Re: [Lsr] Pre-writeup review comments

2020-09-23 Thread Peter Psenak
Hi Chris, thanks for your comments. Please see inline (##PP): On 18/09/2020 16:08, Christian Hoppsprotocol= application/pgp-signature wrote: During my review and while doing the Shepherd writeup for https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-lsr-isis-srv6-extensions/ I came up with the

Re: [Lsr] 回复: New Version Notification for draft-zhu-lsr-isis-sr-vtn-flexalgo-01.txt

2020-09-16 Thread Peter Psenak
Hi Jie, On 16/09/2020 12:02, Dongjie (Jimmy) wrote: Hi Peter, Thanks for your comment. Please see some replies inline: -Original Message- From: Lsr [mailto:lsr-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Peter Psenak Sent: Wednesday, September 16, 2020 4:46 PM To: zhu...@chinatelecom.cn; lsr

Re: [Lsr] 回复: New Version Notification for draft-zhu-lsr-isis-sr-vtn-flexalgo-01.txt

2020-09-16 Thread Peter Psenak
Yongqing, I have two basic comments: 1. Using L2 Bundle Member Attributes TLV for advertising attributes for VTNs seems like a hack. 2. "In order to correlate the virtual or physical member links with the corresponding VTNs, each member link SHOULD be assigned with a dedicated Admin

Re: [Lsr] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-lsr-flex-algo

2020-09-11 Thread Peter Psenak
PF routing protocol behavior. It reduce interop issues footprint with systems not supporting ASLA.) G/ -Original Message----- From: Peter Psenak Sent: Thursday, September 3, 2020 12:02 To: Van De Velde, Gunter (Nokia - BE/Antwerp); Selderslaghs, Rudy (Nokia - BE/Antwerp); Shrad

Re: [Lsr] I-D Action: draft-ietf-lsr-isis-srv6-extensions-09.txt

2020-09-08 Thread Peter Psenak
: IS-IS Extension to Support Segment Routing over IPv6 Dataplane Authors : Peter Psenak Clarence Filsfils Ahmed Bashandy Bruno Decraene Zhibo Hu Filename

Re: [Lsr] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-lsr-flex-algo

2020-09-08 Thread Peter Psenak
Hi Bruno, please see inline: On 07/09/2020 17:31, bruno.decra...@orange.com wrote: Hi Peter, From: Lsr [mailto:lsr-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Peter Psenak Sent: Thursday, September 3, 2020 9:55 AM Hi Shraddha, On 03/09/2020 05:39, Shraddha Hegde wrote: Peter, In order to make

Re: [Lsr] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-lsr-flex-algo

2020-09-08 Thread Peter Psenak
A TLV was introduced. The link to this draft, you have copied in the mail above. I think it is fair to warn the operators on the possible inter-op issues this could cause. I would like to see the above sentence added to the draft. Rgds Shraddha Juniper Business Use Only -----Original Message

Re: [Lsr] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-lsr-flex-algo

2020-09-03 Thread Peter Psenak
unrelated that flex-algo ASLA with L-bit SET is semantically a valid ASLA. This also simplifies and align ISIS and OSPF routing protocol behavior. It reduce interop issues footprint with systems not supporting ASLA.) G/ -Original Message----- From: Peter Psenak Sent: Thursday, September

Re: [Lsr] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-lsr-flex-algo

2020-09-03 Thread Peter Psenak
ertisement. Hence, I suggest that we should make it explicit clear that L-bit set for flex-algo is MUST NOT be allowed. L-bit is allowed with any app, including the flex-algo. thanks, Peter G/ -Original Message- From: Lsr On Behalf Of Peter Psenak Sent: Thursday, September 3,

Re: [Lsr] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-lsr-flex-algo

2020-09-03 Thread Peter Psenak
ssage- From: Lsr On Behalf Of Peter Psenak Sent: Thursday, September 3, 2020 9:55 AM To: Shraddha Hegde ; olivier.dug...@orange.com; tony...@tony.li; Robert Raszuk Cc: Christian Hopps ; draft-ietf-lsr-flex-algo@ietf.org; Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) ; lsr@ietf.org; lsr-...@ietf.org; Acee Li

Re: [Lsr] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-lsr-flex-algo

2020-09-03 Thread Peter Psenak
ation. thanks, Peter Rgds Shraddha Juniper Business Use Only -Original Message----- From: Peter Psenak Sent: Wednesday, September 2, 2020 2:43 PM To: Shraddha Hegde ; olivier.dug...@orange.com; tony...@tony.li; Robert Raszuk Cc: Christian Hopps ; draft-ietf-lsr-flex-al

Re: [Lsr] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-lsr-flex-algo

2020-09-02 Thread Peter Psenak
nks, Peter I want the history to be accurately recorded. This allows network operators to better understand the history and ensure interoperability across vendors before deploying. Rgds Shraddha Juniper Business Use Only -Original Message----- From: Peter Psenak Sent: Thursday, August

Re: [Lsr] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-lsr-flex-algo

2020-08-27 Thread Peter Psenak
for flex-algo based on this version of the document will not interoperate with versions that use legacy advertisements. " Rgds Shraddha Juniper Business Use Only *From:*olivier.dug...@orange.com *Sent:* Thursday, August 20, 2020 7:56 PM *To:* Peter Psenak ; tony...@tony.li;

