[Idr] 答复: WG Adoption call for drafts for Flow Specification option 1 (RFC5575 additions (filters/actions) 3/25 to 4/8/2016

[Liangqiandeng <[e-mail]>]

Hi Sue, John,

I support adoption of followings, and I would discuss more for them.
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-eddy-idr-flowspec-packet-rate/
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-hao-idr-flowspec-nvo3/
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-liang-idr-bgp-flowspec-label/
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-yong-idr-flowspec-mpls-match/
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-litkowski-idr-flowspec-interfaceset/
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-hao-idr-flowspec-redirect-tunnel/
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-li-idr-flowspec-redirect-generalized-sid/
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-vandevelde-idr-flowspec-path-redirect/

Regards,
Qiandeng

·¢¼þÈË: Idr [mailto:[e-mail]] ´ú±í Susan Hares
·¢ËÍʱ¼ä: 2016Äê4ÔÂ2ÈÕ 10:31
ÊÕ¼þÈË: 'Steven Cheung (stecheun)'
³­ËÍ: 'idr@ietf. org'
Ö÷Ìâ: Re: [Idr] WG Adoption call for drafts for Flow Specification option 1 (RFC5575 additions (filters/actions) 3/25 to 4/8/2016

Steven:

Can you provide some insight into why you consider the
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-vandevelde-idr-flowspec-path-redirect/

specific enough to consider for option one while others posting on this list do not consider it specific enough?

Sue

From: Idr [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of Steven Cheung (stecheun)
Sent: Friday, April 01, 2016 9:45 PM
To: Susan Hares
Cc: 'idr@ietf. org'
Subject: Re: [Idr] WG Adoption call for drafts for Flow Specification option 1 (RFC5575 additions (filters/actions) 3/25 to 4/8/2016

Hi, Sue, John,

Support: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-vandevelde-idr-flowspec-path-redirect/

Thanks.
-Steven

From: Idr <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>> on behalf of Susan Hares <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>
Date: Friday, March 25, 2016 at 7:47 AM
To: "'idr@ietf. org'" <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>
Subject: [Idr] WG Adoption call for drafts for Flow Specification option 1 (RFC5575 additions (filters/actions) 3/25 to 4/8/2016

IDR WG:

This begins a 2 week WG Call (3/25 to 4/8/2016) for the set of drafts to be considered in RFC5575 additions. These options are filters, actions or critical security additions.  The flow specification work has been a part of the interims since IETF 94
https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/interim/2016/02/08/idr/proceedings.html
https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/interim/2016/03/07/idr/proceedings.html

There will be a brief flow specification presentation at IETF 95, and the email list has select to start with option 1 ¨C extending RFC5575.  We also will be gathering details on the SDN/NFV use case for option 2 (new NLRI and Wide Communities support).

This is a group call for the drafts to be considered in the flow specification work.  For each of the drafts you wish to be considered Option 1, please indicate:


1)      If this option is valuable for the DDoS deployments or another critical deployments,

2)      Do you feel this draft is useful, but not ready for adoption,

3)      Do you feel this draft is a good start for this work.

The drafts to consider are:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-eddy-idr-flowspec-packet-rate/
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-hao-idr-flowspec-nvo3/
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-hao-idr-flowspec-redirect-tunnel/
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-li-idr-flowspec-redirect-generalized-sid/
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-liang-idr-bgp-flowspec-label/
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-litkowski-idr-flowspec-interfaceset/
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-vandevelde-idr-flowspec-path-redirect/
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-yong-idr-flowspec-mpls-match/

And for the ordering of these filters and actions drafts ¨C the Option 1 section out of this
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-hares-idr-flowspec-combo/
(A revised draft with just Option 1 will be posted)

Sue Hares and John Scudder