Return-Path: X-Original-To: igmp-mld-bis@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: igmp-mld-bis@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F1811200B7 for ; Fri, 31 May 2019 05:59:53 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.009 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.009 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=arista.com 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 BHIUaRLSfeZ5 for ; Fri, 31 May 2019 05:59:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pg1-x536.google.com (mail-pg1-x536.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::536]) (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 21D921200B4 for ; Fri, 31 May 2019 05:59:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pg1-x536.google.com with SMTP id d30so4015379pgm.7 for ; Fri, 31 May 2019 05:59:51 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=arista.com; s=googlenew; h=from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to:cc:to :references; bh=NmmTW+fksJFLHysqZ1Fzcc8Q6ZKB3QI0ShKSAQbrvws=; b=hfZUhvPQ533HIdkGjwIOUnfncH4zSZIrfxnhnos+y7HmRN+T+ctrrxte8EosPt7FBE x6zbezYyL9BzPmG9/WF91Wc9w2g9FkPlU2tL/rV56tzdBoEbdhI2QmlfS8u0/zb6RoKl EVUL2GC7ZNJb8PdgNehIDQlcOTqBdHl7PiRMmofYhRqRbTW7h21Q1dWVDAXV3AkK3ct+ oxBtsjGiWUPHicbr9op1V5T5mQ9nKfmKBipWe7pYde1lwtb6EHbshsgECtP0g8JLraS+ 4qlDx1rjSLdTa805eP9IzkIiOlxFhst+v8JSuwA3mnrnM9kTeE03lY7c5DcI8HWrae9n 1FqA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date :in-reply-to:cc:to:references; bh=NmmTW+fksJFLHysqZ1Fzcc8Q6ZKB3QI0ShKSAQbrvws=; b=JdOqwGer4i4JHZrLm3oxnBFtLSBxhgYPGWa3xd22E+2xKIXbys6FfZj/1CHP8oocgS 5k5JXmyoCNonSxrWGfMpno3AndwfE10IqHwqZAzxXeMLQKITXsynu1WYMzIWI9mGyJ9+ z9oZ27OBX5QrS4Vo4QFupzWCOLJfxLoVlxJ6NyJSEBE2LZ9lUYyzd1QzOyOI/67CiU/P J18K+LL+sfxQUpkfc+/wzshrwblm9R5ZWLK2pbR1PdvzobHYhRH/COyghPa3LHHpkYBL epSJr8LoiT3IZgHY/xoxWqzYeDSmYFXbOO8h8kvWVez3YH01Qp/btCRhOY7wF/XjXpdA F3SA== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAXk8HLC3WMzU3CM91+T0sU7ysbj20mRICdMQM/M6tWPrzzuR48T FfMNljv9zcEh4yjo3RHS1LRJhA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxIQ3+GLJ5b/u3TbAiahRZfll41f7GCRMUkAvQaVDjXxoevUJcFb1fSM6ki0HlcEXyGx6QNOQ== X-Received: by 2002:a63:5009:: with SMTP id e9mr1307023pgb.396.1559307590461; Fri, 31 May 2019 05:59:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [172.16.0.167] ([62.60.61.169]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id c76sm6542816pfc.43.2019.05.31.05.59.48 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 31 May 2019 05:59:49 -0700 (PDT) From: Olufemi Komolafe Message-Id: <82966459-79EF-4160-A3F9-A57381784437@arista.com> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_0DA2D704-F71E-4899-AB07-D74FACD1171A" Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.3 \(3273\)) Date: Fri, 31 May 2019 13:59:46 +0100 In-Reply-To: Cc: Toerless Eckert , "Mankamana Mishra (mankamis)" , "igmp-mld-bis@ietf.org" To: Anish Peter References: <94764FD1-AA9D-475F-A888-ADCF941C0565@arista.com> <9516CE1F-999A-4841-9D77-ABD64C642BE3@cisco.com> <20190501141529.akjsqlqh64x3qnmf@faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de> <5C363D02-6913-4672-82F6-309E10C3E03C@arista.com> <5B00E7A8-F32E-48AC-8CBA-6E0441CD7001@arista.com> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3273) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Igmp-mld-bis] Tomorrow's meeting X-BeenThere: igmp-mld-bis@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 31 May 2019 12:59:53 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_0DA2D704-F71E-4899-AB07-D74FACD1171A Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 > On 29 May 2019, at 14:25, Anish Peter wrote: >=20 > Once again got late! sorry.