Re: [Lsr] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-lsr-flex-algo

2020-08-20 Thread Peter Psenak
Olivier, On 20/08/2020 16:25, olivier.dug...@orange.com wrote: Peter, Le 20/08/2020 à 14:12, Peter Psenak a écrit : Hi Olivier, On 20/08/2020 13:58, olivier.dug...@orange.com wrote: Hi Peter, Thank for the new version. Le 19/08/2020 à 14:00, Peter Psenak a écrit : Olivier, [ ... ] So

Re: [Lsr] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-lsr-flex-algo

2020-08-20 Thread Peter Psenak
Hi Olivier, On 20/08/2020 13:58, olivier.dug...@orange.com wrote: Hi Peter, Thank for the new version. Le 19/08/2020 à 14:00, Peter Psenak a écrit : Olivier, [ ... ] So, to speed up the deployment, I would prefer a reference to a delay value that could be advertise by means of RFC7471

Re: [Lsr] Regarding OSPF Extended Prefix Range TLV usage for External/NSSA prefixes defined in RFC 8665

2020-08-19 Thread Peter Psenak
SRMS (redistribution across IGP protocols) , Range TLV is not applicable to use in that use case? no. At this point, Range TLV is defined only for SRMS mapping advertisement. thanks, Peter Thanks & Regards, Veerendranath -Original Message- From: Peter Psenak Sent: Wednesday, Au

Re: [Lsr] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-lsr-flex-algo

2020-08-19 Thread Peter Psenak
cations, but I think Peter has been very clear. Please explain how you managed to end up at code point 33??    Les *From:* Lsr mailto:lsr-boun...@ietf.org>> *On Behalf Of *tony...@tony.li <mailto:tony...@tony.li> *Sent:* Tuesday, August 18, 2020 7:44 AM

Re: [Lsr] Regarding OSPF Extended Prefix Range TLV usage for External/NSSA prefixes defined in RFC 8665

2020-08-19 Thread Peter Psenak
ards, Veerendranath -Original Message- From: Peter Psenak Sent: Wednesday, August 19, 2020 1:39 PM To: Veerendranatha Reddy V ; lsr@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Lsr] Regarding OSPF Extended Prefix Range TLV usage for External/NSSA prefixes defined in RFC 8665 Veerendranath, On 19/08/2020 1

Re: [Lsr] Regarding OSPF Extended Prefix Range TLV usage for External/NSSA prefixes defined in RFC 8665

2020-08-19 Thread Peter Psenak
nath -Original Message- From: Peter Psenak Sent: Wednesday, August 19, 2020 1:23 PM To: Veerendranatha Reddy V ; lsr@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Lsr] Regarding OSPF Extended Prefix Range TLV usage for External/NSSA prefixes defined in RFC 8665 Hi Veerendranatha, On 19/08/2020 06:23, Veerendran

Re: [Lsr] Regarding OSPF Extended Prefix Range TLV usage for External/NSSA prefixes defined in RFC 8665

2020-08-19 Thread Peter Psenak
. Thanks & Regards, Veerendranath -Original Message- From: Peter Psenak Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2020 11:06 PM To: Veerendranatha Reddy V ; lsr@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Lsr] Regarding OSPF Extended Prefix Range TLV usage for External/NSSA prefixes defined in RFC 8665 Veerendranath, On 1

Re: [Lsr] Regarding OSPF Extended Prefix Range TLV usage for External/NSSA prefixes defined in RFC 8665

2020-08-18 Thread Peter Psenak
Veerendranath, On 18/08/2020 16:40, Veerendranatha Reddy V wrote: Hi Authors, All, OSPF Extended Prefix Range TLV defined in RFC 8665 has IA flag to distinguish between Intra and Inter Area scope prefixes. Whether any restrictions to not to use Prefix Range TLV for external/NSSA prefixes ?

Re: [Lsr] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-lsr-flex-algo

2020-08-18 Thread Peter Psenak
ease explain how you managed to end up at code point 33?? __ __    Les __ __ __ __ __ __ *From:* Lsr mailto:lsr-boun...@ietf.org>> *On Behalf Of *tony...@tony.li <mailto:tony...@tony.li> *Sent:* Tuesday, August 18, 2020 7:44 AM *To:*

Re: [Lsr] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-lsr-flex-algo

2020-08-18 Thread Peter Psenak
Hi Tony, On 18/08/2020 16:44, tony...@tony.li wrote: Hi Peter, section 5.1 of the draft-ietf-lsr-flex-algo says: Min Unidirectional Link Delay as defined in [I-D.ietf-isis-te-app]. We explicitly say "Min Unidirectional Link Delay", so this cannot be mixed with other delay values (max,

Re: [Lsr] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-lsr-flex-algo

2020-08-18 Thread Peter Psenak
Hi Chris, I am not aware of any undisclosed IPR. thanks, Peter On 18/08/2020 01:30, Christian Hoppsprotocol= application/pgp-signature wrote: This begins a 2 week WG Last Call, ending after September 1st, 2020, for draft-ietf-lsr-flex-algo

Re: [Lsr] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-lsr-flex-algo

2020-08-18 Thread Peter Psenak
Hi Tony, section 5.1 of the draft-ietf-lsr-flex-algo says: Min Unidirectional Link Delay as defined in [I-D.ietf-isis-te-app]. We explicitly say "Min Unidirectional Link Delay", so this cannot be mixed with other delay values (max, average). section 7.3. of ietf-isis-te-app says: Type

Re: [Lsr] [draft-ietf-lsr-flex-algo-08] Clarification on ASLA usage for flex-algo

