Re: Size of CR in CRH
"Zafar Ali (zali)" <zali@cisco.com> Thu, 21 May 2020 21:51 UTC
Return-Path: <zali@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B95333A0C00 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 21 May 2020 14:51:18 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -9.597
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.597 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, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.com header.b=lbcYSbbG; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.onmicrosoft.com header.b=kESvEZBD
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 J9RllluTuUCA for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 21 May 2020 14:51:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rcdn-iport-1.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-1.cisco.com [173.37.86.72]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0F8F53A0420 for <6man@ietf.org>; Thu, 21 May 2020 14:51:16 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=29985; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1590097876; x=1591307476; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:mime-version; bh=PlHwo472VkCPOnEG8df7silEFOK8GHY+lgOMQjb76zA=; b=lbcYSbbGMnK5mXqk/9le9qiBQ+6EW64YOzN1D9vX863/JI2PUP4sr9Lj psqufS9dMx/28TaWqNjtXoIyXinKV/qNU/W0NfphAoOrqgaXG0RguTp5k XYWmbvI7qt8J7uEkNT6aqxL1wQBV8U6TZwZRsfoAarBUDZSMKmq3MhRO2 E=;
IronPort-PHdr: 9a23:SIALNhVsgHLt/MPwQf1H6EoAPGrV8LGuZFwc94YnhrRSc6+q45XlOgnF6O5wiEPSBN+FufBDhu7WuqT4VHYGp52GtSNKfJ9NUkoDjsMb10wlDdWeAEL2ZPjtc2QhHctEWVMkmhPzMUVcFMvkIVGHpHq04G0QHRj7NQNxPunvHMjZiMHkn+y38ofYNgNPgjf1aLhuLRKw+APWsMRegYZrJqsrjBXTpX4dcOVNzmQuLlWWzBs=
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0BcCADq9sZe/49dJa1cCh0BAQEBCQESAQUFAYIHgSUvUQdvWC8sCoQag0YDjT6YO4FCgRADVQsBAQEMAQEYAQwIAgQBAYREAheBeyQ4EwIDAQELAQEFAQEBAgEFBG2FVgyFcQEBAQEDAQEQER0BASwLAQsEAgEIEQECAQEBIQcDAgICJQsUAwYIAgQOBSKDBAGBfk0DLgECDKYPAoE5iGF2gTKDAQEBBYJJgm4Ygg4DBoE4gmOJXxqBQT+BOByBT34+gmcBAQKBLgEHCwE4CQ0Jgl4zgi2ORg4EgwyGJIp9jyN9CoJTiCmQKR2CYoh8kheaNpNvAgQCBAUCDgEBBYFpImZwcBU7KgGCCgEBMlAYDZBADBeDT4UUhUJ0AjUCBgEHAQEDCXyKQAGBDwEB
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.73,419,1583193600"; d="scan'208,217";a="762586263"
Received: from rcdn-core-7.cisco.com ([173.37.93.143]) by rcdn-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA; 21 May 2020 21:51:12 +0000
Received: from XCH-RCD-002.cisco.com (xch-rcd-002.cisco.com [173.37.102.12]) by rcdn-core-7.cisco.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id 04LLp2qN010145 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Thu, 21 May 2020 21:51:11 GMT
Received: from xhs-rcd-003.cisco.com (173.37.227.248) by XCH-RCD-002.cisco.com (173.37.102.12) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1497.2; Thu, 21 May 2020 16:51:10 -0500
Received: from xhs-rtp-002.cisco.com (64.101.210.229) by xhs-rcd-003.cisco.com (173.37.227.248) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1497.2; Thu, 21 May 2020 16:51:09 -0500
Received: from NAM12-MW2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (64.101.32.56) by xhs-rtp-002.cisco.com (64.101.210.229) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1497.2 via Frontend Transport; Thu, 21 May 2020 17:51:09 -0400
ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=CgbQ1iLXzFK5e6ZqImBFS6EAu0QDGDk7bJZBXNYO6oR3cRn6I0UTgT+6p1IkQXjmcgy12/s4BbcLtfRuRyb+SKRWuMxIzujmxpwMzrCisqvibh3B4vp+FYbXvgARZ0zIKQMHTuPasZ1Kh152RjAe2UWld3OCp0Lz4KqpG9KqvGzzzJo3n6dmi5ZNZHTaofyZfXeZNIRs9CGXVhrMdWbOXLPbaOel0m3LeWHlFfwztMES3JzJKCotNUJJSqcPm/7qu2aiStVgbNZh8FeX+Y21SKa0Kwj6bYVj/Q9DJnZ5upVFi753fLaD9H9DMqIVYQ+Z6j5VS/LaZgS2QKdjxgH6VA==
ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=PlHwo472VkCPOnEG8df7silEFOK8GHY+lgOMQjb76zA=; b=fY7tESq1d/ELy+3jr3we292AG8gxNXXR7Pl+gMPq/QqgtY4D55anthRuqr4U/YIOibHZ3wIAzpv/96sRO62veU6L7DWEg62K1YV+JYyTrBmGCGEFX5PwAEFO5jPRv+Ksu4l7TGHMfiOv/KIPUNIX8ErZ0vp4FaOGxGGmmQkXA0zvxOI4Nk9frlp2Mi2cYABOzw0Ppf0t7H//eW4xQZ+JQgR9MJdH/nSaxDVQvgkhA+sSSjKX4rGF7f7k2WCoxIKA2ybPcyt77SYKXHFrb3OpwmNGWb8PkcA7hdEBB6Kghk6lYEH55cyogMeFBrKa2rqAdqe0qY/1bteVbJqgBs/EBA==
ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=cisco.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=cisco.com; dkim=pass header.d=cisco.com; arc=none
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cisco.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector2-cisco-onmicrosoft-com; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=PlHwo472VkCPOnEG8df7silEFOK8GHY+lgOMQjb76zA=; b=kESvEZBDHyuZzEmiu72QyU1Puay1AUqsOgj4SthOzggNYk9loMMi8POad8VM3vDDoNVnDW3pjrXxGHtd2UcYLDOO9RI6IBeJC4ucgfHTOQ3PGuOI7UGgh3RhIXFq1F1MNVdywOY7X1Vu9FxCBOq2htED8Sm2f4GfSx11cT78X5g=