=20 No probs. Mankamana and I were on the call. We agreed that it=E2=80=99d = be good to try to progress things and contact the WG chairs to get = things moving. I will email the chairs but there are a couple of things we need to nail = down: All, Please have a read of the latest version of the draft = (https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-eckert-pim-igmp-mld-questionnaire-00 = ) = and let me know if there are any other IGMPv3 or MLDv2 features = specified in RFC3376 and RFC3810 respectively other than =E2=80=9Cinclude = list=E2=80=9D and =E2=80=9Cexclude list=E2=80=9D that we should itemise? = Given our objectives, I think it is important that we restrict = ourselves to features explicitly defined in these RFCs. Also, the authors=E2=80=99 affiliations, email addresses etc in the = draft are incomplete. Please can you have a look and let me know if you = want me to make any additions or changes to your information? Toerless, please can you send me the source and I will make these = changes. I=E2=80=99ll create a new revision which I will forward to the = WG chairs. It=E2=80=99d be good to try do this over the next day or so therefore a = prompt response would be appreciated :-) Regards, Femi >=20 > On Wed, May 29, 2019 at 5:08 AM Olufemi Komolafe > wrote: > I think we should try to progress this work over the coming weeks. = Hopefully we can meet tomorrow and discuss next steps. >=20 > I re-read the latest version of the questionnaire and was wondering if = we should spell out what features in the RFCs we are interested in? For = example, in Section 3.1.2, we ask =E2=80=9CWhich IGMPv3 features have = you implemented?=E2=80=9D I can imagine some folks giving answers = referring to what they consider IGMPv3 features (e.g. snooping proxy = etc) that are not actually in the RFCs we are focusing on. Furthermore, = in the PIM survey (RFC7063) the authors actually itemise the features in = RFC4601 in which they are interested. So, to help us be able to better = process the responses, I wonder if we should itemise the features that = we are trying to gauge their popularity? >=20 > Which made me wonder, other than Include list and exclude list, are = there other features we should call out? >=20 > Regards, > Femi >=20 > > On 1 May 2019, at 15:18, Olufemi Komolafe > wrote: > >=20 > > Mankamana, Timothy and myself were on the call. Mankamana is going = to email the chairs to try to determine the next steps to distributing = the questionnaire. > >=20 > > Regards, > > Femi > >=20 > >=20 > >> On 1 May 2019, at 15:15, Toerless Eckert > wrote: > >>=20 > >> Ok, thats the classical excuse until we get rid of DST i guess ;-) > >> I was only 15 minutes late, so i have no real excuse.... ;-) > >>=20 > >> On Wed, May 01, 2019 at 07:35:08PM +0530, Anish Peter wrote: > >>> Very sorry, I happened to join this meeting 1hr late. > >>>=20 > >>> On Tue, Apr 30, 2019 at 6:48 PM Mankamana Mishra (mankamis) < > >>> mankamis@cisco.com > wrote: > >>>=20 > >>>> Sure . > >>>>=20 > >>>> Sent from my iPhone > >>>>=20 > >>>>> On Apr 30, 2019, at 03:01, Olufemi Komolafe >>>> 40arista.com@dmarc.ietf.org > = wrote: > >>>>>=20 > >>>>> I feel we are losing some momentum with this effort and so I = think > >>>> tomorrow when we meet it???d be really good to identify exactly = what remains > >>>> to be done and set some milestones and deadlines. Does that seem > >>>> reasonable? > >>>>>=20 > >>>>> Regards, > >>>>> Femi > >>>>> -- > >>>>> 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 = > >>>>=20 > >>=20 > >>> --=20 > >>> Igmp-mld-bis mailing list > >>> Igmp-mld-bis@ietf.org > >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/igmp-mld-bis = > >>=20 > >>=20 > >> --=20 > >> --- > >> tte@cs.fau.de > >=20 >=20 --Apple-Mail=_0DA2D704-F71E-4899-AB07-D74FACD1171A Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8

