Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call for "ISIS Extensions in Support of Inter-AS MPLS and GMPLS TE" - draft-chen-lsr-isis-rfc5316bis-02

2020-10-24 Thread stefano previdi
Hi, as co-author, I support the adoption of draft-chen-lsr-isis-rfc5316bis-02. Thanks. s. > On Oct 23, 2020, at 4:42 PM, Acee Lindem (acee) > wrote: > > This is simple BIS update to RFC 5316 is required to support IS-IS Inter-AS > TE in IPv6 only networks. The authors have asked for WG

Re: [Lsr] IPR Call for "ISIS Extensions in Support of Inter-AS MPLS and GMPLS TE" - draft-chen-lsr-isis-rfc5316bis-02

2020-10-23 Thread stefano previdi
Hi, I’m not aware of any undisclosed IPR related to this draft. thanks. s. > On Oct 23, 2020, at 4:50 PM, Acee Lindem (acee) wrote: > > Hi Mach, Les, Stefano, Xiaodong, > > Are you aware of any IPR associated with the subject draft. > > If so, has this IPR been disclosed in compliance

Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call for draft-li-lsr-ospfv3-srv6-extensions

2020-02-12 Thread stefano previdi
support. s. > On Jan 23, 2020, at 9:24 PM, Christian Hopps wrote: > > Hi LSR WG and Draft Authors, > > The authors originally requested adoption back @ 105; however, some comments > were received and new version was produced. Moving forward... > > This begins a 2 week WG adoption poll for

Re: [Lsr] WG Last Call draft-ietf-lsr-isis-srv6-extensions

2020-01-24 Thread stefano previdi
As contributor, I do support the draft and I’m not aware of any undisclosed IPR. Thanks. s. > On Jan 22, 2020, at 1:14 AM, Christian Hopps wrote: > > This begins a 2 week WG Last Call, ending after Feb 4, 2020, for > draft-ietf-lsr-isis-srv6-extensions > >

Re: [Lsr] Working Group Adoption Call for "IS-IS Extensions to Support Routing over IPv6 Dataplane" - draft-bashandy-isis-srv6-extensions-05.txt

2019-05-09 Thread stefano previdi
I support the adoption of draft-bashandy-isis-srv6-extensions as WG item. Thanks. s. > On May 9, 2019, at 3:49 PM, Acee Lindem (acee) wrote: > > We been holding off WG adoption until the base SRv6 draft was adopted in > SPRING. Now >

Re: [Lsr] IPR Poll for "IS-IS Extensions to Support Routing over IPv6 Dataplane" - draft-bashandy-isis-srv6-extensions-05.txt

2019-05-09 Thread stefano previdi
Hi, as contributor to draft-bashandy-isis-srv6-extensions I’m not aware of any IPR related to the draft. Thanks. s. > On May 9, 2019, at 4:23 PM, Acee Lindem (acee) wrote: > > Authors, > > Are you aware of any IPR that applies to > draft-bashandy-isis-srv6-extensions-05.txt? > > If

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

2019-04-11 Thread stefano previdi
I’m not aware of any IPR related to this document. Thanks. s. > On Apr 10, 2019, at 11:35 PM, Acee Lindem (acee) wrote: > > Authors, Contributors, > > Are you aware of any IPR that applies to draft-ietf-isis-te-app-06.txt? > > If so, has this IPR been disclosed in compliance with IETF IPR

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

2018-12-07 Thread stefano previdi
Hi All, > On Dec 7, 2018, at 11:01 AM, Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) > wrote: > > Alvaro – > > I am not in agreement with your POV. > > The work undertaken for this revision was very specifically to address Errata > ID: 5293 (https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=7810) . This was >

Re: [Lsr] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC7810 (5486)

2018-09-03 Thread stefano previdi
Les, Acee, Alvaro, diffs looks ok to me. s. > On Aug 31, 2018, at 7:56 AM, RFC Errata System > wrote: > > The following errata report has been submitted for RFC7810, > "IS-IS Traffic Engineering (TE) Metric Extensions". > > -- > You may review the