Received: from DM6PR11MB4692.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:5:2aa::11) by DM6PR11MB3018.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:5:68::11) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.3000.26; Thu, 21 May 2020 21:51:08 +0000
Received: from DM6PR11MB4692.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::fcce:4248:b4d5:470b]) by DM6PR11MB4692.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::fcce:4248:b4d5:470b%5]) with mapi id 15.20.3021.024; Thu, 21 May 2020 21:51:08 +0000
From: "Zafar Ali (zali)" <zali@cisco.com>
To: "Joel M. Halpern" <jmh@joelhalpern.com>
CC: 6man <6man@ietf.org>, "Zafar Ali (zali)" <zali@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: Size of CR in CRH
Thread-Topic: Size of CR in CRH
Thread-Index: AdYvFTreFKnyM7AmR8qG9Oc9YkopMAABO0PwAA/1AwAACJdfgAAEftyAAAk3c4D//8pxAA==
Date: Thu, 21 May 2020 21:51:08 +0000
Message-ID: <3A964FBE-B79C-4E3C-8F76-179752AE6CC2@cisco.com>
References: <C7C2E1C43D652C4E9E49FE7517C236CB02A2BA5D@dggeml529-mbx.china.huawei.com> <DM6PR05MB634888D7D912D561B7F5F0E8AEB70@DM6PR05MB6348.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> <c7b12240-21dd-bb4c-99b6-d590bc298934@foobar.org> <DM6PR05MB63489BBE50753D518C887908AEB70@DM6PR05MB6348.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> <008686B1-3F74-4301-AAA3-6A606F14E93E@cisco.com> <bc2cbec9-6e53-bf97-f9ce-a280e3a96656@joelhalpern.com>
In-Reply-To: <bc2cbec9-6e53-bf97-f9ce-a280e3a96656@joelhalpern.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/16.37.20051002
authentication-results: joelhalpern.com; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;joelhalpern.com; dmarc=none action=none header.from=cisco.com;
x-originating-ip: [47.185.212.154]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 0d8b8a14-a053-4361-9cbe-08d7fdd111a3
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: DM6PR11MB3018:
x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <DM6PR11MB30182E4C2403CC7E408C2E96DEB70@DM6PR11MB3018.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:9508;
x-forefront-prvs: 041032FF37
x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0;
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: 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
x-forefront-antispam-report: CIP:255.255.255.255; CTRY:; LANG:en; SCL:1; SRV:; IPV:NLI; SFV:NSPM; H:DM6PR11MB4692.namprd11.prod.outlook.com; PTR:; CAT:NONE; SFTY:; SFS:(4636009)(39860400002)(376002)(366004)(136003)(346002)(396003)(966005)(66946007)(86362001)(53546011)(64756008)(36756003)(478600001)(66446008)(316002)(66476007)(6506007)(2616005)(8676002)(66556008)(54906003)(6916009)(71200400001)(8936002)(5660300002)(6486002)(166002)(2906002)(107886003)(4326008)(76116006)(186003)(26005)(6512007)(33656002); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101;
x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata: 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
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_3A964FBEB79C4E3C8F76179752AE6CC2ciscocom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 0d8b8a14-a053-4361-9cbe-08d7fdd111a3
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 21 May 2020 21:51:08.0688 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 5ae1af62-9505-4097-a69a-c1553ef7840e
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: njTGZj1btGamOHS6RyWax/5zvZs5w8U57Uq5lLVXOTWXWfiXCoefyoBH8E/0j4NA
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: DM6PR11MB3018
X-OriginatorOrg: cisco.com
X-Outbound-SMTP-Client: 173.37.102.12, xch-rcd-002.cisco.com
X-Outbound-Node: rcdn-core-7.cisco.com
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/TtVFBsGIVtMFnjBfm-9Dj7LxlrQ>
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "IPv6 Maintenance Working Group \(6man\)" <ipv6.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ipv6/>
List-Post: <mailto:ipv6@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 21 May 2020 21:51:19 -0000
