to be a gratuitous addition. Yours Irrespectively, John Juniper Business Use Only > -Original Message- > From: Lsr On Behalf Of Henk Smit > Sent: Wednesday, July 15, 2020 8:22 AM > To: Huaimo Chen > Cc: lsr@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [Lsr] Request WG

Re: [Lsr] Deborah Brungard's Discuss on draft-ietf-isis-te-app-14: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

2020-06-18 Thread John E Drake
I had mentioned "Application Specific" Yours Irrespectively, John Juniper Business Use Only From: Yingzhen Qu Sent: Thursday, June 18, 2020 4:30 PM To: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) ; Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) ; BRUNGARD, DEBORAH A ; The IESG Cc: lsr-cha...@ietf.org; aretana.i...@gmail.com; Acee

Re: [Lsr] Using IS-IS Multi-Topology (MT) for Segment Routing based Virtual Transport Network

2020-03-27 Thread John E Drake
Irrespectively, John Juniper Business Use Only From: Aijun Wang Sent: Thursday, March 26, 2020 9:37 PM To: John E Drake Cc: Joel M. Halpern ; xie...@chinatelecom.cn; lsr Subject: Re: [Lsr] Using IS-IS Multi-Topology (MT) for Segment Routing based Virtual Transport Network [External Email

Re: [Lsr] Using IS-IS Multi-Topology (MT) for Segment Routing based Virtual Transport Network

2020-03-26 Thread John E Drake
Hi, As Joel notes, it is true that enhanced VPNs require the use of specific underlay network resources, either dedicated or shared, but the this needs to be done without installing overlay VPN awareness in the P routers, which is inherently unscalable and operationally complex. Also, since

Re: [Lsr] IPR Poll for "IS-IS TE Attributes per application" - draft-ietf-isis-te-app-06.txt

2019-04-11 Thread John E Drake
I'm not aware of any IPR. Yours Irrespectively, John Juniper Internal From: Lsr On Behalf Of Acee Lindem (acee) Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2019 5:30 PM To: draft-ietf-isis-te-...@ietf.org Cc: lsr@ietf.org Subject: [Lsr] IPR Poll for "IS-IS TE Attributes per application" -

Re: [Lsr] Open issues with Dynamic Flooding

2019-03-07 Thread John E Drake
Hi, What does 'rate limit' mean in this context? Yours Irrespectively, John > -Original Message- > From: Lsr On Behalf Of Peter Psenak > Sent: Thursday, March 7, 2019 2:20 PM > To: tony...@tony.li > Cc: lsr@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [Lsr] Open issues with Dynamic Flooding > > On

Re: [Lsr] Open issues with Dynamic Flooding

2019-03-05 Thread John E Drake
I agree w/ Peter. Yours Irrespectively, John > -Original Message- > From: Lsr On Behalf Of Peter Psenak > Sent: Tuesday, March 5, 2019 2:38 AM > To: tony...@tony.li; lsr@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [Lsr] Open issues with Dynamic Flooding > > Hi Tony, > > On 04/03/2019 18:54 ,

Re: [Lsr] Working Group Adoption Poll for "OSPF Extension for Prefix Originator" - draft-wang-lsr-ospf-prefix-originator-ext-01

2019-02-21 Thread John E Drake
Hi, I agree with Les. I think the draft should be recast to indicate that it is providing OSPF parity with RFC 7794. Can’t topology discovery be done using RFC 7770? Yours Irrespectively, John From: Lsr On Behalf Of Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) Sent: Monday, February 18, 2019 8:22 AM To: Acee

Re: [Lsr] 答复: WG Adoption Call for draft-li-lsr-dynamic-flooding-02 + IPR poll.

2019-02-14 Thread John E Drake
Chris, Well put. Yours Irrespectively, John > -Original Message- > From: Lsr On Behalf Of Christian Hopps > Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2019 10:56 AM > To: lsr@ietf.org > Cc: lsr-cha...@ietf.org; lsr-...@ietf.org; 'Christian Hopps' > ; Aijun Wang > Subject: Re: [Lsr] 答复: WG Adoption

Re: [Lsr] Moving Forward [Re: Flooding Reduction Draft Redux]

2019-02-14 Thread John E Drake
Hi, I completely agree with Peter. Yours Irrespectively, John > -Original Message- > From: Lsr On Behalf Of Peter Psenak > Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2019 2:30 AM > To: Huaimo Chen ; Acee Lindem (acee) > ; Christian Hopps ; lsr@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [Lsr] Moving Forward [Re:

Re: [Lsr] Moving Forward [Re: Flooding Reduction Draft Redux]

2019-02-01 Thread John E Drake
Chris & Acee, This looks fine to me. Yours Irrespectively, John > -Original Message- > From: Lsr On Behalf Of Christian Hopps > Sent: Friday, February 1, 2019 7:26 AM > To: lsr@ietf.org > Cc: cho...@chopps.org > Subject: [Lsr] Moving Forward [Re: Flooding Reduction Draft Redux] > >

Re: [Lsr] Tsvart last call review of draft-ietf-lsr-isis-rfc7810bis-03

2018-12-07 Thread John E Drake
Hi, The answers that Les gives, below, to Yoshifumi are completely correct. Yours Irrespectively, John From: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) Sent: Friday, December 7, 2018 3:06 PM To: Yoshifumi Nishida Cc: nish...@wide.ad.jp; tsv-...@ietf.org; lsr@ietf.org; i...@ietf.org;

Re: [Lsr] [Idr] Available Bandwidth erratum 5486 [was: Re: AD Review of draft-ietf-idr-te-pm-bgp-14]

2018-11-28 Thread John E Drake
Alvaro, As I said, John’s suggestion is correct and it does match 7471, which is also correct. Yours Irrespectively, John From: Idr On Behalf Of Alvaro Retana Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2018 5:16 PM To: John Scudder Cc: lsr@ietf.org; idr-cha...@ietf.org;

Re: [Lsr] Available Bandwidth erratum 5486 [was: Re: AD Review of draft-ietf-idr-te-pm-bgp-14]

2018-11-28 Thread John E Drake
Hi, Comments inline Yours Irrespectively, John From: Idr On Behalf Of John Scudder Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2018 4:34 PM To: Alvaro Retana Cc: lsr@ietf.org; idr@ietf. org ; draft-ietf-idr-te-pm-...@ietf.org; Hares Susan ; idr-cha...@ietf.org Subject: [Idr] Available Bandwidth erratum

Re: [Lsr] LSR Flooding Reduction Drafts - Moving Forward

2018-09-04 Thread John E Drake
There is no virtually no difference between the two drafts in the way that distributed mode works and your draft currently has no description of how centralized mode works. Yours Irrespectively, John From: Huaimo Chen Sent: Tuesday, September 4, 2018 12:30 PM To: John E Drake ; Robert Raszuk

Re: [Lsr] LSR Flooding Reduction Drafts - Moving Forward

2018-09-04 Thread John E Drake
: Tuesday, September 4, 2018 11:24 AM To: John E Drake ; Robert Raszuk Cc: tony...@tony.li; Acee Lindem (acee) ; lsr@ietf.org; Jeff Tantsura ; Tony Przygienda ; Peter Psenak Subject: RE: [Lsr] LSR Flooding Reduction Drafts - Moving Forward Hi John, See my comments inline below. Best

Re: [Lsr] LSR Flooding Reduction Drafts - Moving Forward

2018-08-30 Thread John E Drake
Hi, I have reviewed both of the flood reduction drafts and the draft referenced below, draft-cc-ospf-flooding-reduction-02, seems to me to be a derivative document inferior in quality to the draft, draft-li-dynamic-flooding-05, from which it is derived. For example, the referenced draft fails

Re: [Lsr] LSR Flooding Reduction Drafts - Moving Forward

2018-08-24 Thread John E Drake
Les, I think that Tony's draft already has a pretty good set of requirements: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-li-dynamic-flooding-05#section-3 Yours Irrespectively, John > -Original Message- > From: Lsr On Behalf Of Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) > Sent: Friday, August 24, 2018 12:17 PM

Re: [Lsr] IPR Call for "IS-IS Traffic Engineering (TE) Metric Extensions" - draft-ginsberg-lsr-isis-rfc7810bis-00

2018-04-09 Thread John E Drake
I’m not aware of any IPR. Yours Irrespectively, John From: Lsr On Behalf Of Acee Lindem (acee) Sent: Monday, April 9, 2018 3:39 PM To: draft-ginsberg-lsr-isis-rfc7810...@ietf.org Cc: lsr@ietf.org Subject: [Lsr] IPR Call for "IS-IS Traffic Engineering (TE) Metric