Re: [bess] WG Last Call, IPR and Implementation Poll for draft-ietf-bess-mvpn-evpn-aggregation-label-04 Mon, 04 January 2021 10:43 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9221F3A0B83; Mon, 4 Jan 2021 02:43:13 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.197
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.197 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id DqJTnTUXMhlx; Mon, 4 Jan 2021 02:43:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::32d]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 71B9B3A0B68; Mon, 4 Jan 2021 02:43:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: by with SMTP id q75so18860882wme.2; Mon, 04 Jan 2021 02:43:11 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=from:to:cc:references:in-reply-to:subject:date:message-id :mime-version:thread-index:content-language; bh=r36W4PsOaQvNtXbqDnL2tDcFCPmIbsEYYHOp5ZAWnfA=; b=rASXf5BP05zwM9j8CpKuICcK9ZnOcUPYZG2OezAGUpvC5DMLE53cy+ixrLU66oz76U +RZgre3lW/I9kmkbCMt+RIo5jXmGLTYtVq1+yw/drDIy+I43BMBTpCHU8HFvZsW3tZw9 BrcyjyCK/O5D3MoJzH0NUT9NqrZy/1h9jOrsnQ8fCSOaPu8H+tFAe7+ia31FhUvHv7Ix JyMIOyh0+U0YSg7FY7DNr6No0b10SfC9R39YiIPcQprVkDAB5D7E++etiMbQ5BK6BNGk +MCN3YQxQNL+mL9n3m9z1k560V7QN74En1CvudECvx4jUyMRyKhttIm1nPmBv3J7bYQi qBzw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:references:in-reply-to:subject:date :message-id:mime-version:thread-index:content-language; bh=r36W4PsOaQvNtXbqDnL2tDcFCPmIbsEYYHOp5ZAWnfA=; b=NQwN8nrNi5WTsS18Cn/nUPrcfeA28RWpg/phGoUzapcw7MaOULSS0GkUNRsIapgUcA 6LeS2LcRm04DFW2SdY+P7nSSRotTSpTdffERVHNEWObBGcxpZAOjckjW+2KuPpv/N1ZV bXUuzWphvqeo3wiL4w4mRZR4bCPo3cSUZ6kiUbwcU3b1AQc/8qAeNjxi5bFhEaKe2ndL piNFTl7G/y0J6//JKI7kZHDlrwJrRAhmLqLNu4reJS/LAkqp1DqKBwKVO7AA4URaVFTL lnE6JD97IFyLNP14iyhLYHavYCCi3HwdbrJB2Gvh1+MQYH63nl4cmHNtPwqZgSOHq5rD dzZA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5326VLhjZ1hcVhh+LzjzvX15TdnvQBde7md0TmmMIEIfRn7YKl0Z uzduyfBMxbSMa1v/RusRoYUo4yRA9Q==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzuwJunACkcE3OZJDvqrUTXDL2ZZ87SOafhGZrWHZyKBE9p5xb0njDzo5L+ohpujj5Qi9bkvA==
X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:211:: with SMTP id 17mr26324316wmi.84.1609756989466; Mon, 04 Jan 2021 02:43:09 -0800 (PST)
Received: from SLITKOWS3YYU6 ([]) by with ESMTPSA id o13sm70228102wrh.88.2021. (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 04 Jan 2021 02:43:08 -0800 (PST)
From: <>
To: <>, <>
Cc: <>
References: <059101d6cfd5$c53029e0$4f907da0$> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 2021 11:43:07 +0100
Message-ID: <004201d6e286$63dcad30$2b960790$>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0043_01D6E28E.C5A1D880"
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 16.0
Thread-Index: AQIf7ZDiAmmUBlO+4/e587PzZbXYRQL4m5fyqW1sE/A=
Content-Language: fr
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [bess] WG Last Call, IPR and Implementation Poll for draft-ietf-bess-mvpn-evpn-aggregation-label-04
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 04 Jan 2021 10:43:14 -0000

We are still missing couple of IPR replies to close the WGLC: Eric, Ice
(their email contact has to be updated).


In addition, we haven't received any reply regarding an existing
implementation. Is anyone aware of an implementation ?









From: BESS < <> > on behalf
of <>
< <> >
Date: Friday, December 11, 2020 at 4:53 PM
<> >, <>  < <>
Cc: <>
< <> >
Subject: [bess] WG Last Call, IPR and Implementation Poll for

This email starts a two-week working group last call for
draft-ietf-bess-mvpn-evpn-aggregation-label-04 [1]


Please review the draft and send any comments to the BESS list. Also, please
indicate if you support publishing the draft as a standards track RFC.


This poll runs until the 28th December 2020


We are also polling for knowledge of any undisclosed IPR that applies to
this Document, to ensure that IPR has been disclosed in compliance with IETF
IPR rules (see RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669 and 5378 for more details).


If you are listed as an Author or a Contributor of this document please
respond to this email and indicate whether or not you are aware of any
relevant undisclosed IPR. The Document won't progress without answers from
all the Authors and Contributors. 

There is currently one IPR disclosure.


In addition, we are polling for knowledge of implementations of this draft,
per the BESS policy in [2].   


Thank you,

Matthew & Stephane