Joel, “Re: So, you are criticizing Ron” No, I am questioning adoption poll of an “undercooked” document with a “major” architecture change and technical issues. Yes, I am also questioning lack of an architecture document that was supposed to answer all these questions raised during adoption poll. Yes, I am questioning motivation for removing SRm6 normative reference (as Spring is the only documented use-case)? See https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spring/oevPSxoZ5qxutFDUuJh9Uw22930/ Yes, I am interested to participate in the discussion point raised by Nick. Thanks Regards … Zafar From: "Joel M. Halpern" <jmh@joelhalpern.com> Date: Thursday, May 21, 2020 at 5:03 PM To: "Zafar Ali (zali)" <zali@cisco.com> Cc: 6man <6man@ietf.org> Subject: Re: Size of CR in CRH So you are criticizing Ron for being very responsive to the questions that were raised during the document discussion? That seems rather backwards. And then objecting to private discussions when we all know that is often the most useful way to sort things out. (I have multiple discussions with Darren to help determine what text he could put in to address my concerns with the SRH document. Those were very helpful.) Yours, Joel On 5/21/2020 4:38 PM, Zafar Ali (zali) wrote: Hi Ron, Please include the WG in the discussion. I see there is a lot of “on the fly patching” of an “undercooked” document under adoption poll ☹ This is just another indication why having an architecture document is a must for such a big (data plane) change. Thanks Regards … Zafar *From: *ipv6 <ipv6-bounces@ietf.org<mailto:ipv6-bounces@ietf.org>> on behalf of Ron Bonica <rbonica=40juniper.net@dmarc.ietf.org<mailto:rbonica=40juniper.net@dmarc.ietf.org>> *Date: *Thursday, May 21, 2020 at 10:35 AM *To: *Nick Hilliard <nick@foobar.org<mailto:nick@foobar.org>> *Cc: *6man <6man@ietf.org<mailto:6man@ietf.org>> *Subject: *RE: Size of CR in CRH Nick, Fair enough. Let's initiate a dialog to identify and mitigate the operational complexity. This may require many messages, so let's do that off-line and come back to the mailing list with a summary. Ron Juniper Business Use Only -----Original Message----- From: Nick Hilliard <nick@foobar.org<mailto:nick@foobar.org> <mailto:nick@foobar.org><mailto:nick@foobar.org%3e>> Sent: Thursday, May 21, 2020 6:24 AM To: Ron Bonica <rbonica@juniper.net<mailto:rbonica@juniper.net> <mailto:rbonica@juniper.net><mailto:rbonica@juniper.net%3e>> Cc: 6man <6man@ietf.org<mailto:6man@ietf.org> <mailto:6man@ietf.org><mailto:6man@ietf.org%3e>> Subject: Re: Size of CR in CRH [External Email. Be cautious of content] Ron Bonica wrote on 21/05/2020 03:51: Does having two CRH versions really add operational complexity, given that operators will be advised to run one or another? Why not let the operator choose which version is best for its network? They probably know better than us. yeah, it really does add complexity. I don't see a straightforward way of hiding the implementation details in a configuration grammar, at least not portably across vendors. This means implementing complexity right down the tool chain and creating operational / support awareness about the fact there would be N different varieties of CRH, semantically similar but not the same. If you merge networks with different SID sizes, this will be disruptive because there's no clear migration mechanism between one size and another, so changing SID size would mean a flag day. Probably retooling too. It's not just operational complexity, btw - using multiple SID sizes has a long trail of consequences at a protocol level too. For example, how would you signal this in bgp? Separate afis? Same AFI but different tlvs for each different type? Then how do you handle arbitrage? Tom made some suggestions, but these also have consequences. If the prevailing WG opinion is to make multiple SID size options available, then we need to describe in detail how this is going to work right across the board, and how to minimise the downstream impact. If we don't then this pushes the consequence heap into other peoples' laps and they may not appreciate this. Nick -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org<mailto:ipv6@ietf.org> <mailto:ipv6@ietf.org> Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 -------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org<mailto:ipv6@ietf.org> Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Brian E Carpenter
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Erik Kline
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Joel M. Halpern
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Brian E Carpenter
- CRH and RH0 Darren Dukes (ddukes)
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ron Bonica
- Re: CRH and RH0 Darren Dukes (ddukes)
- Re: CRH and RH0 Bob Hinden
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ron Bonica
- Re: CRH and RH0 otroan
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ron Bonica
- Re: CRH and RH0 otroan
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ron Bonica
- Re: CRH and RH0 otroan
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ron Bonica
- Re: CRH and RH0 Bob Hinden