Re: [Lsr] IPR Poll on draft-ietf-isis-segment-routing-extensions-16 (Shepherd write-up)

2018-06-12 Thread Stefano Previdi (IETF)
I'm not aware of any undisclosed IPR. s. On Mon, Jun 11, 2018, 9:18 PM Uma Chunduri wrote: > Dear All, > > Are you aware of any IPR that applies to > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-isis-segment-routing-extensions-16 > ? > > Sending this email as suggested by LSR chairs - as this was

Re: [Lsr] IGP TE Metric Extensions

2018-06-05 Thread stefano previdi
> > From: Muthu Arul Mozhi Perumal > Sent: 05 June 2018 17:19 > To: Ketan Talaulikar (ketant) > Cc: Stefano Previdi (IETF) ; lsr@ietf.org; Jeff Tantsura > > > > Subject: Re: [Lsr] IGP TE Metric Extensions > > > > Sounds reasonable to me.. > &

Re: [Lsr] IGP TE Metric Extensions

2018-05-31 Thread Stefano Previdi (IETF)
On Thu, May 31, 2018, 6:15 PM Muthu Arul Mozhi Perumal wrote: > Thanks, Jeff. Would be good to have this clarified > in draft-ginsberg-isis-rfc7810bis. My original message seems to have been > stripped off, so including it again for the lsr list.. > > ​Both RFC 7810 and RFC 7471 say that: > >

Re: [Lsr] LSR Working Group Last Call for "OSPFv3 Extensions for Segment Routing" - draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment-routing-extensions-13

2018-05-24 Thread stefano previdi
I support the publication of this draft. Thanks. s. > On May 23, 2018, at 5:03 PM, Acee Lindem (acee) wrote: > > This begins an LSR WG last call for the subject draft. Please send your > comments to this list prior to 12:00 AM GMT, June 7th, 2018. > Thanks, > Acee and Chris >

Re: [Lsr] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-isis-segment-routing-extensions-16

2018-04-28 Thread stefano previdi
support. s. > On Apr 23, 2018, at 4:02 PM, Christian Hopps wrote: > > Hi Folks, > > We are starting a new 2 week WG last call on > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-isis-segment-routing-extensions/ > > as there have (*) been some changes to the document since

Re: [Lsr] LSR Working Group Adoption Poll for Flex Algorithm Drafts

2018-04-17 Thread Stefano Previdi (IETF)
I support both drafts. Thanks. s. On Tue, Apr 17, 2018, 4:44 PM Acee Lindem (acee) wrote: > This begins a two-week adoption poll for the following Flex Algorithm > drafts: > > > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-hegdeppsenak-isis-sr-flex-algo/ > >

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

2018-04-09 Thread Stefano Previdi
Hi Acee, all, I'm not aware of any undisclosed IPR related to this draft. Thanks. s. On Mon, Apr 9, 2018, 9:39 PM Acee Lindem (acee) wrote: > Authors, > > > > Are you aware of any IPR that applies to > draft-ginsberg-lsr-isis-rfc7810bis-00 in addition to the IPR declared on >

Re: [Lsr] FW: New Version Notification for draft-ginsberg-isis-rfc7810bis-00.txt

2018-04-04 Thread Stefano Previdi
have interpreted the >> > ambiguous encoding of some sub-TLVs in different/non-interoperable ways >> > it was felt that a bis version of the RFC was justified. >> > Please see the Appendix of the draft for a discussion of the >> changes from >> > RFC 7810

Re: [Lsr] Inconsistence regarding the definition of "Adj-SID Sub-TLV" between OSPF and ISIS extension for Segment Routing

2018-04-03 Thread stefano previdi
me too. If we want to align the encoding, we should probably better align the protocol name directly... s. > On Apr 3, 2018, at 9:34 AM, Peter Psenak wrote: > > On 02/04/18 14:19 , Acee Lindem (acee) wrote: >> Speaking as WG member: >> >> I couldn’t agree more with