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

"" <> Sat, 13 February 2021 06:41 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 32F203A0EE6 for <>; Fri, 12 Feb 2021 22:41:31 -0800 (PST)
X-Quarantine-ID: <4Gx5FX3enP7Y>
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Amavis-Alert: BAD HEADER SECTION, Duplicate header field: "Message-ID"
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.095
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.095 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.982, T_KAM_HTML_FONT_INVALID=0.01, T_SPF_TEMPERROR=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4Gx5FX3enP7Y for <>; Fri, 12 Feb 2021 22:41:26 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 88DC93A0EE5 for <>; Fri, 12 Feb 2021 22:41:25 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=s201512; t=1613198481; bh=LlBBqAdStvzkEBmLwgVVJB43zpBRbc02YLBieKZwRIo=; h=Date:From:To:Subject; b=bF/YrWq9fv7ivWMTvYojGNSG+1/67H4VvsJi+p907DWZPWn6O6SRxgY4AjWJhWeCW o0KRZuBG6WqbWyUOHdDUs5+m4Vcr6fCsoto368v23X9lPYrV1+XICRgNQfkV/Y/6jQ 1zNj8Ao0RKpb0WUg+U8s9YOybTegDRRKCkuyoqo4=
Received: from DESKTOP-UGG3TED ([]) by (NewEsmtp) with SMTP id A53858A4; Sat, 13 Feb 2021 14:41:19 +0800
X-QQ-mid: xmsmtpt1613198479tv8lxcwwl
Message-ID: <>
X-QQ-XMAILINFO: N7jtdtKmrjVv62VAo0xyEzXc8XW5o7eiVAi1Q/qSTBe77hh7jgC9JZD47PpqbA VFQdTPfHWidEq0azSGVXsXfbiMAq1Jd8Z3VXoOxmwwJ3pOkNfnI6P55Ag2UxtwA8caU1SWsYpqsd hmnt6S1P7TB9iJB9bJnt+LEm0dSf0vvGP2adTIGCc+IjJpL3tW91mBKtAtMvM7zxoILyRnIdFGhu 5uU0nyQ6BiZ61JDMHOfz3MPPFJE+pJzzLyZNYITcQ1a4Fb7Os9OrFXfevKoAiXPHb6VQK5K4xYCa M8zcPlX3axKjjn2tqAt9WMGd2ndzant0ONw9MJdFqPDDMe8fZ6tPonMngk8IfJp1KoKw+T6G2690 rBk+syAe5PmMaFL86yoyYyjo0vD5M3XLWpei6K77Py+nlzpW+ZxeXgaNxaAz6uFBV3FsSR3n4FEL ZUi3w3KdbTISAmgdjIR2wZVDFvVSsZlW5igrlcO3nA3N/H/jOAzUYlSgDH7d7eB2Ez4FQJQVmsVz vSvo675RIcq2d2hOqHMr7BBKU2kImCZ4nsrkDDsvqinJThHrIzGVe5Vhtetdmv16PP4wcCnPVEjZ 6GArvKSLXf9ajCIq3BUIAKQ78LZYcw7fBqlZpjtEe62cZK4Zdm9u3k81z0Ce3hGqULLqq9mlF6F3 ji/vu118UViV+sEgg7aLytX7Om2few/VOYKyGFY7PzBd8It3VzZ2M+g8puscUOs+CKD3LS04eXFw SkZLIn+PMzMUr2NZA2FBd3vCGK9zf1xKzsnVW5MwFthTsEsMqzngUf1lwF0HDxYGnorKrcoihg2J O7pbfnuaT0sS7BIhvGOKKbjcI55mtk5bY=
Date: Sat, 13 Feb 2021 14:41:20 +0800
From: "" <>
To: idr <>, wangaijun <>
X-Priority: 3
X-GUID: A858D599-7170-4249-A172-7BE3740687FD
X-Has-Attach: no
X-Mailer: Foxmail[cn]
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_001_NextPart666686278130_=----"
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [Idr] WG Adoption call for draft-wang-idr-rd-orf-05.txt (2/4/2021 to 2/18/2021)
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Inter-Domain Routing <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 13 Feb 2021 06:41:31 -0000

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

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 <> 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) [] 
> Sent: Friday, February 12, 2021 1:02 PM
> To: Susan Hares;
> 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 <> on behalf of Susan Hares <>
> Date: Friday, February 12, 2021 at 12:32 PM
> To: IDR List <>
> 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