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ron Bonica
- RE: CRH and RH0 Pengshuping (Peng Shuping)
- Re: CRH and RH0 Tom Herbert
- Re: CRH and RH0 Robert Raszuk
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ron Bonica
- Re: CRH and RH0 Robert Raszuk
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ron Bonica
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ron Bonica
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ron Bonica
- Re: CRH and RH0 Robert Raszuk
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ron Bonica
- Re: CRH and RH0 Robert Raszuk
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ron Bonica
- Re: CRH and RH0 Stewart Bryant
- Re: CRH and RH0 Bob Hinden
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ron Bonica
- Re: CRH and RH0 Tom Herbert
- Re: CRH and RH0 Ole Troan
- Re: CRH and RH0 Darren Dukes (ddukes)
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ron Bonica
- Re: CRH and RH0 Bob Hinden
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ron Bonica
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ketan Talaulikar (ketant)
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ketan Talaulikar (ketant)
- Re: CRH and RH0 otroan
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ron Bonica
- Re: CRH and RH0 Darren Dukes (ddukes)
- Re: CRH and RH0 Tom Herbert
- Re: CRH and RH0 Erik Kline
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ketan Talaulikar (ketant)
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ron Bonica
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ron Bonica
- Re: CRH and RH0 Darren Dukes (ddukes)
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ketan Talaulikar (ketant)
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ketan Talaulikar (ketant)
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ron Bonica
- Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH and… John Scudder
- Re: CRH and RH0 Mark Smith
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Robert Raszuk
- Re: CRH and RH0 Robert Raszuk
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ron Bonica
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ron Bonica
- Re: CRH and RH0 Gyan Mishra
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… S Moonesamy
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Darren Dukes (ddukes)
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Joel M. Halpern
- Re: CRH and RH0 Darren Dukes (ddukes)
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… John Scudder
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Bob Hinden
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Bob Hinden
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… S Moonesamy
- Re: CRH and RH0 Tom Herbert
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ron Bonica
- RE: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Ketan Talaulikar (ketant)
- RE: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Pengshuping (Peng Shuping)
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Darren Dukes (ddukes)
- RE: CRH and RH0 Chengli (Cheng Li)
- RE: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Chengli (Cheng Li)
- Re: CRH and RH0 Robert Raszuk
- Re: CRH and RH0 Stewart Bryant
- Re: CRH and RH0 Robert Raszuk
- Re: CRH and RH0 Stewart Bryant
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Behcet Sarikaya
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Voyer, Daniel
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… 刘毅松
- 答复: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… qinfengwei
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Zafar Ali (zali)
- RE: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Andrew Alston
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Tom Herbert
- RE: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Ron Bonica
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Nick Hilliard
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Zafar Ali (zali)
- Re: [spring] Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was… Robert Raszuk
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… John Scudder
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Fernando Gont
- Shorter SIDs in SR over IPv6 (Re: Adoption call c… Greg Mirsky
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Zafar Ali (zali)
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… John Scudder
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Tom Herbert
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Robert Raszuk
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Mark Smith
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Tom Herbert