2020-08-12 Thread Peter Psenak
Hi Tony, Sarah, On 10/08/2020 18:00, tony...@tony.li wrote: Hi Peter, The flex-algo draft mentions "Min Unidirectional Link Delay as defined in [RFC7810 ]". When reading RFC7810, I found two Sub-TLVs: 4.1. Unidirectional Link Delay Sub-TLV 4.2. Min/Max

Re: [Lsr] [draft-ietf-lsr-flex-algo-08] Clarification on ASLA usage for flex-algo

2020-08-10 Thread Peter Psenak
Hi Tony, On 10/08/2020 16:21, tony...@tony.li wrote: Hi Peter, The flex-algo draft mentions "Min Unidirectional Link Delay as defined in [RFC7810 ]". When reading RFC7810, I found two Sub-TLVs: 4.1. Unidirectional Link Delay Sub-TLV 4.2. Min/Max

Re: [Lsr] [draft-ietf-lsr-flex-algo-08] Clarification on ASLA usage for flex-algo

2020-08-10 Thread Peter Psenak
Tony, ok, seems like Gunter and you share the same concerns. Will clarify the two points discussed. thanks, Peter On 07/08/2020 17:30, tony...@tony.li wrote: Peter, . The existing description in section 5.1 indicate that legacy encoding (RFC7810 and RFC5305) is used for link

Re: [Lsr] [draft-ietf-lsr-flex-algo-08] Clarification on ASLA usage for flex-algo

2020-08-10 Thread Peter Psenak
Hi Sarah, On 08/08/2020 01:33, Sarah Chen wrote: Hi, Peter, The flex-algo draft mentions "Min Unidirectional Link Delay as defined in [RFC7810 ]". When reading RFC7810, I found two Sub-TLVs: 4.1. Unidirectional Link Delay Sub-TLV 4.2. Min/Max

[Lsr] WG LC Request for draft-ietf-lsr-flex-algo

2020-08-07 Thread Peter Psenak
Hi Acee, Chris, as discussed during the WG meeting last week, on behalf of all authors of draft-ietf-lsr-flex-algo, I would like to ask for the WG LC. thanks, Peter ___ Lsr mailing list Lsr@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr

Re: [Lsr] [draft-ietf-lsr-flex-algo-08] Clarification on ASLA usage for flex-algo

2020-08-07 Thread Peter Psenak
/ From: Peter Psenak Sent: Thursday, August 6, 2020 6:37:42 PM To: Van De Velde, Gunter (Nokia - BE/Antwerp) ; draft-ietf-lsr-flex-a...@ietf.org Cc: lsr@ietf.org Subject: Re: [draft-ietf-lsr-flex-algo-08] Clarification on ASLA usage for flex-algo Hi Gunter, On 06/08

Re: [Lsr] [draft-ietf-lsr-flex-algo-08] Clarification on ASLA usage for flex-algo

2020-08-06 Thread Peter Psenak
Hi Gunter, On 06/08/2020 18:31, Van De Velde, Gunter (Nokia - BE/Antwerp) wrote: Hi Authors, All, My understanding is that for new LSR applications we should select either “ASLA encoding” or select “legacy encoding” for all Link attributes. Not a mixture of both. There is a clear long term

Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang-lsr-prefix-unreachable-annoucement-03.txt

2020-07-30 Thread Peter Psenak
or the route becoming reachable again? This is a slippery slope. I'm not suggesting the unreachable stuff to affect forwarding in any way. thanks, Peter Thanks, Acee On 7/30/20, 10:34 AM, "Lsr on behalf of Peter Psenak" wrote: On 30/07/2020 16:30, Robert Raszuk wrote: &

Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang-lsr-prefix-unreachable-annoucement-03.txt

2020-07-30 Thread Peter Psenak
. Peter Thx R. On Thu, Jul 30, 2020 at 4:21 PM Peter Psenak <mailto:ppse...@cisco.com>> wrote: On 30/07/2020 16:14, Robert Raszuk wrote: >      > 2:For bgp example,when the pe node down,the bgp peer must down >     within >      > 30 mintus,I

Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang-lsr-prefix-unreachable-annoucement-03.txt

2020-07-30 Thread Peter Psenak
On 30/07/2020 16:14, Robert Raszuk wrote: > 2:For bgp example,when the pe node down,the bgp peer must down within > 30 mintus,It will not get it up via cancle advertise pua. for the above it is sufficient to advertise the unreachability for few seconds from each ABR

Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang-lsr-prefix-unreachable-annoucement-03.txt

2020-07-30 Thread Peter Psenak
the unreachability for few seconds from each ABR independently. That would be a much more solid proposal. thanks, Peter ZHIBO -- 胡志波 Hu Zhibo Mobile: +86-18618192287 Email: huzh...@huawei.com <mailto:huzh...@huawei.com> *发件人:*Peter Psenak

Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang-lsr-prefix-unreachable-annoucement-03.txt

2020-07-30 Thread Peter Psenak
Huzhibo, On 30/07/2020 14:49, Huzhibo wrote: Hi peter: On 30/07/2020 14:28, Aijun Wang wrote: Hi, Peter: Aijun Wang China Telecom On Jul 30, 2020, at 20:00, Peter Psenak wrote: Hi Aijun, On 30/07/2020 13:44, Aijun Wang wrote: Hi, Peter: Currently, we have the following consideration

Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang-lsr-prefix-unreachable-annoucement-03.txt

