Re: [Idr] draft-zhou-idr-bgp-srmpls-elp-06 - Adoption call (1/27/2023 to 2/10/2023

liu.yao71@zte.com.cn Mon, 06 February 2023 01:42 UTC

Return-Path: <liu.yao71@zte.com.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 8DBC4C14F74A for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 5 Feb 2023 17:42:20 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.055
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.055 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, CTE_8BIT_MISMATCH=0.84, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id kA57Jze2F_iC for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 5 Feb 2023 17:42:19 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mxhk.zte.com.cn (mxhk.zte.com.cn [63.216.63.40]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2D037C14F693 for <idr@ietf.org>; Sun, 5 Feb 2023 17:42:18 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mse-fl2.zte.com.cn (unknown [10.5.228.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mxhk.zte.com.cn (FangMail) with ESMTPS id 4P98Bt0cmyz8QrkZ; Mon, 6 Feb 2023 09:42:14 +0800 (CST)
Received: from njy2app02.zte.com.cn ([10.40.13.116]) by mse-fl2.zte.com.cn with SMTP id 3161fuoi072136; Mon, 6 Feb 2023 09:41:56 +0800 (+08) (envelope-from liu.yao71@zte.com.cn)
Received: from mapi (njy2app02[null]) by mapi (Zmail) with MAPI id mid203; Mon, 6 Feb 2023 09:41:57 +0800 (CST)
Date: Mon, 06 Feb 2023 09:41:57 +0800
X-Zmail-TransId: 2afa63e05ae563571150
X-Mailer: Zmail v1.0
Message-ID: <202302060941577285708@zte.com.cn>
In-Reply-To: <202301300842453674298@zte.com.cn>
References: BYAPR08MB48725B762B56D0ABE9710E77B3CC9@BYAPR08MB4872.namprd08.prod.outlook.com, 202301300842453674298@zte.com.cn
Mime-Version: 1.0
From: liu.yao71@zte.com.cn
To: shares@ndzh.com, idr@ietf.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-MAIL: mse-fl2.zte.com.cn 3161fuoi072136
X-Fangmail-Gw-Spam-Type: 0
X-FangMail-Miltered: at cgslv5.04-192.168.250.137.novalocal with ID 63E05AF6.000 by FangMail milter!
X-FangMail-Envelope: 1675647734/4P98Bt0cmyz8QrkZ/63E05AF6.000/10.5.228.133/[10.5.228.133]/mse-fl2.zte.com.cn/<liu.yao71@zte.com.cn>
X-Fangmail-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-Fangmail-MID-QID: 63E05AF6.000/4P98Bt0cmyz8QrkZ
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/zRSmCAR6kPrv_YIN6jTYXC1i5NY>
Subject: Re: [Idr] draft-zhou-idr-bgp-srmpls-elp-06 - Adoption call (1/27/2023 to 2/10/2023
X-BeenThere: idr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
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, 06 Feb 2023 01:42:20 -0000

And I support the adoption as co-author.

Regards,
Yao


------------------Original------------------
From: 刘尧00165286
To: SusanHares <shares@ndzh.com>;
Cc: idr@ietf.org <idr@ietf.org>;彭少富10053815;
Date: 2023年01月30日 08:42
Subject: Re: draft-zhou-idr-bgp-srmpls-elp-06 - Adoption call  (1/27/2023 to 2/10/2023
Hi Sue,
I am not aware of any IPR related to this draft.

Yao


------------------Original------------------
From: SusanHares
To: idr@ietf.org ;
Cc: 刘尧00165286;彭少富10053815;
Date: 2023年01月27日 22:26
Subject: draft-zhou-idr-bgp-srmpls-elp-06 - Adoption call  (1/27/2023 to 2/10/2023
" _ue_custom_node_="true">
This adoption begins a two week WG Adoption call for
draft-zhou-idr-bgp-srmpls-elp-06.txt
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-zhou-idr-bgp-srmpls-elp/
The authors should respond to this message with
Email that indicates whether they know of any IPR
related to this draft.
In your discussions please consider if this WG
should approve an  extension to Segment flags defined in the
draft-ietf-idr-segment-routing-te-policy-20.txt .
The existing flags are the following
2.4.4.2.12.  Segment Flags
The Segment Types sub-TLVs described above may contain the following
flags in the "Flags" field defined in Section 6.8:
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|V|A|S|B|       |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 22: Segment Flags
The changes proposed by this draft are the addition
Of an “E” flag to those bits.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|V|A|S|B|E|     |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
E-Flag: This flag, when set, indicates that presence of < ELI, EL>
label pairs which are inserted after this segment.  E-Flag is
applicable to Segment Types A, C, D, E, F, G and H.  If E-Flag
appears with Segment Types B, I, J and K, it MUST be ignored.
Cheerily, Sue