[bess] Deborah Brungard's Yes on draft-ietf-bess-evpn-vpls-seamless-integ-05: (with COMMENT)

Deborah Brungard <db3546@att.com> Wed, 09 January 2019 21:05 UTC

Return-Path: <db3546@att.com>
X-Original-To: bess@ietf.org
Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D0B96130EAB; Wed, 9 Jan 2019 13:05:37 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Deborah Brungard <db3546@att.com>
To: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Cc: draft-ietf-bess-evpn-vpls-seamless-integ@ietf.org, Matthew Bocci <matthew.bocci@nokia.com>, bess-chairs@ietf.org, matthew.bocci@nokia.com, bess@ietf.org
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.89.2
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Message-ID: <154706793785.5038.6318137394526115900.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2019 13:05:37 -0800
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/bess/4bpahIY2gq2pxG5B201ZV8R3qrk>
Subject: [bess] Deborah Brungard's Yes on draft-ietf-bess-evpn-vpls-seamless-integ-05: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list <bess.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/bess>, <mailto:bess-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/bess/>
List-Post: <mailto:bess@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bess-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess>, <mailto:bess-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2019 21:05:38 -0000

Deborah Brungard has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-bess-evpn-vpls-seamless-integ-05: Yes

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)

Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:


I agree with the current status as PS. While it does not define new
codepoints or protocol extensions, it defines new mechanisms
which need to be supported by all (PBB-)EVPN nodes. The mechanisms
are not supported by operational configuration, they are new
mechanisms which need to be supported by the node itself.

A BCP/Informational status would be appropriate if this document
was only defining the procedures related to the VPLS or PBB-VPLS
PEs. For those nodes, there is no change, as all the new mechanisms
supporting seamless integration need to be supported on the EVPN nodes.