2020-07-30 Thread Peter Psenak
Aijun, On 30/07/2020 14:28, Aijun Wang wrote: Hi, Peter: Aijun Wang China Telecom On Jul 30, 2020, at 20:00, Peter Psenak wrote: Hi Aijun, On 30/07/2020 13:44, Aijun Wang wrote: Hi, Peter: Currently, we have the following consideration: 1. If not all of the ABRs announce

Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang-lsr-prefix-unreachable-annoucement-03.txt

2020-07-30 Thread Peter Psenak
. And guessing based on the timer is not going to make it much better I'm afraid. thanks, Peter How about the above consideration and Do you have other thoughts ? Aijun Wang China Telecom On Jul 30, 2020, at 17:21, Peter Psenak wrote: Hi Ajun, one additional problem on top of others

Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang-lsr-prefix-unreachable-annoucement-03.txt

2020-07-30 Thread Peter Psenak
Hi Ajun, one additional problem on top of others that have been mentioned is how are you going to get rid of "old" un-reachability announcements/ Let's imagine you have the following prefixes in your area 1: - 10.10.0.1/32 - 10.0.0.255/32 - used for loopback adresses - 10.10.1.0/30 -

Re: [Lsr] [IANA #1173602] Re: IANA early allocation request for draft-ietf-lsr-ospf-bfd-strict-mode

2020-07-08 Thread Peter Psenak
0x0010 for draft-ietf-lsr-ospf-bfd-strict-mode and 0x0020 for draft-ietf- lsr- dynamic-flooding? Thanks, Ketan -Original Message- From: Amanda Baber via RT Sent: 04 July 2020 07:53 To: Acee Lindem (acee) Cc: Peter Psenak (ppsenak) ; mraj...@juniper.net; lsr@ietf.org; Ketan Talaulik

Re: [Lsr] [IANA #1173602] Re: IANA early allocation request for draft-ietf-lsr-ospf-bfd-strict-mode

2020-07-03 Thread Peter Psenak
t; mailto:ket...@cisco.com>> wrote: +1 -Original Message- From: Peter Psenak mailto:ppse...@cisco.com>> Sent: 02 July 2020 13:11 To: Acee Lindem (acee) mailto:a...@cisco.com>>; iana-prot-pa...@iana.org <mailto:iana-prot-pa...@iana.org> Cc: lsr@ietf.org <mailto:

Re: [Lsr] [IANA #1173602] Re: IANA early allocation request for draft-ietf-lsr-ospf-bfd-strict-mode

2020-07-02 Thread Peter Psenak
uot; <mailto:ket...@cisco.com>> wrote: +1 -Original Message- From: Peter Psenak mailto:ppse...@cisco.com>> Sent: 02 July 2020 13:11 To: Acee Lindem (acee) mailto:a...@cisco.com>>; iana-prot-pa...@iana.org <mailto:iana-prot-pa...@iana.org> Cc: lsr@ietf.org <

Re: [Lsr] [IANA #1173602] Re: IANA early allocation request for draft-ietf-lsr-ospf-bfd-strict-mode

2020-07-02 Thread Peter Psenak
3 > IETF Review > LLS Type 1 Extended Options and Flags RFC 5613 > Expert Review (Expert: Gunter Van De Velde, Peter Psenak) > > For the flag, the designated experts are Gunter and Peter (copied). > > Please init

Re: [Lsr] draft-ietf-lsr-flex-algo

2020-07-01 Thread Peter Psenak
Hi Bruno, please see inline: On 30/06/2020 18:39, bruno.decra...@orange.com wrote: Hi Peter, From: Peter Psenak [mailto:ppse...@cisco.com] Hi Bruno, On 30/06/2020 18:08, bruno.decra...@orange.com wrote: Hi Peter, Thanks for your reply. From: Peter Psenak [mailto:ppse...@cisco.com] Hi

Re: [Lsr] draft-ietf-lsr-flex-algo

2020-06-30 Thread Peter Psenak
Hi Bruno, On 30/06/2020 18:08, bruno.decra...@orange.com wrote: Hi Peter, Thanks for your reply. From: Peter Psenak [mailto:ppse...@cisco.com] Hi Bruno, please see inline: On 30/06/2020 16:53, bruno.decra...@orange.com wrote: Hi all, I can live with the current text, but I'm just

Re: [Lsr] draft-ietf-lsr-flex-algo

2020-06-30 Thread Peter Psenak
Hi Bruno, please see inline: On 30/06/2020 16:53, bruno.decra...@orange.com wrote: Hi all, I can live with the current text, but I'm just raising the point for discussion (better safe than sorry). "16.1.1. IGP Algorithm Types Registry This document makes the following registrations in

Re: [Lsr] Robert Wilton's No Objection on draft-ietf-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse-15: (with COMMENT)

2020-06-23 Thread Peter Psenak
Hi Rob, On 23/06/2020 12:42, Robert Wilton via Datatracker wrote: Robert Wilton has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse-15: No Objection When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC

Re: [Lsr] Regarding SRv6 SID Structure Sub-Sub-TLV in draft-ietf-lsr-isis-srv6-extensions

2020-06-22 Thread Peter Psenak
Cheng, On 22/06/2020 13:50, Chengli (Cheng Li) wrote: Hi authors, When I read the document, I noticed that the format of the SRv6 SID Structure Sub-Sub-TLV has no reserved bits, which may bring troubles for future extensions. what bits do you need? What if new architecture of SID is

