Dear netconf and opsawg,
We updated draft-ietf-netconf-distributed-notif to address Benoit's comment on
the use of domain observation id terminology. We believe that by introducing a
new terminology, Message Publisher and Message Publisher ID we have been
addressing his concerns. Looking
Support, AC series breaks down connectivity service into a set of common
building block, can be reused in other YANG model work, also establish the
correlation with the network topology and SAP model.
-Qin
发件人: OPSAWG [mailto:opsawg-boun...@ietf.org] 代表 Joe Clarke (jclarke)
发送时间: 2023年10月2日
Hello, opsawg (and Ops Area). The preliminary agenda is up at
https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/118/agenda. This time around we’re trying
something new. We have two session slots. We have a typical two-hour slot
currently on Monday from 13:00 to 15:00. This will be the combined
I support the set of drafts – standardization of attachment circuits is very
valuable
thanks
Julian
Juniper Business Use Only
From: OPSAWG on behalf of "Joe Clarke (jclarke)"
Date: Monday, 2 October 2023 at 14:22
To: "opsawg@ietf.org"
Subject: [OPSAWG] CALL FOR ADOPTION: Attachment
Re-,
Your comment about "unknown L4" reminded me another comment you had about how
to disambiguate unknown EH vs. upper layer headers:
Our local copy includes now the following NEW text:
If an implementation determines that it includes an extension header
that it does no support, then the
Hi Éric,
Thank your for the comments. I will start by the easy one:
"I still wonder why the tcpOptions and ipv6ExtensionHeaders are in the same I-D
though ;-)"
This was mainly for the authors convenience to avoid many I-Ds. We defer to the
Chairs for this one.
Cheers,
Med
De : OPSAWG De la
Benoît and Med,
Thanks for this useful document, please find below some comments (obviously
without any hat).
Should the “No Next-Header” (next-header=59) be included (cfr my other remarks
on the companion I-D) ?
There should be a way to convey the information that the exporter was (un)able
Benoît and Med,
Thanks for this document, please find below some comments on the IPv6 sections
(4.1 and 9.1), obviously wearing no hat. I like the idea of creating a registry
mapping IPFIX IE bits to IPv6 extension headers, even if there won’t be any new
IPv6 extension headers.
Another
Hi All,
We just posted a draft which may be of interest to this group. All feedback
welcomed.
We would also like to present this at the upcoming meeting in Prague, if
possible.
Thanks
John
A new version of Internet-Draft draft-opsawg-evans-discardmodel-00.txt has
been
