IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Idr] IPR call and WG LC for draft-ietf-idr-bgpls-srv6-ext-04.txt (11/1/2020 to 11/16/2020)

Susan Hares <shares@ndzh.com> Mon, 02 November 2020 16:29 UTC

Return-Path: <shares@ndzh.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 418DD3A0B73 for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 2 Nov 2020 08:29:28 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 1.224
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.224 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DOS_OUTLOOK_TO_MX=2.845, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, KHOP_HELO_FCRDNS=0.275, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no 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 8d93QucO6imZ for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 2 Nov 2020 08:29:26 -0800 (PST)
Received: from hickoryhill-consulting.com (50-245-122-97-static.hfc.comcastbusiness.net [50.245.122.97]) (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 BA9B53A0EDF for <idr@ietf.org>; Mon, 2 Nov 2020 08:29:16 -0800 (PST)
X-Default-Received-SPF: pass (skip=loggedin (res=PASS)) x-ip-name=50.107.115.222;
From: Susan Hares <shares@ndzh.com>
To: "'Acee Lindem (acee)'" <acee=40cisco.com@dmarc.ietf.org>, idr@ietf.org
References: <045d01d6b0c7$c5eb4900$51c1db00$@ndzh.com> <B27A2389-0994-44FC-B7D1-184C596FFCE6@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <B27A2389-0994-44FC-B7D1-184C596FFCE6@cisco.com>
Date: Mon, 02 Nov 2020 11:29:12 -0500
Message-ID: <07a301d6b135$4cf97c10$e6ec7430$@ndzh.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_07A4_01D6B10B.642548D0"
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0
Thread-Index: AQG9Ozo0iT1RvIbU61nS0IwA0pAXSAD6Mpl1qd/s81A=
Content-Language: en-us
X-Antivirus: AVG (VPS 201102-4, 11/02/2020), Outbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Not-Tested
X-Authenticated-User: skh@ndzh.com
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/zqJKFaqSi-nl5IqJjgxYDHjh1ms>
Subject: Re: [Idr] IPR call and WG LC for draft-ietf-idr-bgpls-srv6-ext-04.txt (11/1/2020 to 11/16/2020)
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, 02 Nov 2020 16:29:28 -0000

Acee:

 

Thank you  for noting that the URL is incorrect.   The correct URL is at:

 

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-idr-bgpls-srv6-ext/

 

Sue 

 

 

From: Idr [mailto:idr-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Acee Lindem (acee)
Sent: Monday, November 2, 2020 7:58 AM
To: Susan Hares; idr@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Idr] IPR call and WG LC for draft-ietf-idr-bgpls-srv6-ext-04.txt (11/1/2020 to 11/16/2020)

 

Hi Sue, IDR WG, 

I support publication of the document. Note that the URL below is for the flex-algo BGP-LS draft. 

Thanks,

Acee

 

From: Idr <idr-bounces@ietf.org> on behalf of Susan Hares <shares@ndzh.com>
Date: Sunday, November 1, 2020 at 10:26 PM
To: IDR List <idr@ietf.org>
Subject: [Idr] IPR call and WG LC for draft-ietf-idr-bgpls-srv6-ext-04.txt (11/1/2020 to 11/16/2020)

 

This begins an IPR call and a 2 week WG LC for 

draft-ietf-idr-bgpls-srv6-ext-04.txt (11/1 to 11/16/2020) 

 

You can access the draft at: 

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-idr-bgp-ls-flex-algo/

 

This draft focus on the BGP-LS support for SRv6. 

Spring has proposed the SRv6 support in RFC8402 

(see section 3.1.3 for mechanisms and section 8.2 for 

Security considerations).  

 

There are two implementations: Cisco and GoBGP 

You can see the implementation report at: 

https://trac.ietf.org/trac/idr/wiki/draft-ietf-idr-bgpls-srv6-ext%20implementations

 

In your responses, please consider the following questions: 

a) Is the SRv6 technology ready for deployment or 

are there known issues? 

 

b) Will SRv6 provide valuable support for 

deployments of BGP-LS in support of source routing 

(aka spring)? 

 

c) Is this draft ready for publication? 

 

If you know of additional implementations, please send

a note to the idr chairs with the information or 

respond to this email. 

 

Cheers, Susan Hares

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email