Re: [Lsr] Opsdir telechat review of draft-ietf-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse-14

2020-06-15 Thread Peter Psenak
Hi Scott. there is a following text in the OSPF draft: "On top of advertising the link attributes for standardized applications, link attributes can be advertised for the purpose of applications that are not standardized. We call such an application a "User Defined Application" or

Re: [Lsr] Robert Wilton's Discuss on draft-ietf-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse-14: (with DISCUSS)

2020-06-12 Thread Peter Psenak
Hi Rob, On 12/06/2020 11:21, Rob Wilton (rwilton) wrote: Hi Peter, Cutting the response to just the text in question. -Original Message- From: Peter Psenak Sent: 12 June 2020 09:25 To: Rob Wilton (rwilton) ; Alvaro Retana Cc: Acee Lindem (acee) ; draft-ietf-ospf-te-link-attr- re

Re: [Lsr] Robert Wilton's Discuss on draft-ietf-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse-14: (with DISCUSS)

2020-06-12 Thread Peter Psenak
Hi Rob, On 11/06/2020 15:39, Rob Wilton (rwilton) wrote: Hi Peter, Please see inline ... I think that there is probably just one point of confusion/ambiguity that needs to be resolved. yes, agree, please see inline (##PP): -Original Message- From: Peter Psenak Sent: 11 June

Re: [Lsr] Deborah Brungard's Discuss on draft-ietf-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse-14: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

2020-06-11 Thread Peter Psenak
Deborah, please see inline (##PP) On 11/06/2020 14:00, BRUNGARD, DEBORAH A wrote: Hi Peter, Thanks - in-line- Deborah -Original Message- From: Peter Psenak Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2020 7:00 AM To: BRUNGARD, DEBORAH A ; The IESG Cc: draft-ietf-ospf-te-link-attr-re...@ietf.org; lsr

Re: [Lsr] Deborah Brungard's Discuss on draft-ietf-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse-14: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

2020-06-11 Thread Peter Psenak
Hi Deborah, thanks for your comments, please see inline (##P): On 10/06/2020 23:57, Deborah Brungard via Datatracker wrote: Deborah Brungard has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse-14: Discuss When responding, please keep the subject line intact and

Re: [Lsr] Roman Danyliw's No Objection on draft-ietf-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse-14: (with COMMENT)

2020-06-11 Thread Peter Psenak
Hi Roman, thanks for your comments, please see inline (##PP): On 10/06/2020 23:58, Roman Danyliw via Datatracker wrote: Roman Danyliw has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse-14: No Objection When responding, please keep the subject line intact and

Re: [Lsr] Robert Wilton's Discuss on draft-ietf-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse-14: (with DISCUSS)

2020-06-11 Thread Peter Psenak
Hi Rob, thanks for your comments, please see inline (##PP) On 10/06/2020 19:18, Rob Wilton (rwilton) wrote: Hi Alvaro, -Original Message- From: Alvaro Retana Sent: 10 June 2020 16:49 To: Rob Wilton (rwilton) Cc: Acee Lindem (acee) ; draft-ietf-ospf-te-link-attr- re...@ietf.org;

Re: [Lsr] Murray Kucherawy's No Objection on draft-ietf-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse-14: (with COMMENT)

2020-06-11 Thread Peter Psenak
Thanks Acee, I fixed them all. Peter On 09/06/2020 16:59, Acee Lindem (acee) wrote: Hi Peter, Murray, On 6/9/20, 6:53 AM, "Peter Psenak" wrote: Hi Murray, thanks for your comments, please see inline: On 08/06/2020 08:00, Murray Kucherawy via Datatracker wrote:

Re: [Lsr] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse-12

2020-06-10 Thread Peter Psenak
-TE head-end router tries to setup an RSVP-TE path via that link it will result in the path setup failure. thanks, Peter Linda Dunbar -Original Message- From: Peter Psenak Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 10:18 AM To: Linda Dunbar ; Acee Lindem (acee) ; gen-...@ietf.org Cc: last-c

Re: [Lsr] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse-12

2020-06-09 Thread Peter Psenak
information? please see above. thanks, Peter Thank you. Linda -Original Message- From: Acee Lindem (acee) Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 6:25 AM To: Peter Psenak (ppsenak) ; Linda Dunbar ; gen-...@ietf.org Cc: last-c...@ietf.org; lsr@ietf.org; draft-ietf-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse

Re: [Lsr] Murray Kucherawy's No Objection on draft-ietf-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse-14: (with COMMENT)

2020-06-09 Thread Peter Psenak
Hi Murray, thanks for your comments, please see inline: On 08/06/2020 08:00, Murray Kucherawy via Datatracker wrote: Murray Kucherawy has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse-14: No Objection When responding, please keep the subject line intact and

Re: [Lsr] Martin Duke's No Objection on draft-ietf-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse-14: (with COMMENT)

2020-06-09 Thread Peter Psenak
Hi Martin, On 09/06/2020 08:54, Martin Duke via Datatracker wrote: Martin Duke has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse-14: No Objection When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC

Re: [Lsr] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse-12

2020-06-09 Thread Peter Psenak
by RSVP-TE. thanks, Peter Linda Dunbar -Original Message- From: Peter Psenak Sent: Monday, June 1, 2020 11:01 AM To: Linda Dunbar ; gen-...@ietf.org Cc: last-c...@ietf.org; lsr@ietf.org; draft-ietf-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse@ietf.org Subject: Re: Genart last call review of draft-ietf

Re: [Lsr] Éric Vyncke's No Objection on draft-ietf-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse-13: (with COMMENT)

2020-06-07 Thread Peter Psenak
Hi Eric, On 07/06/2020 17:21, Éric Vyncke via Datatracker wrote: Éric Vyncke has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse-13: No Objection When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines.

