IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Idr] draft-li-idr-bgp-ls-sbfd-extensions-03.txt - 2 week WG adoption call

Huaimo Chen <huaimo.chen@huawei.com> Thu, 18 April 2019 14:33 UTC

Return-Path: <huaimo.chen@huawei.com>
X-Original-To: idr@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: idr@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 35772120345 for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 18 Apr 2019 07:33:13 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 ypLnE5hcWp-N for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 18 Apr 2019 07:33:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [185.176.76.210]) (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 1C3ED1200DF for <idr@ietf.org>; Thu, 18 Apr 2019 07:33:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lhreml701-cah.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.18.7.108]) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTP id 2425CCAE27E99632A6AC for <idr@ietf.org>; Thu, 18 Apr 2019 15:33:09 +0100 (IST)
Received: from SJCEML703-CHM.china.huawei.com (10.208.112.39) by lhreml701-cah.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.42) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.408.0; Thu, 18 Apr 2019 15:33:07 +0100
Received: from SJCEML521-MBX.china.huawei.com ([169.254.1.117]) by SJCEML703-CHM.china.huawei.com ([169.254.5.85]) with mapi id 14.03.0439.000; Thu, 18 Apr 2019 07:33:03 -0700
From: Huaimo Chen <huaimo.chen@huawei.com>
To: Susan Hares <shares@ndzh.com>, "idr@ietf.org" <idr@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [Idr] draft-li-idr-bgp-ls-sbfd-extensions-03.txt - 2 week WG adoption call
Thread-Index: AdT18PKNf1StrQ3RRRaQiBRQFVL9LwAApx/Q
Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2019 14:33:03 +0000
Message-ID: <5316A0AB3C851246A7CA5758973207D463B9CEED@sjceml521-mbx.china.huawei.com>
References: <015501d4f5f2$7a72ed70$6f58c850$@ndzh.com>
In-Reply-To: <015501d4f5f2$7a72ed70$6f58c850$@ndzh.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.212.245.237]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_5316A0AB3C851246A7CA5758973207D463B9CEEDsjceml521mbxchi_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/9l1BZZBdAC5BDwrteUYxCGXiTas>
Subject: Re: [Idr] draft-li-idr-bgp-ls-sbfd-extensions-03.txt - 2 week WG adoption call
X-BeenThere: idr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Thu, 18 Apr 2019 14:33:13 -0000

Support.

Best Regards,
Huaimo
From: Idr [mailto:idr-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Susan Hares
Sent: Thursday, April 18, 2019 10:25 AM
To: idr@ietf.org
Subject: [Idr] draft-li-idr-bgp-ls-sbfd-extensions-03.txt - 2 week WG adoption call

This begins a 2 week WG adoption call for draft-li-idr-bgp-ls-sbfd-extensions-03.txt.  You can access the document at:

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-li-idr-bgp-ls-sbfd-extensions/

During your comments, please consider the following:


1)      Does adding the announcement of seamless S-BFD descriptors via BGP LS address family benefit network provisioning?

2)      Is it important to keep the same BGP-ls information in OSPF, IS-IS, and BGP regarding S-BFD discriminators?

3)      Is this document mature enough for WG Adoption?

4)      Are there any issues that the WG should consider to help quicken the pace of the adoption?

5)      Do you know of planned implementations?  If so, should is this document mature enough to receive early allocation for the BGP-LS code points.

Remember that raising issues regarding document during WG adoption will help us speed this BGP-LS WG document toward WG LC.

Cheerily, Susan Hares

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email