Return-Path: 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 EB4453A251A for ; Tue, 3 Mar 2020 10:16:36 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.097 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 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, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com 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 RM75uJoNe3jG for ; Tue, 3 Mar 2020 10:16:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-io1-xd33.google.com (mail-io1-xd33.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::d33]) (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 D561B3A2518 for ; Tue, 3 Mar 2020 10:16:34 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-io1-xd33.google.com with SMTP id m22so4657740ioj.7 for ; Tue, 03 Mar 2020 10:16:34 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=qC/bN0hAOPmS5JeXKBaW2yhXwaAfIXXulYHhQheMxsg=; b=DOHnQjYBo3DwrDFlL0z109QWl91GDEmlXVZo3vTzojdQASEmESB4Tbd7MUt+R65i/M CnW9aOSqI42QW1qpj9vgT3jQ9njVbhpLCC4AhLGp/anaCZ1kKKQ/RjIzfSRpz4Fcoec+ fdLi+t2JxZXpdKuqdyJ8ki/iSAb5lIOrgRmKCjKCb3nAoquBmT6mUBXaAQEyy1pQtvFG bLzru939Mv5wpoamK5/qDIkp/eN8o/NB3hN2MSQNTAOeKi/Q4fSAOFNr2dcuwvFKmMdp 3a4MZSqEi+GhID102Ryur8td+m10g5jtrWcuG7pUSQHWS/B6/FhGOVAEvLbedMQPSQAt 0Oyw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=qC/bN0hAOPmS5JeXKBaW2yhXwaAfIXXulYHhQheMxsg=; b=LPjPyRJbQVbbn7GvDgbHZNiS9YugzkAeohl/DQheePj9taj0ZjWiKRTnbAc9w88q7n UlkjX4Bb/dFMTOwhFAVoaSZzOE/8zwbqa1Bv9DNGV3E04XWOog/rdY4oEUrrexoLeSQK zH+xpQdErvsPtALq5FBS2lX2qUGdVNpYHsF4AA4Xc4H6BzkKQ9cBSD2FjjbEkTY+2drA EEklBtnvrpJlxkRoqL4XhQusdIZMnXAkiwnOayHVJ+UwxmpfUth062GO2pbIOMtqCTW/ FMOahwtsXFYujuxRGVIU5NP7JKLu2LbTI2r4o63p91AouAEgLAh8c0VjOrFu3YbhvBc2 NBjQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ANhLgQ3jmtrufSEgap/JsZ0jfjfq9ogE2e7h6NQif6V9Je7h++1aj84u 2r+RXhMqXaTxdCQt+LxtClVOfcWtXGHKWbHDKPMXl3i9 X-Google-Smtp-Source: =?utf-8?q?ADFU+vu6Vj+CUjF6cw/tdtfF7nchR+GgWUvilP7Moe8d?= =?utf-8?q?uEMDZtpWGYZSVtAelqQ6l2CCPDrqygVVN9bo4u8Y85/3DmQ=3D?= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6638:1018:: with SMTP id r24mr5047232jab.133.1583259393972; Tue, 03 Mar 2020 10:16:33 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <000701d5eb18$71a02200$54e06600$@ndzh.com> In-Reply-To: <000701d5eb18$71a02200$54e06600$@ndzh.com> From: Xufeng Liu Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2020 13:16:22 -0500 Message-ID: To: Susan Hares Cc: idr wg Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000c3def9059ff74dac" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Idr] IPR Call for draft-li-idr-flowspec-srv6 X-BeenThere: idr@ietf.org 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: Tue, 03 Mar 2020 18:16:37 -0000 --000000000000c3def9059ff74dac Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I'm not aware of any IPR that applies to this draft. Thanks, - Xufeng On Mon, Feb 24, 2020 at 8:44 AM Susan Hares wrote: > Greetings: > > > > This begins a IPR call for /raft-li-idr-flowspec-srv6-02.txt. The > adoption call will begin after all authors have responded to this email > with an IPR statement. For the authors who have responded before, you wi= ll > need to respond to this email message as well. > > > > A bit thanks to the authors who have waited patiently for the IDR chairs. > > > > For the WG general discussion on IDR flow specification, this call is to > inquiry if this draft=E2=80=99s approach is useful. As has been discuss= ed on the > list, the IETF 107 IDR working group meeting will need to decide if all > additions to flow specification should go into a version 2 > specification. > > > > In order to have a fruitful discussion regarding the amount of additions > for flow specification, we will be calling for the WG to discuss any > potential Flow specification drafts. > > > > Cheers, Sue > _______________________________________________ > Idr mailing list > Idr@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr > --000000000000c3def9059ff74dac Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I'm not aware of any IPR that applies to this dra= ft.

Thanks,
- Xufeng

=
On Mon, Fe= b 24, 2020 at 8:44 AM Susan Hares <shares@ndzh.com> wrote:

Greetings:

=C2=A0<= /u>

This begins a IPR call for /raft-li-idr-flows= pec-srv6-02.txt.=C2=A0 The adoption call will begin after all authors have = responded to this email with an IPR statement.=C2=A0 For the authors who ha= ve responded before, you will need to respond to this email message as well= . =C2=A0

=C2=A0

A bit thanks to the authors who have waited patiently = for the IDR chairs.=C2=A0

= =C2=A0

For the WG general discussion on ID= R flow specification,=C2=A0 this call is to inquiry if this draft=E2=80=99s= approach is useful. =C2=A0=C2=A0As has been discussed on the list, the IET= F 107 IDR working group meeting will need to decide if all additions to flo= w specification should go into =C2=A0a version 2 specification.=C2=A0=C2=A0=

=C2=A0

In order to have a fruitful discussion regarding the amount = of additions for flow specification, we will be calling for the WG to discu= ss any potential Flow specification drafts.

=C2=A0

Cheers, Sue

_______________________________________________
Idr mailing list
Idr@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr
--000000000000c3def9059ff74dac--