Re: [Lsr] I-D Action: draft-ietf-ospf-mpls-elc-15.txt

2020-06-05 Thread Peter Psenak
Yali, On 05/06/2020 06:25, wangyali wrote: Hi Peter, Thanks. Please see inline . -Original Message- From: Peter Psenak [mailto:ppse...@cisco.com] Sent: Thursday, June 4, 2020 4:53 PM To: wangyali ; lsr@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Lsr] I-D Action: draft-ietf-ospf-mpls-elc-15.txt Yali

Re: [Lsr] I-D Action: draft-ietf-ospf-mpls-elc-15.txt

2020-06-04 Thread Peter Psenak
Yali, please see inline: On 04/06/2020 05:09, wangyali wrote: Hi Peter, Please see inline . Thanks. -Original Message- From: Peter Psenak [mailto:ppse...@cisco.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 3, 2020 11:04 PM To: wangyali ; lsr@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Lsr] I-D Action: draft-ietf-ospf-mpls

Re: [Lsr] I-D Action: draft-ietf-ospf-mpls-elc-15.txt

2020-06-03 Thread Peter Psenak
Yali, On 03/06/2020 15:51, wangyali wrote: Hi Peter, Thanks for your reply. please see inline . -Original Message- From: Peter Psenak [mailto:ppse...@cisco.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 3, 2020 7:44 PM To: wangyali ; lsr@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Lsr] I-D Action: draft-ietf-ospf-mpls-elc-15

Re: [Lsr] A question about draft-ietf-lsr-flex-algo

2020-06-03 Thread Peter Psenak
8:19 PM *To:* Huzhibo ; Peter Psenak (ppsenak) *Cc:* lsr@ietf.org; draft-ietf-lsr-flex-a...@ietf.org *Subject:* RE: A question about draft-ietf-lsr-flex-algo Hi Zhibo Hu, Welcome to the club - I have already asked the same question and got a response from Peter. You can find the relevant

Re: [Lsr] A question about draft-ietf-lsr-flex-algo

2020-06-03 Thread Peter Psenak
Hi Zhibo, this has been explained in the WG alias already. Can you please go over archives. thanks, Peter On 03/06/2020 14:06, Huzhibo wrote: Hi Peter: I noticed that draft-ietf-lsr-flex-algo-07 adds exclude SRLG TLV. SRLG defines a group of risk-sharing link groups. It is generally used

Re: [Lsr] I-D Action: draft-ietf-ospf-mpls-elc-15.txt

2020-06-03 Thread Peter Psenak
: Xiaohu Xu Sriganesh Kini Peter Psenak Clarence Filsfils Stephane Litkowski Matthew Bocci Filename: draft-ietf-ospf-mpls-elc-15.txt Pages

Re: [Lsr] I-D Action: draft-ietf-ospf-mpls-elc-15.txt

2020-06-02 Thread Peter Psenak
Tianran, On 02/06/2020 10:25, Tianran Zhou wrote: Peter, -Original Message- From: Peter Psenak [mailto:ppse...@cisco.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 2, 2020 4:10 PM To: Tianran Zhou ; lsr@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Lsr] I-D Action: draft-ietf-ospf-mpls-elc-15.txt Tianran, On 02/06/2020 08:14

Re: [Lsr] I-D Action: draft-ietf-ospf-mpls-elc-15.txt

2020-06-02 Thread Peter Psenak
ea is single IGP with multiple areas. Mutli domain is multiple IGPs. thanks, Peter Tianran -Original Message- From: Peter Psenak [mailto:ppse...@cisco.com] Sent: Monday, June 1, 2020 6:56 PM To: Tianran Zhou ; lsr@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Lsr] I-D Action: draft-ietf-ospf-mpls-elc-15.txt Tian

Re: [Lsr] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse-12

2020-06-01 Thread Peter Psenak
head-end router tries to setup an RSVP-TE path via link where RSVP-TE is not enabled it will result in the path setup failure." Hope it makes it clear and addresses your question. thanks, Peter Linda Dunbar -Original Message----- From: Peter Psenak Sent: Friday, May 29, 202

Re: [Lsr] [Last-Call] Opsdir last call review of draft-ietf-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse-12

2020-06-01 Thread Peter Psenak
Scott, please see inline (##PP3) On 01/06/2020 12:46, Scott O. Bradner wrote: inline On Jun 1, 2020, at 5:54 AM, Peter Psenak wrote: ##PP2 It's the ambiguity that causes the problem. Here's a real life example which triggered some of this work: A network has RSVP-TE enabled on one

Re: [Lsr] I-D Action: draft-ietf-ospf-mpls-elc-15.txt

2020-06-01 Thread Peter Psenak
pability and Entropy Readable Label Depth Using OSPF Authors : Xiaohu Xu Sriganesh Kini Peter Psenak Clarence Filsfils Stephane Litkowski Matthew Bo

Re: [Lsr] Rtgdir last call review of draft-ietf-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse-12

