Hi Alvaro,
done.
Have some issues posting the new ospfv2 draft, so requested manual posting.
thanks,
Peter
On 16/11/18 22:40 , Alvaro Retana wrote:
[Took the ops-dir and the ietf@ietf lists off.]
Hi!
Joe makes a really good point below about the TLV types and RFC7770. It
looks like we all
[Took the ops-dir and the ietf@ietf lists off.]
Hi!
Joe makes a really good point below about the TLV types and RFC7770. It
looks like we all missed it! :-(
To quote Peter (from a message in this thread), "I don't think it is good
to specify the behavior which is described somewhere else.”
Hi Joe,
On 31/10/18 04:15 , Joe Clarke wrote:
On 10/30/18 08:05, Peter Psenak wrote:
I'm going to be pedantic here. According to RFC7770, when a new OSPF
Router
Information LSA TLV is defined, the spec needs to explicitly state if
it's
applicable to OSPFv2, v3, or both. While you reference
On Tue, Oct 30, 2018 at 03:33:21PM +, Acee Lindem (acee) wrote:
> Hi Les,
>
> On 10/30/18, 11:15 AM, "Les Ginsberg (ginsberg)" wrote:
>
> Acee -
>
> > > Section 3.2
> > >
> > > "When a router receives multiple overlapping ranges, it MUST
> > >
Hi Les,
On 10/30/18, 11:15 AM, "Les Ginsberg (ginsberg)" wrote:
Acee -
> > Section 3.2
> >
> > "When a router receives multiple overlapping ranges, it MUST
> >conform to the procedures defined in
> >
Hi Peter, Joe, et al,
On 10/30/18, 8:05 AM, "Peter Psenak (ppsenak)" wrote:
Hi Joe,
thanks for your review, please see inline (##PP):
On 26/10/18 21:42 , Joe Clarke wrote:
> Reviewer: Joe Clarke
> Review result: Has Nits
>
> I have been assigned to review
Hi Joe,
thanks for your review, please see inline (##PP):
On 26/10/18 21:42 , Joe Clarke wrote:
Reviewer: Joe Clarke
Review result: Has Nits
I have been assigned to review
draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment-routing-extensions on behalf of the ops
directorate. This document defines OSPFv3
