IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Idr] Comments on draft-vandevelde-idr-ipv6-flowspec-imp

"VAN DE VELDE, Gunter (Gunter)" <gunter.van_de_velde@alcatel-lucent.com> Mon, 27 July 2015 11:53 UTC

Return-Path: <gunter.van_de_velde@alcatel-lucent.com>
X-Original-To: idr@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: idr@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D5381B2B59 for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 27 Jul 2015 04:53:33 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.91
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham
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 R7VCoY-k4OVz for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 27 Jul 2015 04:53:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp-fr.alcatel-lucent.com (fr-hpgre-esg-01.alcatel-lucent.com [135.245.210.22]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BFAB71B2C03 for <idr@ietf.org>; Mon, 27 Jul 2015 04:53:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from fr711usmtp1.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (unknown [135.239.2.122]) by Websense Email Security Gateway with ESMTPS id 855E7EE5B949A; Mon, 27 Jul 2015 11:53:27 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from FR711WXCHHUB01.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (fr711wxchhub01.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com [135.239.2.111]) by fr711usmtp1.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (GMO) with ESMTP id t6RBrTDw017732 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Mon, 27 Jul 2015 13:53:29 +0200
Received: from FR711WXCHMBA06.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com ([169.254.2.12]) by FR711WXCHHUB01.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com ([135.239.2.111]) with mapi id 14.03.0195.001; Mon, 27 Jul 2015 13:53:29 +0200
From: "VAN DE VELDE, Gunter (Gunter)" <gunter.van_de_velde@alcatel-lucent.com>
To: Jeffrey Haas <jhaas@pfrc.org>, "idr@ietf.org" <idr@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: Comments on draft-vandevelde-idr-ipv6-flowspec-imp
Thread-Index: AQHQuoVDjsKZS9ZnKkGFoZY78MZ60Z3vUKkA
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2015 11:53:28 +0000
Message-ID: <B5E4E88A-6704-475E-8BB2-83BC2DE5BBE6@alcatel-lucent.com>
References: <20150709202554.GC13783@pfrc.org>
In-Reply-To: <20150709202554.GC13783@pfrc.org>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [135.239.27.39]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-ID: <04A590509B46984AA40C32C206690D37@exchange.lucent.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/5PQy0OSLtoaMdbPLqt55EC82K34>
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 27 Jul 2015 05:02:47 -0700
Cc: "draft-vandevelde-idr-ipv6-flowspec-imp@tools.ietf.org" <draft-vandevelde-idr-ipv6-flowspec-imp@tools.ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Idr] Comments on draft-vandevelde-idr-ipv6-flowspec-imp
X-BeenThere: idr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Inter-Domain Routing <idr.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/idr>, <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/idr/>
List-Post: <mailto:idr@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr>, <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2015 11:53:33 -0000

Hi Jeff,

The implementation draft when created originally was focussed around draft-ietf-idr-flow-spec-v6-06 implementation and compatibility testing to aid in progress of this proposed standard track document. Main goal is to test that the NLRI exchanged works and that the routers can see the content of the information exchanged.

My idea was that we could do a additional document for draft-ietf-idr-flowspec-redirect-rt-bis-04 if that makes sense to proceed? (that would lead to one proposed standard document with its implementation report document)


Be well,
G/

On 09/07/15 22:25, "Jeffrey Haas" <jhaas@pfrc.org> wrote:

>I would like to encourage the authors to clarify interop point E3:
>   o  E3: Extended Community - redirect
>
>In particular, this is because redirect communities have gotten some recent
>scrutiny.  draft-ietf-idr-flow-spec-v6-06 adds support for RFC 5701 with a 
>new redirect community. draft-ietf-idr-flowspec-redirect-rt-bis-04, which is
>in IETF Last Call, clarifies existing redirect behaviors.  Finally, the
>interop report itself seems to include a redirect example that appears to be
>an instance of draft-ietf-idr-flowspec-redirect-ip-02.
>
>As an early data point, Juniper does not currently support VRFs using
>IPv6-specific route-targets, nor the IPv6-specific community referenced in
>the flowspec-v6 draft.
>
>-- Jeff
>
>
>----- Forwarded message from IETF Secretariat <ietf-secretariat-reply@ietf.org> -----
>
>Date: Thu, 02 Jul 2015 08:25:01 -0700
>From: IETF Secretariat <ietf-secretariat-reply@ietf.org>
>To: jhaas@pfrc.org
>Subject: Personal ID list of jhaas@pfrc.org notification: Changes on draft-vandevelde-idr-ipv6-flowspec-imp
>
>
>Hello,
>
>This is a notification from the Personal ID list of jhaas@pfrc.org.
>
>Document: draft-vandevelde-idr-ipv6-flowspec-imp,
>https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-vandevelde-idr-ipv6-flowspec-imp
>
>Change:
>New version available: *draft-vandevelde-idr-ipv6-flowspec-imp-02.txt*
>
>Best regards,
>
>        The datatracker draft tracking service
>        (for the IETF Secretariat)
>
>----- End forwarded message -----

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email