2020-06-01 Thread Peter Psenak
Hi Daniele, please see inline (##PP) On 29/05/2020 18:18, Daniele Ceccarelli via Datatracker wrote: Reviewer: Daniele Ceccarelli Review result: Has Nits Hello, I have been selected as the Routing Directorate reviewer for this draft. The Routing Directorate seeks to review all routing or

Re: [Lsr] [Last-Call] Opsdir last call review of draft-ietf-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse-12

2020-06-01 Thread Peter Psenak
Scott, please see inline (##PP2) On 30/05/2020 20:38, Scott O. Bradner wrote: thanks for the reply - see in line On May 28, 2020, at 10:09 AM, Peter Psenak wrote: Hi Scott, please see inline (##PP): On 27/05/2020 17:17, Scott Bradner via Datatracker wrote: Reviewer: Scott Bradner

Re: [Lsr] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse-12

2020-05-29 Thread Peter Psenak
are to be added, then why need a new ASLA sub-TLV? to be able to use the existing attributes for new apps, other than RSVP-TE. thanks, Peter Linda -Original Message- From: Peter Psenak Sent: Friday, May 29, 2020 5:51 AM To: Linda Dunbar ; gen-...@ietf.org Cc: last-c...@ietf.org; lsr

Re: [Lsr] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse-12

2020-05-29 Thread Peter Psenak
Hi Linda, On 28/05/2020 19:02, Linda Dunbar via Datatracker wrote: Reviewer: Linda Dunbar Review result: Not Ready I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed by the IESG for the IETF Chair. Please treat

Re: [Lsr] Opsdir last call review of draft-ietf-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse-12

2020-05-28 Thread Peter Psenak
Hi Scott, please see inline (##PP): On 27/05/2020 17:17, Scott Bradner via Datatracker wrote: Reviewer: Scott Bradner Review result: Not Ready This is an OPS-DIR review of OSPF Link Traffic Engineering Attribute Reuse (draft-ietf-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse) This ID describes

Re: [Lsr] Benjamin Kaduk's Discuss on draft-ietf-isis-mpls-elc-12: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

2020-05-26 Thread Peter Psenak
Hi Acee, updated the text based on your comments. thanks, Peter On 26/05/2020 16:07, Acee Lindem (acee) wrote: Hi Peter, This is in response to the previous Email on your suggested text. On 5/26/20, 4:26 AM, "Peter Psenak" wrote: Hi Alvaro, please see inline (##PP)

Re: [Lsr] Benjamin Kaduk's Discuss on draft-ietf-isis-mpls-elc-12: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

2020-05-26 Thread Peter Psenak
Hi Acee, have you looked at the texts that I suggested in my response to Alvaro earlier today? Please see inline: On 26/05/2020 13:49, Acee Lindem (acee) wrote: Hi Alvaro, See inline. On 5/22/20, 10:59 AM, "Alvaro Retana" wrote: On May 21, 2020 at 3:39:03 PM, Benjamin Kaduk wrote:

Re: [Lsr] Benjamin Kaduk's Discuss on draft-ietf-isis-mpls-elc-12: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

2020-05-26 Thread Peter Psenak
Hi Ben, please see inline (##PP2) On 21/05/2020 21:38, Benjamin Kaduk wrote: Hi Peter, On Thu, May 21, 2020 at 12:05:39PM +0200, Peter Psenak wrote: Benjamin, thanks for review, please see inline (##PP): On 20/05/2020 00:44, Benjamin Kaduk via Datatracker wrote: Benjamin Kaduk has entered

Re: [Lsr] Benjamin Kaduk's Discuss on draft-ietf-isis-mpls-elc-12: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

2020-05-26 Thread Peter Psenak
Hi Alvaro, please see inline (##PP) On 22/05/2020 16:59, Alvaro Retana wrote: On May 21, 2020 at 3:39:03 PM, Benjamin Kaduk wrote: Peter: Hi! With respect to Alvaro's clarification, your answer for (1) makes sense; thanks! I think Alvaro has offered to help work out what (if any)

Re: [Lsr] Alissa Cooper's No Objection on draft-ietf-ospf-mpls-elc-13: (with COMMENT)ret, .

2020-05-21 Thread Peter Psenak
unchanged. This is not anything new. This ambiguity is common for any new protocol extension that signals a boolean type of information. thanks, Peter On 21/05/2020 15:09, Alissa Cooper wrote: Thanks! Alissa On May 21, 2020, at 3:51 AM, Peter Psenak <mailto:ppse...@cisco.com>> wrote:

Re: [Lsr] Benjamin Kaduk's Discuss on draft-ietf-isis-mpls-elc-12: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

2020-05-21 Thread Peter Psenak
Hi Alvaro, On 21/05/2020 13:44, Alvaro Retana wrote: On May 21, 2020 at 6:05:41 AM, Peter Psenak wrote: Peter: Hi! -- DISCUSS: -- As for other reviewers

Re: [Lsr] Benjamin Kaduk's Discuss on draft-ietf-ospf-mpls-elc-13: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

2020-05-21 Thread Peter Psenak
Hi Benjamin, thanks for review. Please see inline (##PP) two responses to OSPF specific comments. On 20/05/2020 00:43, Benjamin Kaduk via Datatracker wrote: Benjamin Kaduk has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-ospf-mpls-elc-13: Discuss When responding, please keep the

Re: [Lsr] Benjamin Kaduk's Discuss on draft-ietf-isis-mpls-elc-12: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

2020-05-21 Thread Peter Psenak
Benjamin, thanks for review, please see inline (##PP): On 20/05/2020 00:44, Benjamin Kaduk via Datatracker wrote: Benjamin Kaduk has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-isis-mpls-elc-12: Discuss When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email

Re: [Lsr] Alissa Cooper's No Objection on draft-ietf-ospf-mpls-elc-13: (with COMMENT)

2020-05-21 Thread Peter Psenak
Hi Alissa, On 20/05/2020 21:57, Alissa Cooper via Datatracker wrote: Alissa Cooper has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-ospf-mpls-elc-13: No Objection When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines.

