IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [bess] WGLC: draft-ietf-bier-mvpn-05

Stig Venaas <stig@venaas.com> Mon, 19 June 2017 21:47 UTC

Return-Path: <stig@venaas.com>
X-Original-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C872129442 for <bess@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 19 Jun 2017 14:47:54 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=venaas-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id xtxcjyLaRkUT for <bess@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 19 Jun 2017 14:47:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qt0-x232.google.com (mail-qt0-x232.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c0d::232]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4E957129401 for <bess@ietf.org>; Mon, 19 Jun 2017 14:47:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qt0-x232.google.com with SMTP id w1so120278629qtg.2 for <bess@ietf.org>; Mon, 19 Jun 2017 14:47:51 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=venaas-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=HHn6LNS17e/ZVbPk/VaaDqPWm3sNcTaEGKFlBTeLNLU=; b=x03VUS2uz1RDTCcDdTN/DPWAHvB0p/Mml0YKzSSkHGZEFIAdQMsVglTrFWfcRUwAvY ji38opBoLCo1wyqufqU6m54k2A9IR7nKs/m9SNJjWAjUbSi6U1yo5IplzdjCzQ79Ybek OBhcQ/GfAEToAmP3+hmR3hP1+BdrPkh9IOFGRA6lPz0yX7S6zex57liOWr8ppbLYxjGh HEnrX5fo4BC5cHyrqZ0QSgk7meYqnGM9XdNywKkupW+GiXE/ByYeqErS9ceW+d6FED0r UuAfvQJZhQ2AcJo8i1YdayE1iHXahV06BCCUqG5fL0s5f0R7Il+papWMvvJX7jQYCuDG Oh9g==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=HHn6LNS17e/ZVbPk/VaaDqPWm3sNcTaEGKFlBTeLNLU=; b=KaRvxk7dOpN2ukq226W7UCdLGCXNU7NtBtq+iL692c3ys7/xaG57d0M6qnnp64kZJX imQfKHpf032CTuHSU6ja7vUSWyhXg06Bx1owG8tZ6OdELGwpeVcW0j9K/GrjDUNZoS98 D2pS+C6IbJdXr/IBLoMLSTS8FqV8x7Zz7EBieoOCfPQ4ksoc76A7Jto3kOOu+eRBZIa0 Z4kaM5fvG3MHsUsURtJJ+nbr8dwiNdRY9EXurwyOeT2i4Y2QeeBvY4MWGaYZulIRlq0O 4YJWiryq+NcngT10G6BjaGsfP79nA7EjPwvOWhQ1CWdv1mjXy762pN5EwdDFjZwUn6O3 rbGw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AKS2vOxZsBcDABjDPJRJK6Z3/OsxKX9bIMOfmnDml7SCq0H8TdOPgQPO et9869utcSb/8vmsrVXnLfeO1Q0sVooZ
X-Received: by 10.237.63.36 with SMTP id p33mr30096336qtf.81.1497908870497; Mon, 19 Jun 2017 14:47:50 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.140.25.144 with HTTP; Mon, 19 Jun 2017 14:47:50 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CABFReBoN6YbJr+fqigLuWBStUS2-4rfHuVKONSJdNU4RRK9qaw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CABFReBoN6YbJr+fqigLuWBStUS2-4rfHuVKONSJdNU4RRK9qaw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Stig Venaas <stig@venaas.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2017 14:47:50 -0700
Message-ID: <CAHANBtL5s9+vh8qzc8dBuYP3YbQMV6znfpoPqb+NKj8BJT=QYA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Greg Shepherd <gjshep@gmail.com>
Cc: "bier@ietf.org" <bier@ietf.org>, bess@ietf.org, "pim@ietf.org" <pim@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/bess/O3c7ENPzA_Y6wzqhuNKnB7iluJ0>
Subject: Re: [bess] WGLC: draft-ietf-bier-mvpn-05
X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
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: Mon, 19 Jun 2017 21:47:54 -0000

Hi

I think this draft is mostly ready. I just have a couple of comments.

In section 1:
   This revision of the document does not specify the procedures
   necessary to support MVPN customers that are using BIDIR-PIM.  Those
   procedures will be added in a future revision.

Remove this text?

Section 2.1.  MPLS Label

Should one use different labels to distinguish address families in the same VRF?


The PTA must be present in Leaf A-D routes so one can know the BIER
prefix of the router joining. It might be obvious, but I think it is
worth pointing it out. It is specified for IR (in RFC 7988 section
4.1.1 it says: "Leaf A-D route MUST also contain a PTA"...

Stig


On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 3:01 PM, Greg Shepherd <gjshep@gmail.com> wrote:
> BIER, BESS, PIM
>
> At BIER WG meeting, IETF97 in Chicago, we decided to move forward to WGLC
> for some of our docs. We learned that even once published the IESG has a
> process to change the track of the RFC if the WG makes the case to move the
> work from Informational to Standards track. The feedback from operators is
> that RFC status was more important than track, and we won't be able to meet
> our charter requirements to change track without deployment experience and
> operator support.
>
> This email starts a two week timer for feedback on the draft:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bier-mvpn
>
> WGLC to run in parallel in both BIER, BESS, and PIM WGs due to the scope of
> the work.
>
> Thanks,
> Greg
> (BIER Chairs)
>
> _______________________________________________
> BESS mailing list
> BESS@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email