[bmwg] Fwd: I-D Action: draft-ietf-bmwg-evpntest-11.txt

"sbanks@encrypted.net" <sbanks@encrypted.net> Mon, 11 September 2023 15:27 UTC

Return-Path: <sbanks@encrypted.net>
X-Original-To: bmwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: bmwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2728FC15107E for <bmwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 11 Sep 2023 08:27:18 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.704
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.704 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_INVALID=0.1, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=neutral reason="invalid (public key: not available)" header.d=encrypted.net
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id HWd7g_cLafX3 for <bmwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 11 Sep 2023 08:27:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from xyz.hosed.org (xyz.hosed.org [71.114.67.91]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7CEDAC14CE2C for <bmwg@ietf.org>; Mon, 11 Sep 2023 08:27:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by xyz.hosed.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C720619C338D; Mon, 11 Sep 2023 11:27:11 -0400 (EDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at xyz.hosed.org
Received: from xyz.hosed.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (xyz.hosed.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id GJGcf79rdPIU; Mon, 11 Sep 2023 11:27:11 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from smtpclient.apple (c-67-170-204-170.hsd1.ca.comcast.net [67.170.204.170]) by xyz.hosed.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5788C19C1427; Mon, 11 Sep 2023 11:27:11 -0400 (EDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=encrypted.net; s=default; t=1694446031; bh=jC00McwJsgYQAyn2OQORFh8EvvCyIbYHliAWqbiAFlo=; h=From:Subject:Date:References:Cc:To:From; b=eSsjO6vToyR75IaO92MnPOqlaXoD9cjhoqmYkFGWBkRXuyUoJD5dS0qJ/6ObjVr2/ s0FoQhUyV3Ir0LSj9amQ4Uk11tiUC5Y0/3Aj7urnPs1rs6+r8vpcQX1Q1C4ZCoXPlw tBobWb6BzB64MSdZpRn0V17whmE6PrsNdd/Wa9FM=
From: "sbanks@encrypted.net" <sbanks@encrypted.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_00A5A30A-3AEB-4805-B1F9-D74D66361BED"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3731.400.51.1.1\))
Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2023 08:27:00 -0700
References: <169226101202.2136.8003368474406403012@ietfa.amsl.com>
To: bmwg@ietf.org
Message-Id: <81E3536E-9BFE-4BB7-B48A-71BD405BD9CC@encrypted.net>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3731.400.51.1.1)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/bmwg/-HJlk1-Nq-M89mLhfDdd0a11ndg>
Subject: [bmwg] Fwd: I-D Action: draft-ietf-bmwg-evpntest-11.txt
X-BeenThere: bmwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: Benchmarking Methodology Working Group <bmwg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/bmwg>, <mailto:bmwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/bmwg/>
List-Post: <mailto:bmwg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bmwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bmwg>, <mailto:bmwg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2023 15:27:18 -0000

Hello BMWG,
	My apologies for the late follow up - I thought I’d sent this note, but cannot find it in my mailbox, so let me circle back.

	The authors of the EVPN benchmarking work had previously shared an adopted document with the working group. It was marked dead, due to an inability to reach the authors (https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/bmwg/q_QpkXNK2YcNxMqix3EhrY-3O0w/). The authors would like to revive the draft. Given how much time has elapsed since WGLC and IETF LC, our AD would like the working group to review and confirm that it is still work we’d like to support. Please reply to this email with a call for support, or lack of support. Let’s give this period 2 weeks - please indicate support/no support by September 25, 2023.

Thank you,
Sarah 
BMWG Co-Chair


> Begin forwarded message:
> 
> From: internet-drafts@ietf.org
> Subject: [bmwg] I-D Action: draft-ietf-bmwg-evpntest-11.txt
> Date: August 17, 2023 at 1:30:12 AM PDT
> To: <i-d-announce@ietf.org>
> Cc: bmwg@ietf.org
> Reply-To: bmwg@ietf.org
> 
> 
> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts
> directories. This Internet-Draft is a work item of the Benchmarking
> Methodology (BMWG) WG of the IETF.
> 
>   Title           : Benchmarking Methodology for EVPN and PBB-EVPN
>   Authors         : Sudhin Jacob
>                     Kishore Tiruveedhula
>   Filename        : draft-ietf-bmwg-evpntest-11.txt
>   Pages           : 27
>   Date            : 2023-08-17
> 
> Abstract:
>   This document defines methodologies for benchmarking EVPN and PBB-
>   EVPN performance.  EVPN is defined in RFC 7432, and is being deployed
>   in Service Provider networks.  Specifically, this document defines
>   the methodologies for benchmarking EVPN/PBB-EVPN convergence, data
>   plane performance, and control plane performance.
> 
> The IETF datatracker status page for this Internet-Draft is:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bmwg-evpntest/
> 
> There is also an htmlized version available at:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-bmwg-evpntest-11
> 
> A diff from the previous version is available at:
> https://author-tools.ietf.org/iddiff?url2=draft-ietf-bmwg-evpntest-11
> 
> Internet-Drafts are also available by rsync at rsync.ietf.org::internet-drafts
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> bmwg mailing list
> bmwg@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bmwg