Re: [Lsr] Roman Danyliw's No Objection on draft-ietf-isis-mpls-elc-12: (with COMMENT)

2020-05-20 Thread Peter Psenak
On 20/05/2020 12:32, Alvaro Retana wrote: On May 20, 2020 at 4:38:54 AM, Peter Psenak (ppse...@cisco.com <mailto:ppse...@cisco.com>) wrote: > Two editorial nits: > ** Section 3. Editorial. s/ When a router propagates a prefix between ISIS > levels ([RFC5302],/When a ro

Re: [Lsr] Roman Danyliw's No Objection on draft-ietf-isis-mpls-elc-12: (with COMMENT)

2020-05-20 Thread Peter Psenak
Hi Roman, On 20/05/2020 00:01, Roman Danyliw via Datatracker wrote: Roman Danyliw has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-isis-mpls-elc-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

Re: [Lsr] draft-ietf-lsr-flex-algo

2020-05-20 Thread Peter Psenak
On 20/05/2020 00:37, Gyan Mishra wrote: On Tue, May 19, 2020 at 3:38 AM Peter Psenak <mailto:ppse...@cisco.com>> wrote: Gyan, On 19/05/2020 03:52, Gyan Mishra wrote: > > Flex algo is usually mentioned in the context of SR-TE to help reduced

Re: [Lsr] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-ospf-mpls-elc-13

2020-05-19 Thread Peter Psenak
scope of this draft and if anything needs to be added in that regard it should be done by updating the RFC8662. regards, Peter Regards, Elwyn Sent from Samsung tablet. Original message From: "Acee Lindem (acee)" Date: 14/05/2020 21:43 (GMT+00:00) To: Alvaro Retana , &qu

Re: [Lsr] draft-ietf-lsr-flex-algo

2020-05-19 Thread Peter Psenak
Gyan, On 19/05/2020 03:52, Gyan Mishra wrote: Flex algo is usually mentioned in the context of SR-TE to help reduced SRH size to circumvent MSD issues for both SRV6 and SR-MPLS, though segment list reduction may be seen as one of the benefits of the flex-algo, it is certainly not the

Re: [Lsr] Erik Kline's No Objection on draft-ietf-ospf-mpls-elc-13: (with COMMENT)

2020-05-18 Thread Peter Psenak
Hi Erik, please see inline: On 17/05/2020 06:36, Erik Kline via Datatracker wrote: Erik Kline has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-ospf-mpls-elc-13: No Objection When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and

Re: [Lsr] Warren Kumari's No Objection on draft-ietf-ospf-mpls-elc-13: (with COMMENT)

2020-05-15 Thread Peter Psenak
Hi Warren, On 15/05/2020 03:25, Warren Kumari via Datatracker wrote: Warren Kumari has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-ospf-mpls-elc-13: No Objection When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines.

Re: [Lsr] OSPFv3 Implementations of draft-ietf-ospf-mpls-elc

2020-05-15 Thread Peter Psenak
Hi, I'm going to update the draft to use bit 0x40 in "OSPFv3 Prefix Options (8 bits) registry" for E-Flag (ELC Flag). thanks, Peter On 07/05/2020 15:10, Alvaro Retana wrote: Dear lsr WG: If you’ve been following the progress of this document, you will have noticed that it is already in

Re: [Lsr] AD Review of draft-ietf-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse-10

2020-05-15 Thread Peter Psenak
Hi Alvaro, please see inline (##PP) On 14/05/2020 19:26, Alvaro Retana wrote: On May 5, 2020 at 6:08:27 AM, Peter Psenak wrote: Peter: Hi! ... I tried to address all of them, some have been resolved during ISIS draft review, in which case I took the same resolution for this draf. Please

Re: [Lsr] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-ospf-mpls-elc-13

2020-05-11 Thread Peter Psenak
of ERLD-MSD advertisements appears on reflection to be a more serious issue than just an editorial nit. Regards, Elwyn On 07/05/2020 08:53, Peter Psenak wrote: Hi Elwyn, please see inline: On 06/05/2020 16:25, Elwyn Davies via Datatracker wrote: Reviewer: Elwyn Davies Review result: Ready

Re: [Lsr] Éric Vyncke's No Objection on draft-ietf-ospf-mpls-elc-13: (with COMMENT)

2020-05-11 Thread Peter Psenak
Hi Eric, please see inline: On 11/05/2020 17:55, Éric Vyncke via Datatracker wrote: Éric Vyncke has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-ospf-mpls-elc-13: No Objection When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and

Re: [Lsr] Éric Vyncke's No Objection on draft-ietf-isis-mpls-elc-12: (with COMMENT)

2020-05-11 Thread Peter Psenak
Hi Eric, please see inline: On 11/05/2020 18:02, Éric Vyncke via Datatracker wrote: Éric Vyncke has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-isis-mpls-elc-12: No Objection When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and

  1   2   3   >