Re: [Idr] WG Adoption call for draft-wang-idr-rd-orf-05.txt (2/4/2021 to 2/18/2021)

Aijun Wang <wangaijun@tsinghua.org.cn> Sat, 13 February 2021 02:31 UTC

Return-Path: <wangaijun@tsinghua.org.cn>
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 847E13A123D for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 12 Feb 2021 18:31:54 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.918
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.918 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-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 F4yZtnZXrmg9 for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 12 Feb 2021 18:31:51 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-m17638.qiye.163.com (mail-m17638.qiye.163.com [59.111.176.38]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 529183A123C for <idr@ietf.org>; Fri, 12 Feb 2021 18:31:49 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [240.0.0.1] (unknown [106.121.176.3]) by mail-m17638.qiye.163.com (Hmail) with ESMTPA id 8034E1C0124; Sat, 13 Feb 2021 10:31:46 +0800 (CST)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-56280D12-748F-4A5A-A670-68F08458B429
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Aijun Wang <wangaijun@tsinghua.org.cn>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
Date: Sat, 13 Feb 2021 10:31:45 +0800
Message-Id: <B1CE12E0-7A35-4BCF-AF79-AE87E3DC714D@tsinghua.org.cn>
References: <01bf01d7016a$135cd0d0$3a167270$@ndzh.com>
Cc: "Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee@cisco.com>, idr@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <01bf01d7016a$135cd0d0$3a167270$@ndzh.com>
To: Susan Hares <shares@ndzh.com>
X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (18D52)
X-HM-Spam-Status: e1kfGhgUHx5ZQUtXWQgYFAkeWUFZS1VLWVdZKFlBSkxLS0o3V1ktWUFJV1 kPCRoVCBIfWUFZTh9KSh0fHk5ITE0YVkpNSkhKQ0hOS01NQklVEwETFhoSFyQUDg9ZV1kWGg8SFR 0UWUFZT0tIVUpKS0JITVVLWQY+
X-HM-Sender-Digest: e1kMHhlZQR0aFwgeV1kSHx4VD1lBWUc6MEk6KCo4Gj8JOS0pTjZRMA82 Kh0aCxJVSlVKTUpISkNITktMS01KVTMWGhIXVQwaFRwaEhEOFTsPCBIVHBMOGlUUCRxVGBVFWVdZ EgtZQVlKS01VSklKVUpMTVVIWVdZCAFZQUpJSUxCNwY+
X-HM-Tid: 0a77993ad85ed993kuws8034e1c0124
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/oehfUugxciLJo4oSNflTUtTh-kU>
Subject: Re: [Idr] WG Adoption call for draft-wang-idr-rd-orf-05.txt (2/4/2021 to 2/18/2021)
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: Sat, 13 Feb 2021 02:31:55 -0000

Hi, Susan:

Thanks for your suggestions. More responses from the operators are welcome!
We think this mechanism can let the network cope with dynamically the extraordinary scenarios for VPN routes advertisement, especially the inter-AS Option B/C scenarios. 
This can certainly encourage the widespread deployment of inter-AS option B/C solution(especially for EVPN/VXLAN, EVPN/SRv6) increase the VPN services coverage and revenue of the operators.

There may be some details procedures and device behaviors need to be clarified further, but this is not unsolvable, considering there are so many experts within IDR WG.

Thanks Robert, Jakob, Jim and Acee for the technical challenges to let us/IDRer understand the solution more clearly.

Aijun Wang
China Telecom

> On Feb 13, 2021, at 02:09, Susan Hares <shares@ndzh.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> Acee:
>  
> Yes.  I noticed that fact about operator feedback as well.    As co-chair/shepherd, I welcome all operator input (DC, IXP, carrier, … ) regarding this draft  - both positive and negative.    
>  
> Cheers,  Sue
>  
> From: Acee Lindem (acee) [mailto:acee@cisco.com] 
> Sent: Friday, February 12, 2021 1:02 PM
> To: Susan Hares; idr@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [Idr] WG Adoption call for draft-wang-idr-rd-orf-05.txt (2/4/2021 to 2/18/2021)
>  
> HI Sue,
>  
> From: Idr <idr-bounces@ietf.org> on behalf of Susan Hares <shares@ndzh.com>
> Date: Friday, February 12, 2021 at 12:32 PM
> To: IDR List <idr@ietf.org>
> Subject: Re: [Idr] WG Adoption call for draft-wang-idr-rd-orf-05.txt (2/4/2021 to 2/18/2021)
>  
> Typo error.   Resending for clarity to the authors.
>  
> Greetings:
>  
> In this discussion we do not have consensus on the following things:
>  
> a) the problem this draft is drafting to solve relating to BGP routes,
> b) the need for additional mechanisms to solve the problem,
> c) a clear description of the technology to solve the problem.
>  
> It is difficult to do (b) and (c) without a consensus on the problem.  Since this is the 2nd time this draft has gone up for adoption, the co-chairs are considering the input from the list and will provide some suggestions to the authors.   
>  
> The authors and those who are making comments on this draft are welcome to continue discussing the topic on-list.   
>  
> A big thanks to the operators who have shared their view of the need for the technology and to all IDR members who have recalled that “clear speech and kindness can go together”. 
>  
> I don’t see a lot of support from operators other than the co-authors.
>  
> Thanks,
> Acee
>  
>  
> Cheers, Sue
>  
>   
> _______________________________________________
> Idr mailing list
> Idr@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr