Re: [Idr] WG Adoption call for draft-wang-idr-rd-orf-05.txt (2/4/2021 to 2/18/2021)

Hi, folks,
I have reviewed the document the approach proposed in it is useful for inter-AS VPN deployment and service provisioning, so I support its adoption.
Best regards
Chongfeng

Hi, Susan:

Thanks for your suggestions. More responses from the operators are welcome!
We think this mechanism can let the network cope with dynamically the extraordinary scenarios for VPN routes advertisement, especially the inter-AS Option B/C scenarios. 
This can certainly encourage the widespread deployment of inter-AS option B/C solution(especially for EVPN/VXLAN, EVPN/SRv6) increase the VPN services coverage and revenue of the operators.

There may be some details procedures and device behaviors need to be clarified further, but this is not unsolvable, considering there are so many experts within IDR WG.

Thanks Robert, Jakob, Jim and Acee for the technical challenges to let us/IDRer understand the solution more clearly.

Aijun Wang
China Telecom

> On Feb 13, 2021, at 02:09, Susan Hares <shares@ndzh.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> Acee:
>  
> Yes.  I noticed that fact about operator feedback as well.    As co-chair/shepherd, I welcome all operator input (DC, IXP, carrier, … ) regarding this draft  - both positive and negative.    
>  
> Cheers,  Sue
>  
> From: Acee Lindem (acee) [mailto:acee@cisco.com] 
> Sent: Friday, February 12, 2021 1:02 PM
> To: Susan Hares; idr@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [Idr] WG Adoption call for draft-wang-idr-rd-orf-05.txt (2/4/2021 to 2/18/2021)
>  
> HI Sue,
>  
> From: Idr <idr-bounces@ietf.org> on behalf of Susan Hares <shares@ndzh.com>
> Date: Friday, February 12, 2021 at 12:32 PM
> To: IDR List <idr@ietf.org>
> Subject: Re: [Idr] WG Adoption call for draft-wang-idr-rd-orf-05.txt (2/4/2021 to 2/18/2021)
>  
> Typo error.   Resending for clarity to the authors.
>  
> Greetings:
>  
> In this discussion we do not have consensus on the following things:
>  
> a) the problem this draft is drafting to solve relating to BGP routes,
> b) the need for additional mechanisms to solve the problem,
> c) a clear description of the technology to solve the problem.
>  
> It is difficult to do (b) and (c) without a consensus on the problem.  Since this is the 2nd time this draft has gone up for adoption, the co-chairs are considering the input from the list and will provide some suggestions to the authors.   
>  
> The authors and those who are making comments on this draft are welcome to continue discussing the topic on-list.   
>  
> A big thanks to the operators who have shared their view of the need for the technology and to all IDR members who have recalled that “clear speech and kindness can go together”. 
>  
> I don’t see a lot of support from operators other than the co-authors.
>  
> Thanks,
> Acee
>  
>  
> Cheers, Sue
>  
>   
> _______________________________________________
> Idr mailing list
> Idr@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr

chongfeng.xie@foxmail.com