On 29 May 2019, at 14:25, Anish = Peter <anish.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:

Once again got late! sorry.

No = probs.  Mankamana and I were on the call.  We agreed that = it=E2=80=99d be good to try to progress things and contact the WG chairs = to get things moving.

I will email = the chairs but there are a couple of things we need to nail = down:

All,
Please have a read of the latest version of the draft (https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-eckert-pim-igmp-mld-questionn= aire-00) and let me know if there are any other IGMPv3 or MLDv2 = features specified in RFC3376 and RFC3810 respectively other than = =E2=80=9Cinclude list=E2=80=9D and =E2=80=9Cexclude list=E2=80=9D that = we should itemise?  Given our objectives, I think it is important = that we restrict ourselves to features explicitly defined in these = RFCs.

Also, = the authors=E2=80=99 affiliations, email addresses etc in the draft are = incomplete.  Please can you have a look and let me know if you want = me to make any additions or changes to your information?

Toerless, please can you = send me the source and I will make these changes.  I=E2=80=99ll = create a new revision which I will forward to the WG chairs.

It=E2=80=99d  be = good to try do this over the next day or so therefore a prompt response = would be appreciated :-)

Regards,
Femi


On Wed, May 29, 2019 at 5:08 AM Olufemi Komolafe = <femi@arista.com> = wrote:
I think we should try to progress = this work over the coming weeks.  Hopefully we can meet tomorrow = and discuss next steps.

I re-read the latest version of the questionnaire and was wondering if = we should spell out what features in the RFCs we are interested = in?  For example, in Section 3.1.2, we ask =E2=80=9CWhich IGMPv3 = features have you implemented?=E2=80=9D I can imagine some folks giving = answers referring to what they consider IGMPv3 features (e.g. snooping = proxy etc) that are not actually in the RFCs we are focusing on.  = Furthermore, in the PIM survey (RFC7063) the authors actually itemise = the features in RFC4601 in which they are interested.  So, to help = us be able to better process the responses, I wonder if we should = itemise the features that we are trying to gauge their popularity?

Which made me wonder,  other than Include list and exclude list, = are there other features we should call out?

Regards,
Femi

> On 1 May 2019, at 15:18, Olufemi Komolafe <femi@arista.com> wrote:
>
> Mankamana, Timothy and myself were on the call.  Mankamana is = going to email the chairs to try to determine the next steps to = distributing the questionnaire.
>
> Regards,
> Femi
>
>
>> On 1 May 2019, at 15:15, Toerless Eckert <tte@cs.fau.de> wrote:
>>
>> Ok, thats the classical excuse until we get rid of DST i guess = ;-)
>> I was only 15 minutes late, so i have no real excuse.... ;-)
>>
>> On Wed, May 01, 2019 at 07:35:08PM +0530, Anish Peter wrote:
>>> Very sorry, I happened to join this meeting 1hr late.
>>>
>>> On Tue, Apr 30, 2019 at 6:48 PM Mankamana Mishra (mankamis) = <
>>> mankamis@cisco.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Sure .
>>>>
>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>
>>>>> On Apr 30, 2019, at 03:01, Olufemi Komolafe = <femi=3D
>>>> 40arista.com@dmarc.ietf.org> = wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> I feel we are losing some momentum with this effort = and so I think
>>>> tomorrow when we meet it???d be really good to identify = exactly what remains
>>>> to be done and set some milestones and deadlines.  = Does that seem
>>>> reasonable?
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> Femi
>>>>> --
>>>>> 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
>>>>
>>
>>> --
>>> Igmp-mld-bis mailing list
>>> Igmp-mld-bis@ietf.org
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/igmp-mld-bis
>>
>>
>> --
>> ---
>> tte@cs.fau.de
>


= --Apple-Mail=_0DA2D704-F71E-4899-AB07-D74FACD1171A--