[Idr] Shepherds Writeup for draft-ietf-idr-add-paths-implementation-00
"Russ White" <russw@riw.us> Fri, 10 April 2015 14:20 UTC
Return-Path: <russw@riw.us>
X-Original-To: idr@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: idr@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E4EF01B36B5 for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 10 Apr 2015 07:20:20 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.91
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham
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 eApA8OgkoU7U for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 10 Apr 2015 07:20:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from server.riw.us (server.riw.us [162.144.32.236]) (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 8BC3A1B36B2 for <idr@ietf.org>; Fri, 10 Apr 2015 07:20:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from 162-229-180-77.lightspeed.rlghnc.sbcglobal.net ([162.229.180.77]:53183 helo=RussPC) by server.riw.us with esmtpsa (TLSv1.2:DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.85) (envelope-from <russw@riw.us>) id 1YgZn5-0000Ip-LG for idr@ietf.org; Fri, 10 Apr 2015 14:20:15 +0000
From: Russ White <russw@riw.us>
To: 'idr wg' <idr@ietf.org>
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 2015 10:20:10 -0400
Message-ID: <02b901d07399$74460200$5cd20600$@riw.us>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 15.0
Thread-Index: AQGFJA1PMYtbQ8iGnY6rpqAm20Jpjw==
Content-Language: en-us
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - server.riw.us
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - riw.us
X-Get-Message-Sender-Via: server.riw.us: authenticated_id: russw@riw.us
X-Source:
X-Source-Args:
X-Source-Dir:
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/_pe8V621Fu9PfdXEqM0GeBqvK_s>
Subject: [Idr] Shepherds Writeup for draft-ietf-idr-add-paths-implementation-00
X-BeenThere: idr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Fri, 10 Apr 2015 14:20:21 -0000
Y'all -- Shepherds writeup for draft-ietf-idr-add-paths-implementation-00 below. Russ == 1. Summary The document shepherd is Russ White. The responsible Area Director is Alvaro Retana. This document documents the current implementation state for a set of extensions to BGP so a BGP speaker can advertise multiple paths rather than a single best path to peers. These additional paths are intended to used to eliminate path oscillation, in a number of situations where advertising multiple paths can improve network convergence, and in a number of situations where BGP is used in "high fan out" equal cost multipath network topologies to provide optimal path availability. 2. Review and Consensus There has been no controversy over this document, which simply indicates how many implementations of these extensions there are, and which specific capabilities have been included in those implementations. The document shows widespread implementation of the features described. The working group has reached concensus on moving this document forward. 3. Intellectual Property Each author has confirmed conformance with BCP 78/79. There are no IPR disclosures on the document. 4. Other Points There are no normative downrefs in this document. There are no additions to the YANG model based on the extensions described in this draft. There are no changes to any IANA registry as a result of this draft.