[Idr] IPR and WG LC for draft-ietf-idr-bgp-ls-flex-algo-04.txt (11/1 to 11/16)

Susan Hares <shares@ndzh.com> Mon, 02 November 2020 02:19 UTC

Return-Path: <shares@ndzh.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 EBAC53A0C37 for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 1 Nov 2020 18:19:32 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 1.224
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.224 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DOS_OUTLOOK_TO_MX=2.845, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, KHOP_HELO_FCRDNS=0.275, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no 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 HJqCv1wxuLu5 for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 1 Nov 2020 18:19:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: from hickoryhill-consulting.com (50-245-122-97-static.hfc.comcastbusiness.net [50.245.122.97]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 669913A0C36 for <idr@ietf.org>; Sun, 1 Nov 2020 18:19:31 -0800 (PST)
X-Default-Received-SPF: pass (skip=loggedin (res=PASS)) x-ip-name=50.107.115.222;
From: "Susan Hares" <shares@ndzh.com>
To: <idr@ietf.org>
Date: Sun, 1 Nov 2020 21:19:26 -0500
Message-ID: <03d401d6b0be$96cde8c0$c469ba40$@ndzh.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_03D5_01D6B094.ADF87D00"
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0
Thread-Index: AdawvMBaghCOE6fURXKxuh9t+EnUOw==
Content-Language: en-us
X-Antivirus: AVG (VPS 201101-6, 11/01/2020), Outbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Not-Tested
X-Authenticated-User: skh@ndzh.com
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/V_tliBP42qPRGBZ9QQnYce_WS88>
Subject: [Idr] IPR and WG LC for draft-ietf-idr-bgp-ls-flex-algo-04.txt (11/1 to 11/16)
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: Mon, 02 Nov 2020 02:19:33 -0000

This begins a 2 week WG LC for  draft-ietf-idr-bgp-ls-flex-algo-04.txt 

(11/1 to 11/16).   

 

The authors should send their IPR statements by Tuesday (11/3)

or this WG LC will be extended 1 extra week. 

 

You can access the draft at: 

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-idr-bgp-ls-flex-algo/

 

This draft is also needed to match BGP work to LSR specification 

for draft-ietf-lsr-flex-algo-13.txt (at IESG). 

 

There are 2 Cisco implementations of draft-ietf-idr-bgp-ls-flex-algo. 

Details on the implementations are at:

https://trac.ietf.org/trac/idr/wiki/draft-ietf-idr-bgp-ls-flex-algo%20implem
entations

 

WG members should consider in their response: 

 

a) Are there technical issues with the flexible algorithm technology? 

b) Is this draft ready for publication? 

c) Will this technology aid LSR deployments? 

d) Are you concerned about the 2 implementations coming 

only from Cisco? 

 

If you know of any other planned implementations, please send 

Chairs this information or respond to this email to inform the WG. 

 

Cheers, Susan Hares