IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Idr] draft-li-idr-flowspec-rpd-05.txt - WG Adoption call (10/14 to 10/28/2019)

Lizhenbin <lizhenbin@huawei.com> Tue, 29 October 2019 12:21 UTC

Return-Path: <lizhenbin@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 319C6120074 for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 29 Oct 2019 05:21:44 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.199
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.199 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 mI3FsecsJLsq for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 29 Oct 2019 05:21:41 -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 7B876120073 for <idr@ietf.org>; Tue, 29 Oct 2019 05:21:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lhreml709-cah.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.18.7.108]) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTP id 57F52BE0CF6E1F2A0E39 for <idr@ietf.org>; Tue, 29 Oct 2019 12:21:38 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from lhreml714-chm.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.65) by lhreml709-cah.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.32) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.408.0; Tue, 29 Oct 2019 12:21:37 +0000
Received: from lhreml714-chm.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.65) by lhreml714-chm.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.65) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.1713.5; Tue, 29 Oct 2019 12:21:37 +0000
Received: from DGGEMM423-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.1.198.40) by lhreml714-chm.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.65) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_0, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA) id 15.1.1713.5 via Frontend Transport; Tue, 29 Oct 2019 12:21:37 +0000
Received: from DGGEMM512-MBS.china.huawei.com ([169.254.4.14]) by dggemm423-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.1.198.40]) with mapi id 14.03.0439.000; Tue, 29 Oct 2019 20:21:24 +0800
From: Lizhenbin <lizhenbin@huawei.com>
To: Susan Hares <shares@ndzh.com>, 'idr wg' <idr@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [Idr] draft-li-idr-flowspec-rpd-05.txt - WG Adoption call (10/14 to 10/28/2019)
Thread-Index: AdWCvtFpBLL09mJXRVKaSdG0p0gs7gLkvdgg
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2019 12:21:23 +0000
Message-ID: <5A5B4DE12C0DAC44AF501CD9A2B01A8D9352028E@dggemm512-mbs.china.huawei.com>
References: <015d01d582c4$388e04d0$a9aa0e70$@ndzh.com>
In-Reply-To: <015d01d582c4$388e04d0$a9aa0e70$@ndzh.com>
Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US
Content-Language: zh-CN
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.111.206.84]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_5A5B4DE12C0DAC44AF501CD9A2B01A8D9352028Edggemm512mbschi_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/VSGXIxUBMhpkwQQ8Fo6k28LjSik>
Subject: Re: [Idr] draft-li-idr-flowspec-rpd-05.txt - WG Adoption call (10/14 to 10/28/2019)
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: Tue, 29 Oct 2019 12:21:44 -0000

Support as the co-author. We have a long-term discussion with the operators including China Telecom, Tencent, etc. and
several experimental implementations on the traffic steering solutions. In the process we believe BGP-based solutions have
much advantages in scalability, performance, etc. At the same time thanks for advice from the community the design of BGP
extensions are refined well. I think it is the right time for the WG adoption.


Best Regards,
Zhenbin (Robin)




From: Idr [mailto:idr-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Susan Hares
Sent: Tuesday, October 15, 2019 3:19 AM
To: 'idr wg' <idr@ietf.org>
Subject: [Idr] draft-li-idr-flowspec-rpd-05.txt - WG Adoption call (10/14 to 10/28/2019)

This begins a 2 week WG adoption call for draft-li-idr-flowspec-rpd-05.txt
(10/14 to 10/28/2019).  You can access the draft at:

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-li-idr-flowspec-rpd/

In your discussion regarding this draft consider if:


1)      Passing extended policy in BGP  is useful,

2)      Passing policy in wide community atom is a technical sound mechanism,

3)      A deployment need exists for this technology.


Susan Hares
Co-chair and shepherd

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email