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Robert Raszuk
- Size of CR in CRH Bob Hinden
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Templin (US), Fred L
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Bob Hinden
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Templin (US), Fred L
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Tom Herbert
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Nick Hilliard
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Ron Bonica
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Templin (US), Fred L
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Brian E Carpenter
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Nick Hilliard
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Joel M. Halpern
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Bob Hinden
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Wang, Weibin (NSB - CN/Shanghai)
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Andrew Alston
- Re: Size of CR in CRH otroan
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Ron Bonica
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Bob Hinden
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Uma Chunduri
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Ron Bonica
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Tom Herbert
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Ron Bonica
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Tom Herbert
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Ron Bonica
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Ole Troan
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Mark Smith
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Fred Baker
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Ron Bonica
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Tom Herbert
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Robert Raszuk
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Bob Hinden
- On adddress sizing (was: Re: Size of CR in CRH) Toerless Eckert
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Toerless Eckert
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Ron Bonica
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Chengli (Cheng Li)
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Ron Bonica
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Robert Raszuk
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Nick Hilliard
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Ron Bonica
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Ron Bonica
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Zafar Ali (zali)
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Robert Raszuk
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Tom Herbert
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Ron Bonica
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Ron Bonica
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Robert Raszuk
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Ketan Talaulikar (ketant)
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Ron Bonica
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Robert Raszuk
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Ron Bonica
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Tom Herbert
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Robert Raszuk
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Zafar Ali (zali)
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Ron Bonica
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Joel M. Halpern
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Zafar Ali (zali)
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Bob Hinden
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Ron Bonica
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Ron Bonica
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Robert Raszuk
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Robert Raszuk
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Joel M. Halpern
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Pablo Camarillo (pcamaril)
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Joel M. Halpern
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Brian E Carpenter
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Gyan Mishra
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Gyan Mishra
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Wang, Weibin (NSB - CN/Shanghai)
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Ketan Talaulikar (ketant)