Re: [Igmp-mld-bis] Meet in Montreal?

Hi,

I’ll be there too.

So I believe we have Tim, Toerless, Hitoshi and myself.  Anyone else?

Shall we try to meet on Tuesday, then?  Say at noon?  Anyone that does not suit?

Nice work getting a response to the survey, Hitoshi.

Regards,
Femi

> On 19 Jul 2019, at 11:28, Hitoshi Asaeda <asaeda@ieee.org> wrote:
> 
> Hi folks,
> 
> I'll be there.
> 
> I'm sorry I've not contributed to this draft update.
> I'm not an operator and have no information privately, but I asked one Japanese operator to give some input based on the questionnaire and got it. I hope it can be a good input.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Hitoshi
> 
> 
> ===from here===
> 
> 3.2.  Questionnaire for Network Operators
> 
>   Name: Takatoshi Ikeda
> 
>   Affiliation/Organization: APAN-JP
> 
>   Contact Email: ops@jp.apan.net
> 
>   Do you wish to keep your name and affiliation confidential?:
> 
> 3.2.1.  Deployment Status
> 
>   Which of the following are currently deployed in your network?  And
>   for how long has it been deployed?
> 
>   1.  IGMPv1 [RFC1112] deployed?: N, since:
> 
>   2.  IGMPv2 [RFC2236] deployed?: Y, since:
> 
>   3.  IGMPv3 [RFC3376] deployed?: Y, since:
> 
>   4.  Lightweight IGMPv3 [RFC5790] Implemented: N, since:
> 
>   5.  MLDv1 [RFC2710] deployed?: Y, since:
> 
>   6.  MLDv2 [RFC3810] deployed?: Y, since:
> 
>   7.  Lightweight MLDv2 [RFC5790] deployed?: N, since:
> 
> 3.2.2.  Deployment Specifics
> 
>   1.  Which IGMPv3 features are in use?  (Is Exclude mode with source
>       list in use?)
>        Membership-report for SSM
>        No filter function is used.
> 
> 
>   2.  Which MLDv2 features are in use?  (Is Exclude mode with source
>       list in use?)
>        Membership-report for SSM
>        No filter function is used.
> 
> 
>   3.  Does your network rely on the fallback mechanism between
>       different IGMP versions?  (Between which IGMP versions?)  (What
>       is your experience with this fallback mechanism?)
> 
>        No
> 
>   4.  Are you using equipment with different (multi-vendor)
>       implementations for your deployment?  (Have you encountered any
>       inter-operability or backward-compatibility issues amongst
>       differing implementations?)  (What are your concerns about these
>       issues?)
> 
>       No
> 
> 3.2.3.  Deployment Perspectives
> 
>   1.  What have you found to be the strengths of IGMPv3/MLDv2?
>       Specifying Source for Multicast
> 
>   2.  What have you found to be the weaknesses of IGMPv3/MLDv2?
>       None
> 
>   3.  What suggestions would you make to the PIM WG as it seeks to
>       update these documents?
> 
> ===to here===
> 
> 
>> On Jul 17, 2019, at 4:59, Toerless Eckert <tte@cs.fau.de> wrote:
>> 
>> I hope i can go to IETF105 and would be happy to meet. Have not tried to
>> work out my schedule, but if i am there, it will be whole week.
>> 
>> Who else is coming ?
>> 
>> Cheers
>>   Toerless
>> 
>> On Mon, Jul 15, 2019 at 07:07:55PM +0000, Mankamana Mishra (mankamis) wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>> This IETF I would not be able to make it.
>>> 
>>> Thanks
>>> Mankamana
>>> 
>>> 
>>> From: Igmp-mld-bis <igmp-mld-bis-bounces@ietf.org> on behalf of Timothy Winters <twinters@iol.unh.edu>
>>> Date: Monday, July 15, 2019 at 12:06 PM
>>> To: Olufemi Komolafe <femi=40arista.com@dmarc.ietf.org>
>>> Cc: "igmp-mld-bis@ietf.org" <igmp-mld-bis@ietf.org>
>>> Subject: Re: [Igmp-mld-bis] Meet in Montreal?
>>> 
>>> I'm available Tuesday morning.
>>> 
>>> ~Tim
>>> 
>>> On Sun, Jul 14, 2019 at 3:01 PM Olufemi Komolafe <femi=40arista.com@dmarc.ietf.org<mailto:40arista.com@dmarc.ietf.org>> wrote:
>>> Not sure who is attending IETF 105 in Montreal next week but I was thinking that perhaps those of us attending can fix a time/place to meet up?
>>> 
>>> It might be an idea to meet on Monday or Tuesday, i.e. before the PIM WG meeting on Thursday, to try to progress and finalise the survey?
>>> 
>>> Also, there have been some discussions on the thread recently so it???d be good for folks to please take a look and provide any thoughts/feedback?
>>> 
>>> In my opinion, we should aim to handing over the survey to the WG chairs before the meeting so the focus can shift on to starting the actual mechanics of distributing the survey etc.
>>> 
>>> Regards,
>>> Femi
>>> 
>>> --
>>> Igmp-mld-bis mailing list
>>> Igmp-mld-bis@ietf.org<mailto:Igmp-mld-bis@ietf.org>
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/igmp-mld-bis
>> 
>>> -- 
>>> Igmp-mld-bis mailing list
>>> Igmp-mld-bis@ietf.org
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/igmp-mld-bis
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> ---
>> tte@cs.fau.de
>> 
>> -- 
>> Igmp-mld-bis mailing list
>> Igmp-mld-bis@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/igmp-mld-bis
> 
> -- 
> Igmp-mld-bis mailing list
> Igmp-mld-bis@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/igmp-mld-bis