Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call - draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv (11/17/2023 - 12/09/2023)

] WG Adoption Call - draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv (11/17/2023 - 12/09/2023) [External Email. Be cautious of content] Hi Les and Parag, The following are two definitions from you. You said they are the same in meaning. That is your opinions. But I think they are different. If they are the same

Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call - draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv (11/17/2023 - 12/09/2023)

The adoption call for has ended. The document is adopted, and with a strong consensus. Authors please resubmit as draft-ietf-lsr-multi-tlv-00. There have been other solutions presented during the adoption call as well as previously, but as is clear from this adoption call the other solutions

Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call - draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv (11/17/2023 - 12/09/2023)

-lsr-multi-...@ietf.org; lsr Subject: RE: Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call - draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv (11/17/2023 - 12/09/2023) Huaimo - We are not making progress here - and I doubt that any additional posts from me will help - so I am not going to respond further. I only want to point out

Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call - draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv (11/17/2023 - 12/09/2023)

; 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

Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call - draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv (11/17/2023 - 12/09/2023)

otmail.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) >Legacy node gets half information result in the inconsistent view of network >(for examp

Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call - draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv (11/17/2023 - 12/09/2023)

...@tony.li>>; Linda Dunbar mailto:linda.dun...@futurewei.com>>; Yingzhen Qu mailto:yingzhen.i...@gmail.com>>; draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-...@ietf.org<mailto:draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-...@ietf.org>; lsr mailto:lsr@ietf.org>> Subject: RE: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call - draft-pkaneria-lsr-m

Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call - draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv (11/17/2023 - 12/09/2023)

a-lsr-multi-...@ietf.org; lsr Subject: RE: Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call - draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv (11/17/2023 - 12/09/2023) Legacy node gets half information result in the inconsistent view of network (for example TED [traffic engineering database] inconsistency lead to many network related is

Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call - draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv (11/17/2023 - 12/09/2023)

: Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call - draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv (11/17/2023 - 12/09/2023)   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

Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call - draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv (11/17/2023 - 12/09/2023)

..@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) Legacy node gets half information result in the inconsistent view of network (for example TED

Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call - draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv (11/17/2023 - 12/09/2023)

(ginsberg)<mailto:ginsberg=40cisco@dmarc.ietf.org>; Tony Li<mailto:tony...@tony.li>; Linda Dunbar<mailto:linda.dun...@futurewei.com> CC: Yingzhen Qu<mailto:yingzhen.i...@gmail.com>; draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-...@ietf.org<mailto:draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-...@ietf.org>; lsr<m

Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call - draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv (11/17/2023 - 12/09/2023)

Sent: Friday, December 8, 2023 7:23 PM To: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) ; 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

Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call - draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv (11/17/2023 - 12/09/2023)

es Ginsberg (ginsberg) Sent: Thursday, December 7, 2023 1:07 PM To: Huaimo Chen ; 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) Hua

Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call - draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv (11/17/2023 - 12/09/2023)

o:ginsb...@cisco.com>>; Tony Li mailto:tony...@tony.li>>; Linda Dunbar mailto:linda.dun...@futurewei.com>> Cc: Yingzhen Qu mailto:yingzhen.i...@gmail.com>>; draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-...@ietf.org<mailto:draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-...@ietf.org>; lsr mailto:lsr@ietf.org>> S

Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call - draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv (11/17/2023 - 12/09/2023)

Gyan> If we made the sending of MP TLV a MUST it would provide the similar type of backwards compatibility as BIG TLV with the capability TLV. Advantage of doing it inside the protocol is that we eliminate configuration of enable/disable state default variations and are able to ensue

Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call - draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv (11/17/2023 - 12/09/2023)

> > > *From:* Huaimo Chen > *Sent:* Thursday, December 7, 2023 6:07 AM > *To:* Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) ; > li_zhenqi...@hotmail.com; Tony Li ; Linda Dunbar < > linda.dun...@futurewei.com> > *Cc:* Yingzhen Qu ; > draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-...@ietf.org; lsr > *S

Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call - draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv (11/17/2023 - 12/09/2023)

(ginsberg) ; 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) Hi Les, My responses are inline below with [HC]. Best Regards, Huaimo

Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call - draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv (11/17/2023 - 12/09/2023)

tentially dangerous > behavior. > > Big-TLV authors like to say “you can send Big-TLV but not use it until all > nodes support it” – but this does meet the criteria for backwards > compatibility. If Big-TLV were “backwards compatible” there would be no > need for a capability

Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call - draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv (11/17/2023 - 12/09/2023)

ulti-...@ietf.org<mailto:draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-...@ietf.org>; lsr mailto:lsr@ietf.org>> Subject: Re: Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call - draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv (11/17/2023 - 12/09/2023) Hello All, It seems Big-TLV is backward compatible. Backward compatible is an important point that sh

Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call - draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv (11/17/2023 - 12/09/2023)

eria-lsr-multi-...@ietf.org>; lsr mailto:lsr@ietf.org>> Subject: Re: Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call - draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv (11/17/2023 - 12/09/2023) Hello All, It seems Big-TLV is backward compatible. Backward compatible is an important point that should be considered when we introd

Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call - draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv (11/17/2023 - 12/09/2023)

Adoption Call - draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv (11/17/2023 - 12/09/2023) [External Email. Be cautious of content] Tony Przygienda writes: > On Thu, Dec 7, 2023 at 7:52 AM Gyan Mishra > wrote: > > ... > Gyan> What Bruno is trying to provide I think strengthe

Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call - draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv (11/17/2023 - 12/09/2023)

Tony Przygienda writes: On Thu, Dec 7, 2023 at 7:52 AM Gyan Mishra wrote: ...     Gyan> What Bruno is trying to provide I think strengthens the draft with the MUST normative language for enable/disable configuration controls.  As this is pre standard implementation if

Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call - draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv (11/17/2023 - 12/09/2023)

...@orange.com Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2023 6:51 PM To: Tony Li ; draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-...@ietf.org Cc: Yingzhen Qu ; lsr ; Aijun Wang Subject: Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call - draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv (11/17/2023 - 12/09/2023) Hi authors, Ø We are documenting existing behavior, codifying

Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call - draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv (11/17/2023 - 12/09/2023)

On Thu, Dec 7, 2023 at 7:52 AM Gyan Mishra wrote: > ... > Gyan> What Bruno is trying to provide I think strengthens the draft > with the MUST normative language for enable/disable configuration > controls. As this is pre standard implementation if the devices go out of > compliance

Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call - draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv (11/17/2023 - 12/09/2023)

2023 9:27 AM > *To:* Tony Li > > *Cc:* Yingzhen Qu ; > draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-...@ietf.org; lsr > *Subject:* RE: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call - draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv > (11/17/2023 - 12/09/2023) > > > > Hi Tony, > > > > Thanks for your replies. Much appr

Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call - draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv (11/17/2023 - 12/09/2023)

Hi Acee *Gyan Mishra* *Network Solutions A**rchitect * *Email gyan.s.mis...@verizon.com * *M 301 502-1347* On Tue, Nov 21, 2023 at 1:19 PM Acee Lindem wrote: > Speaking as WG member: > > I agree with Tony, the WG intent should be to make the current defacto >

Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call - draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv (11/17/2023 - 12/09/2023)

Hi Tony Some comments in-line *Gyan Mishra* *Network Solutions A**rchitect * *Email gyan.s.mis...@verizon.com * *M 301 502-1347* On Tue, Nov 21, 2023 at 11:46 AM Tony Li wrote: > > Hi Bruno, > > Thank you for your comments. > > > As a constructive proposal,

Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call - draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv (11/17/2023 - 12/09/2023)

ft-qgp-lsr-isis-pics-yang > > > > *From:* Lsr *On Behalf Of *Yingzhen Qu > *Sent:* Friday, November 17, 2023 6:24 PM > *To:* draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-...@ietf.org; lsr > *Subject:* [Lsr] WG Adoption Call - draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv > (11/17/2023 - 12/09/2023) > > >

Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call - draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv (11/17/2023 - 12/09/2023)

g-TLV were “backwards compatible” there would be no need > for a capability advertisement to determine when it is safe to use the > advertisements. > Les > From: li_zhenqi...@hotmail.com > Sent: Monday, December 4, 2023 10:35 PM > To: Huaimo Chen ; Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) > ; Tony

Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call - draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv (11/17/2023 - 12/09/2023)

nts. > > > >Les > > > > *From:* li_zhenqi...@hotmail.com > *Sent:* Monday, December 4, 2023 10:35 PM > *To:* Huaimo Chen ; Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) < > ginsb...@cisco.com>; Tony Li ; Linda Dunbar < > linda.dun...@futurewei.com> > *Cc:* Yingzhen Qu ; &g

Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call - draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv (11/17/2023 - 12/09/2023)

: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call - draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv (11/17/2023 - 12/09/2023) Hello All, It seems Big-TLV is backward compatible. Backward compatible is an important point that should be considered when we introduce new features in a protocol, especially the widely used protocols like ISIS

Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call - draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv (11/17/2023 - 12/09/2023)

From: Huaimo Chen Date: 2023-12-04 21:57 To: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg); Tony Li; Linda Dunbar CC: Yingzhen Qu; draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-...@ietf.org; lsr Subject: Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call - draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv (11/17/2023 - 12/09/2023) Hi Les, My responses are inline below with [HC

Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call - draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv (11/17/2023 - 12/09/2023)

Huaimo Chen writes: [HC]: It seems that the implementation of an idea/solution in a draft is not required by LSR WG for the draft to be adopted, or even for the draft to become RFC. [Chair hat on] It is true that we don't need implementations in order to adopt drafts; however, there

Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call - draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv (11/17/2023 - 12/09/2023)

aneria-lsr-multi-...@ietf.org<mailto:draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-...@ietf.org>; lsr mailto:lsr@ietf.org>> Subject: Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call - draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv (11/17/2023 - 12/09/2023) Hi Linda, * Suppose the information to be carried by the Extended IS Reachabilit

Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call - draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv (11/17/2023 - 12/09/2023)

nda Dunbar Cc: Yingzhen Qu ; draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-...@ietf.org; lsr Subject: Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call - draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv (11/17/2023 - 12/09/2023) Hi Linda, * Suppose the information to be carried by the Extended IS Reachability (type 22) (in Example 4.1) is larger t

Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call - draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv (11/17/2023 - 12/09/2023)

: Yingzhen Qu ; draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-...@ietf.org; lsr Subject: Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call - draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv (11/17/2023 - 12/09/2023) Hi Linda, * Suppose the information to be carried by the Extended IS Reachability (type 22) (in Example 4.1) is larger than 255. Does it mean

Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call - draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv (11/17/2023 - 12/09/2023)

Hi Linda, > Suppose the information to be carried by the Extended IS Reachability (type > 22) (in Example 4.1) is larger than 255. Does it mean the recipient will > receive 2 TLVs (both with the Type 22) in one LSA? For legacy routers, the > second TLV (Type =22) might overwrite the first

Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call - draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv (11/17/2023 - 12/09/2023)

Tony, Questions are inserted below: Linda From: Tony Li On Behalf Of Tony Li Sent: Friday, December 1, 2023 2:21 PM To: Linda Dunbar Cc: Yingzhen Qu ; draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-...@ietf.org; lsr Subject: Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call - draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv (11/17/2023 - 12/09/2023

Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call - draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv (11/17/2023 - 12/09/2023)

Hi Linda, > I have the following concerns about the approach proposed by this draft: > > Suppose the information to be carried by the Extended IS Reachability (type > 22) (in Example 4.1) is larger than 255. Does it mean the recipient will > receive 2 TLVs (both with the Type 22) in one

Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call - draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv (11/17/2023 - 12/09/2023)

adoption, unless those issues are resolved. Linda From: Lsr On Behalf Of Yingzhen Qu Sent: Friday, November 17, 2023 11:24 AM To: draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-...@ietf.org; lsr Subject: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call - draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv (11/17/2023 - 12/09/2023) Hi, This begins a WG adoption call

Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call - draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv (11/17/2023 - 12/09/2023)

hat the purpose of this draft? > Same question with :s/draft/capability > Although I believe I had already raised that point. > > Regards, > --Bruno > > From: Lsr On Behalf Of Tony Li > Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2023 5:06 AM > To: Aijun Wang > Cc: Yingzhen Qu ;

Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call - draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv (11/17/2023 - 12/09/2023)

I support adoption of this document by the WG. Regards,Reshad. On Friday, November 17, 2023, 12:24:12 PM EST, Yingzhen Qu wrote: Hi, This begins a WG adoption call for draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv: draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv-04 - Multi-part TLVs in IS-IS (ietf.org) Please send your

Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call - draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv (11/17/2023 - 12/09/2023)

Support. As the mechanism described in the draft has already been implemented by the three largest vendors of ISP-class routers, and that software has been deployed in real networks today, we better document this asap in an RFC. henk. > On 11/17/2023 6:23 PM CET Yingzhen Qu wrote: >

Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call - draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv (11/17/2023 - 12/09/2023)

already raised that point. Regards, --Bruno From: Lsr On Behalf Of Tony Li Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2023 5:06 AM To: Aijun Wang Cc: Yingzhen Qu ; draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-...@ietf.org; lsr Subject: Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call - draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv (11/17/2023 - 12/09/2023) Hi

Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call - draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv (11/17/2023 - 12/09/2023)

Hi Aijun, > If the MP-TLV support capability declaration doesn’t mean support all > relevant TLVs, and conform to the draft can’t assure the interoperability, > then, what the purpose of this draft? We are documenting existing behavior, codifying what we believe most implementations are

Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call - draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv (11/17/2023 - 12/09/2023)

operational points to understand what support is in network duly noted and yes, yang is probably best angle for now to include the capability per tlv however, some observations below ... On Tue, Nov 28, 2023 at 2:18 PM wrote: > Hi, > > > > This draft proposes advertisements which are out of

Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call - draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv (11/17/2023 - 12/09/2023)

all of vendors declare they support “MP-TLV” but not all of > the relevant TLVs? > > Best Regards > > Aijun Wang > China Telecom > > 发件人: forwardingalgori...@ietf.org <mailto:forwardingalgori...@ietf.org> > [mailto:forwardingalgori...@ietf.org] 代表 Yingzhen Qu > 发送时间: 2023年11月18

Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call - draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv (11/17/2023 - 12/09/2023)

sr] WG Adoption Call - draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv (11/17/2023 - 12/09/2023) Hi, This begins a WG adoption call for draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv: draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv-04 - Multi-part TLVs in IS-IS (ietf.org)<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv/>

Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call - draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv (11/17/2023 - 12/09/2023)

To:* Tony Przygienda ; Tony Li > *Cc:* Yingzhen Qu ; > 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 Email. Be cautious of content]* > > > >

Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call - draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv (11/17/2023 - 12/09/2023)

; draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-...@ietf.org; lsr Subject: RE: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call - draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv (11/17/2023 - 12/09/2023) Hi Everyone, The solution in draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv has the following issues: 1. Not backward compatible. Unpredictable behavior with partial

Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call - draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv (11/17/2023 - 12/09/2023)

ber 17, 2023 10:29 AM To: Tony Li mailto:tony...@tony.li>> Cc: Yingzhen Qu mailto:yingzhen.i...@gmail.com>>; draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-...@ietf.org<mailto:draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-...@ietf.org>; lsr mailto:lsr@ietf.org>> Subject: Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call - draft-pkaneria-lsr-

Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call - draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv (11/17/2023 - 12/09/2023)

Hi Bruno, I’m in agreement with Les. One more points below. > Furthermore, it is highly unlikely that any implementation is going to > actually comply just because of our choice of adjective here. > [Bruno] Exactly my above point: existing implementations may not bother and > claims

Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call - draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv (11/17/2023 - 12/09/2023)

is very much consistent with Tony's reply. Some additional responses inline. From: bruno.decra...@orange.com Sent: Tuesday, November 21, 2023 9:27 AM To: Tony Li Cc: Yingzhen Qu ; draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-...@ietf.org; lsr Subject: RE: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call - draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv (11/17

Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call - draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv (11/17/2023 - 12/09/2023)

Speaking as WG member: I agree with Tony, the WG intent should be to make the current defacto solution transparent and provide for backward compatible improvements. I’d add that in either case, upgrades will be required for full interoperability and one might as well update to get the support

Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call - draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv (11/17/2023 - 12/09/2023)

INNOV/NET Cc: Yingzhen Qu ; draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-...@ietf.org; lsr Subject: Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call - draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv (11/17/2023 - 12/09/2023) Hi Bruno, Thank you for your comments. As a constructive proposal, and as mitigations, I would like the document be improved

Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call - draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv (11/17/2023 - 12/09/2023)

Hi Bruno, Thank you for your comments. > As a constructive proposal, and as mitigations, I would like the document be > improved with the following changes: > Sending MUST be controlled by configuration [1] > [1] > OLD: It is RECOMMENDED that implementations which support the sending of >

Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call - draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv (11/17/2023 - 12/09/2023)

aneria-lsr-multi-...@ietf.org; lsr Subject: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call - draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv (11/17/2023 - 12/09/2023) Hi, This begins a WG adoption call for draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv: draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv-04 - Multi-part TLVs in IS-IS (ietf.org)<https://datatracker.ietf.

Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call - draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv (11/17/2023 - 12/09/2023)

I support WG adoption of this draft. Thanks, Gaurav Juniper Business Use Only From: Lsr on behalf of Yingzhen Qu Date: Friday, 17 November 2023 at 10:54 PM To: draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-...@ietf.org , lsr Subject: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call - draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv (11/17/2023 - 12/09

Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call - draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv (11/17/2023 - 12/09/2023)

Hi Yingzhen, I support the adoption. Multiple implementations already support what the draft is proposing. thanks, Peter On 17/11/2023 18:23, Yingzhen Qu wrote: Hi, This begins a WG adoption call for draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv: draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv-04 - Multi-part TLVs in IS-IS

Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call - draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv (11/17/2023 - 12/09/2023)

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 Email

Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call - draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv (11/17/2023 - 12/09/2023)

Hi Yingzhen, I support the adoption of this document by the WG. The document has been already widely discussed in the WG for a few years now - the problem is well acknowledged and the solution/approach is the best/practical way to go about it in my opinion. Thanks, Ketan On Fri, Nov 17, 2023

Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call - draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv (11/17/2023 - 12/09/2023)

Support. I've implemented parts of the draft and think it's a practical approach. Thanks, Paul On 11/17/23 11:23, Yingzhen Qu wrote: Hi, This begins a WG adoption call for draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv: draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv-04 - Multi-part TLVs in IS-IS

Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call - draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv (11/17/2023 - 12/09/2023)

Adoption Call - draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv (11/17/2023 - 12/09/2023) +1, support adoptoinb as co-author On Fri, Nov 17, 2023 at 6:58 PM Tony Li mailto:tony...@tony.li>> wrote: I support adoption as co-author. T On Nov 17, 2023, at 9:23 AM, Yingzhen Qu mailto:yingzhen.i...@gma

Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call - draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv (11/17/2023 - 12/09/2023)

+1, support adoptoinb as co-author On Fri, Nov 17, 2023 at 6:58 PM Tony Li wrote: > > I support adoption as co-author. > > T > > > On Nov 17, 2023, at 9:23 AM, Yingzhen Qu wrote: > > Hi, > > This begins a WG adoption call for draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv: > draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv-04 > -

Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call - draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv (11/17/2023 - 12/09/2023)

I support adoption as co-author. T > On Nov 17, 2023, at 9:23 AM, Yingzhen Qu wrote: > > Hi, > > This begins a WG adoption call for draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv: > draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv-04 - Multi-part TLVs in IS-IS (ietf.org) >

Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call - draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv (11/17/2023 - 12/09/2023)

Speaking as WG member: This draft has already resulted in a lot of good discussion and iteration. I support adoption as formalization of the existing solution with configuration, protocol level capability reporting, and IANA multi-TLV specification. Thanks, Acee > On Nov 17, 2023, at 12:23,

[Lsr] WG Adoption Call - draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv (11/17/2023 - 12/09/2023)

Hi, This begins a WG adoption call for draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv: draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv-04 - Multi-part TLVs in IS-IS (ietf.org) Please send your support or objection to the list before December 9th, 2023. An extra week