Re: [Idr] WG LC for draft-ietf-idr-bgp-open-policy: IPR call and call for implementations

Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl> Thu, 04 June 2020 20:54 UTC

Return-Path: <sander@steffann.nl>
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 F191D3A0F67; Thu, 4 Jun 2020 13:54:23 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.099
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 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, 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 (1024-bit key) header.d=steffann.nl
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 ox8Sog5Tqt7I; Thu, 4 Jun 2020 13:54:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.sintact.nl (mail.sintact.nl [83.247.10.6]) (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 901503A1028; Thu, 4 Jun 2020 13:54:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.sintact.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB3734B; Thu, 4 Jun 2020 22:54:12 +0200 (CEST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=steffann.nl; h= x-mailer:references:in-reply-to:date:date:subject:subject :mime-version:content-type:content-type:message-id:from:from :received:received; s=mail; t=1591304050; bh=/ZQrck10N8+xPewShvh Zfb3WvYTGtmTgD8YsOD6y1AM=; b=XVYl6FyHupyCKsdr/uwR5aZG8dW07vwAAeL dFxc8yLnJ/kY9Df88mmXhY8fve8YlBH32rzUwn+tfpdWhWOvn0Q+QuxlXzYvArzH SlcYnsUJnKwsXxT7SEBtqR552TmUJKtn0dPeqrHY0QzBHgn6fy5zRsDoMby5qO/1 5b9YCv8Y=
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at mail.sintact.nl
Received: from mail.sintact.nl ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.sintact.nl [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id IHHM8LISOk_b; Thu, 4 Jun 2020 22:54:10 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [IPv6:2a02:a213:a300:ce80:982:9556:dfb6:3338] (unknown [IPv6:2a02:a213:a300:ce80:982:9556:dfb6:3338]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mail.sintact.nl (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 17FBA3C; Thu, 4 Jun 2020 22:54:09 +0200 (CEST)
X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett
From: Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl>
Message-Id: <93576186-A547-4620-AA96-7C792A533B9C@steffann.nl>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_8E2ADE29-90B7-47C7-8742-F45348A9A886"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha256
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.80.23.2.2\))
Date: Thu, 4 Jun 2020 22:54:08 +0200
In-Reply-To: <02af01d63a94$1c5ff5b0$551fe110$@ndzh.com>
Cc: Eugene Bogomazov <eb@qrator.net>, "idr@ietf. org" <idr@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-idr-bgp-open-policy@ietf.org
To: Susan Hares <shares@ndzh.com>
References: <017501d62b19$deaf5e60$9c0e1b20$@ndzh.com> <CAH1iCiqT7PPLbv6Mpg=4uvEj_mFP81oC52xXiSV9Gv_wUDsaRg@mail.gmail.com> <CANX+VdDm_cb5i3r+c9gjGHUS6_h5Dn+eMBE1rGhcWJt_8Everg@mail.gmail.com> <02af01d63a94$1c5ff5b0$551fe110$@ndzh.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.80.23.2.2)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/pkXCTKGVh6g3p98XHWoakRHFcok>
Subject: Re: [Idr] WG LC for draft-ietf-idr-bgp-open-policy: IPR call and call for implementations
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: Thu, 04 Jun 2020 20:54:24 -0000

Hi,

> Most important, do these 2 implementation interoperate in your tests?

I just noticed that Mikrotik also implemented the draft in their beta 7:
https://help.mikrotik.com/docs/display/ROS/v7+Routing+Protocol+Status#space-menu-link-content

It would be interesting to see if that interoperates as well.

Cheers,
Sander