YOUR DOUBT.
Regards
Parag
Juniper Business Use Only
From: Huaimo Chen
Sent: Sunday, December 10, 2023 1:28 AM
To: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) ; Parag Kaneriya
; li_zhenqi...@hotmail.com; Tony Li ;
Linda Dunbar
Cc: Yingzhen Qu ;
draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-...@ietf.org; lsr
Subject: RE: Re: [Lsr
; Parag Kaneriya
; li_zhenqi...@hotmail.com; Tony Li ;
Linda Dunbar
Cc: Yingzhen Qu ;
draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-...@ietf.org; lsr
Subject: RE: Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call - draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv
(11/17/2023 - 12/09/2023)
[External Email. Be cautious of content]
Huaimo -
We are not making
Legacy node gets half information result in the inconsistent view of network
(for example TED [traffic engineering database] inconsistency lead to many
network related issue.) hence legacy node getting half information is not
backward consistent.
Juniper Business Use Only
From: Huaimo Chen
I support adoption as co-author.
Juniper Business Use Only
From: Acee Lindem
Sent: Friday, November 17, 2023 11:01 PM
To: Yingzhen Qu
Cc: draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-...@ietf.org; lsr
Subject: Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call - draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv (11/17/2023
- 12/09/2023)
[External
"No, I'm not aware of any IPR that applies to this draft"
Juniper Business Use Only
From: Yingzhen Qu
Sent: Friday, November 17, 2023 10:31 PM
To: draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-...@ietf.org; lsr
Cc: lsr-chairs
Subject: IPR Poll for draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv
[External Email. Be cautious of
I support this Draft.
Regards
Parag
Juniper Business Use Only
From: Lsr On Behalf Of Acee Lindem (acee)
Sent: Wednesday, November 23, 2022 1:31 AM
To: lsr@ietf.org
Subject: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call for "IS-IS Optimal Distributed Flooding for
Dense Topologies" - draft-white-lsr-distoptflood-03
Mixing data plan using same TLV may lead to forwarding issue. if you do so it
is required to upgrade all the node in the network which is practically not
possible. Hence Different TVL for IP flex algo required.
Regards
Parag
-Original Message-
From: Peter Psenak
Sent: Tuesday, May
Hello All,
I am not aware of any IPR beyond that which has already been disclosed to the
IETF and is referenced in your email.
Regards
Parag
From: Lsr On Behalf Of Acee Lindem (acee)
Sent: Friday, April 8, 2022 12:40 AM
To: draft-ietf-lsr-ip-flexa...@ietf.org
Cc: lsr@ietf.org
Subject: [Lsr]
I support this Draft.
Regards
Parag
From: Lsr On Behalf Of Acee Lindem (acee)
Sent: Tuesday, November 23, 2021 1:17 AM
To: lsr@ietf.org
Subject: [Lsr] WG Last Call fo "IS-IS Flood Reflection"
-draft-ietf-lsr-isis-flood-reflection-05
[External Email. Be cautious of content]
This begins the WG
IP Algorithm SUBTLV indicate the participation for particular flex algo by
node. Participation doesn't depend on whether it support ipv4 prefix or ipv6
prefix. Node which doesn't support particular family will not install that
family route.
Regards
Parag
Juniper Business Use Only
From:
Hello Aijun,
Every router by default support algo 0. When router support IP-FLEX algo along
with default algo, we need to be deterministic when there is conflict of prefix
advertise in both algo. This conflict might be due to mis config. So when such
condition arise, prefix belong to default
Hello,
I am going through recent draft
https://tools.ietf.org/pdf/draft-ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming-16.pdf
Changes are follow ,
4.1. End: Endpoint
S01. When an SRH is processed {
S02. If (Segments Left == 0) {
S03. Proceed to process the next header in the packet, whose type is
12 matches
Mail list logo
