Re: [Idr] IPR call for draft-ietf-idr-rpd-11.txt (7/23 to 8/6/2021)

Zhuangshunwan <zhuangshunwan@huawei.com> Mon, 26 July 2021 00:11 UTC

Return-Path: <zhuangshunwan@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 799363A1024 for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 25 Jul 2021 17:11:34 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.895
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.895 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, 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 Ir8JvVjvawxK for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 25 Jul 2021 17:11:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from frasgout.his.huawei.com (frasgout.his.huawei.com [185.176.79.56]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1988C3A1025 for <idr@ietf.org>; Sun, 25 Jul 2021 17:11:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from fraeml740-chm.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.18.147.201]) by frasgout.his.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4GY0R02sDxz6L9WM for <idr@ietf.org>; Mon, 26 Jul 2021 07:59:40 +0800 (CST)
Received: from kwepeml500002.china.huawei.com (7.221.188.128) by fraeml740-chm.china.huawei.com (10.206.15.221) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2176.2; Mon, 26 Jul 2021 02:11:24 +0200
Received: from kwepeml500004.china.huawei.com (7.221.188.141) by kwepeml500002.china.huawei.com (7.221.188.128) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2176.2; Mon, 26 Jul 2021 08:11:23 +0800
Received: from kwepeml500004.china.huawei.com ([7.221.188.141]) by kwepeml500004.china.huawei.com ([7.221.188.141]) with mapi id 15.01.2176.012; Mon, 26 Jul 2021 08:11:23 +0800
From: Zhuangshunwan <zhuangshunwan@huawei.com>
To: Susan Hares <shares@ndzh.com>, "idr@ietf.org" <idr@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [Idr] IPR call for draft-ietf-idr-rpd-11.txt (7/23 to 8/6/2021)
Thread-Index: Add/50R30zrszP22TpCblUwF6Wh7FwBy1jXQ
Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2021 00:11:23 +0000
Message-ID: <b5cb1ce5b7044788976125788c597356@huawei.com>
References: <025001d77fe7$64d93b50$2e8bb1f0$@ndzh.com>
In-Reply-To: <025001d77fe7$64d93b50$2e8bb1f0$@ndzh.com>
Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US
Content-Language: zh-CN
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.108.152.178]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_b5cb1ce5b7044788976125788c597356huaweicom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/eWw-FNhV1nbiU6R4lXSjcRfb8-Y>
Subject: Re: [Idr] IPR call for draft-ietf-idr-rpd-11.txt (7/23 to 8/6/2021)
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, 26 Jul 2021 00:11:35 -0000

I support publication of this draft.

Regards,
Shunwan

From: Idr [mailto:idr-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Susan Hares
Sent: Saturday, July 24, 2021 1:23 AM
To: idr@ietf.org
Subject: [Idr] IPR call for draft-ietf-idr-rpd-11.txt (7/23 to 8/6/2021)

This begins a 2 week WG last call on draft-ietf-idr-rpd-11.txt.

There is one missing IPR statement from Liang Ou.
Liang should send the IPR statements in response to this WG LC.

The implementation report is at:
https://trac.ietf.org/trac/idr/wiki/draft-ietf-idr-rpd%20impolementations%20

The two implementations are different implementations from Huawei.

This document describes BGP Extensions for Routing
   Policy Distribution (BGP RPD) to support this.

Please consider in your review of this draft:
1) if this draft is ready for deployment,
2) if the BGP extensions for routing policy distribution
Help deployments of BGP in the Internet.

Cheerily, Susan Hares