Re: [bess] Spencer Dawkins' No Objection on draft-ietf-bess-evpn-overlay-10: (with COMMENT)

Alvaro Retana <aretana.ietf@gmail.com> Fri, 05 January 2018 23:53 UTC

Return-Path: <aretana.ietf@gmail.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 922E912D967; Fri, 5 Jan 2018 15:53:58 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.698
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.698 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, FREEMAIL_REPLY=1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.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 sskGwxjpanyf; Fri, 5 Jan 2018 15:53:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-oi0-x232.google.com (mail-oi0-x232.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c06::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 CAE0D126B6E; Fri, 5 Jan 2018 15:53:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-oi0-x232.google.com with SMTP id n81so355174oig.8; Fri, 05 Jan 2018 15:53:53 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=4d37aJt/HXvfHR3oZd1SfykfAcGysuOgwP+Qy6zwVuc=; b=WBV5EWTwGMmnwUd4toC+2LigtNw+C76ti45nM4gBTeTneQbq5mtNCc5Apm4D51l4YW 8OemIJb1Dq+9L8FPbljZgvteBGLOJn9OIwZ9+ot/Y+yUhrdA4hMfQDy7B1x+pB/Jncvx NxIN2wJwzKL0n2p9Qdfd1UQC6Qhuv+8isZbJOvju8y2CvM8WlKn2kF3s1Oblz60/lVy8 p41jNq4O/Fk2Qz/5xTVSnu6wlKPsUMqVpUoqg514dfqcAXauHaA/dDA3odQzi1cGoNc8 5VELWx3VUg1uyXdPjKwSAysKQSzABl2F3sODRcPtBx1srgoutw/XcBJLenN/RZQbjOrN y6zw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=4d37aJt/HXvfHR3oZd1SfykfAcGysuOgwP+Qy6zwVuc=; b=QXNtnmHJ0jBecaiSTWrhstKuFWzJ3hXcjSzh20AdrSsjFfsnAPAMBKc0/Oy8pCSbby lv0DJH9xRK6P/92sKwLt4M4QmjX8CtpXYxjTrk+wzSSlSZ4KSa9AkO0GP70nBkZ9jIjL e92LVCJEBpNrCVFztwMP/SgKbmcwPliL1BCvanZeCATbrEfV9wN/fnFy6wMHIVOOrkas eH10TS3BTiHPa59chGmrLCegWArxORY2wC1NrXj0bmrmdXZeD1F50+TdWaTwJ3Ym5kPC vl4gGYM5HzRBwtMrBk7gUFJCrKlHETjpNOxmSpUpHcegg6FjFmswT1t+EDglGQB3SylF DpGg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AKGB3mIAgu/Y+7SO9qlhcqkJXnnzl8WALSGcJguounu+RAp+spPO1x++ ecN//+D4lh3HeAiH3KABlhNf/5Qxs6DxGoHrr6I=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACJfBosG4pwcy9NgPUO/zVlAVm+M+F0VtnbvuBkNsWwZALH1ExO3joUG8fvoNIWLdePWKq0w6dlNhbO9IK4CKnWmQJg=
X-Received: by 10.202.89.139 with SMTP id n133mr2745083oib.109.1515196433281; Fri, 05 Jan 2018 15:53:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: from 1058052472880 named unknown by gmailapi.google.com with HTTPREST; Fri, 5 Jan 2018 15:53:52 -0800
From: Alvaro Retana <aretana.ietf@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <151458840509.3969.4686705852309981578.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
References: <151458840509.3969.4686705852309981578.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
X-Mailer: Airmail (467)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2018 15:53:52 -0800
Message-ID: <CAMMESsw08PdVP0=+y-o6Jc4T+omzTqWnY00gogMfoKys6Mf9Mw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Spencer Dawkins <spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com>, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Cc: bess-chairs@ietf.org, Thomas Morin <thomas.morin@orange.com>, draft-ietf-bess-evpn-overlay@ietf.org, bess@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a113dcba22bb77c05621029f2"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/bess/pBS3IIgl1TTigEsJNqs1oRtU6lg>
Subject: Re: [bess] Spencer Dawkins' No Objection on draft-ietf-bess-evpn-overlay-10: (with COMMENT)
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: Fri, 05 Jan 2018 23:53:59 -0000

On December 30, 2017 at 7:00:05 AM, Spencer Dawkins (
spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com) wrote:

Spencer:

Hi!  Happy New Year!

----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Both the Abstract and Introduction contain text like this:

This specification is also applicable to GENEVE encapsulation;
however, some incremental work is required which will be covered in a
separate document.

and the Introduction references draft-boutros-bess-evpn-geneve-00.txt, which

looks like an individual -00 draft. I wonder if it would be better to drop
the
promise from this document, and make the relationship clear in whatever
version
of draft-boutros-bess-evpn-geneve is published.

I'm fine with the working group publishing this draft with the promise
included, but wanted to ask while we're reviewing it, rather than later.

We added that in mainly because the nvo3 WG’s focus on Geneve…

Alvaro.