Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments
Edward Crabbe <edc@google.com> Wed, 15 August 2012 18:26 UTC
Return-Path: <edc@google.com>
X-Original-To: irs-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: irs-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A7CD11E80BA for <irs-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 15 Aug 2012 11:26:58 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.809
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.809 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.167, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id YGV4pPoYdEKa for <irs-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 15 Aug 2012 11:26:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-gh0-f172.google.com (mail-gh0-f172.google.com [209.85.160.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 39E0B11E808A for <irs-discuss@ietf.org>; Wed, 15 Aug 2012 11:26:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by ghbg16 with SMTP id g16so2287683ghb.31 for <irs-discuss@ietf.org>; Wed, 15 Aug 2012 11:26:55 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type:x-system-of-record; bh=PW4AZ2qeDYBwv6vSaIpKmWtk/nTRxyCSa3SN5Ptbgeo=; b=l/TKNNVvIDrbvVjGdx+3MzjgLyeNXhMOt66welLrxDydLE0HsoL1/xAjpiQkGvx3M0 n7dOe6dqL/b4p79CRqscWKhJQ0vgTu7nKz9kk5aleVj66TrHY0hGbzmrbE9LtDN22y6V vF+jKBLlfpFeG0fWHloyqNA3kpcZVKi/fNKexGCQgAOQTeKMqCNPVyjVDnG+ysyYOrpF CZgUtrBS6AVhtBocqUJ2aSrHaVUfXoPcVta7AsGgAu7BjSitxfTsTpHrRdZKesJxTKRg gFJHRrFeKur1PfXX+PYjboB4e9PbjybtaCV06XoNwp/hlTjVl0w4h0PfW+IatZG6Odth NWfg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type:x-system-of-record:x-gm-message-state; bh=PW4AZ2qeDYBwv6vSaIpKmWtk/nTRxyCSa3SN5Ptbgeo=; b=btPrcfKeqphsaRR1gOgCK3kE81nHrVAYfWzBXNDimz7moQdZNEjfW+EmuNRulQbiop 8/dYS9kkl7/O1OzI9QFPk7gPKQor//5lDbhTyGQTqULkotN1MwX5xSBC3HWjoI8wf5wt KfcT26oZPeWy9FKlwIunT5AoZMOq7OHpBIllnsIClk5sa1lpAkjnyDJ1dkHoRfXujkLs AqV4lvk9TstIEliihzQPLNBvgAeZQzU+TSTTX7Udms8ydzqlvSPn4I8GWeW2nT4dcnAX xWIeNC+7oxamSXpD2rCX+ttbWVR6JkIB+03p/iwMFJjkzDT7V9mJ8EvxOYvQ5bLyoEP6 Ns6Q==
Received: by 10.43.45.200 with SMTP id ul8mr18970265icb.36.1345055214677; Wed, 15 Aug 2012 11:26:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.43.45.200 with SMTP id ul8mr18970238icb.36.1345055214437; Wed, 15 Aug 2012 11:26:54 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.50.237.67 with HTTP; Wed, 15 Aug 2012 11:26:13 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <B37E6A2CE5957F4E83C1D9845A0FFE38014A33C0A0@MDWEXGMB02.ciena.com>
References: <812700A304640D4292205D5E83FC59E1061C211D@p-embx01-eq.jnpr.net> <CAG=JvvjYk_E6+Qdidyyjc5oDss9HeA2aq2pt5ciQeX06fuiWsQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAG4d1reLL2_4KRb6yseJK9WTB47YzumMBGdu+UwcOWXxmE0M8Q@mail.gmail.com> <CAG=JvvjVhGsVcSzEFxDKKfNckQxgQiWeezWvwpcoAOSgOP--Nw@mail.gmail.com> <CAG4d1rd_p6x_+PsHWtsYU=oOCT-GnmnZNL+MHcJf4NEG5boP7A@mail.gmail.com> <B37E6A2CE5957F4E83C1D9845A0FFE38014A33BC4A@MDWEXGMB02.ciena.com> <CAG4d1reWGjUU-z=9Gx_MvetAWF6wM8oUMpQRc9hxOg1MU37X_w@mail.gmail.com> <A3C4E51A53661B4EBEE7C5F5E6FCDEB5025AB94FE6D2@USEXCHANGE.corp.extremenetworks.com> <CAG4d1rfD8_0WgzRqH-OVAxfn1RYNfY_ynwkcmqN3MBYyrn5TnQ@mail.gmail.com> <3512BB31280C39448A9880F61DD54CEB09C07E@xmb-aln-x09.cisco.com> <CAG4d1rcvk1RmRmrpCwiAGx9s0v3X9aPECdeF1Wz7WSuYwzdFKA@mail.gmail.com> <CACKN6JH8eiYty3QOZ+E5Nt0wO3nYn87yB3pKixJK-3dnaOXfLQ@mail.gmail.com> <CACKN6JFMZqOnHU=vEkx8WxwSLjg5MYY=-VoJ7uOt8SAzvbAT6Q@mail.gmail.com> <A3C4E51A53661B4EBEE7C5F5E6FCDEB5025AB94FE847@USEXCHANGE.corp.extremenetworks.com> <B37E6A2CE5957F4E83C1D9845A0FFE38014A33C0A0@MDWEXGMB02.ciena.com>
From: Edward Crabbe <edc@google.com>
Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2012 11:26:13 -0700
Message-ID: <CACKN6JEBj7AuOn9H_rdn4gSbMoiV5ZNL806yVrakMRKjE1qTVA@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Shah, Himanshu" <hshah@ciena.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="bcaec529972f4285f804c75212ee"
X-System-Of-Record: true
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQklVAhkl0T8h7NcAkPs5JEIrbdezpnyZ69D6u4eOoWCJkTfba33DjGC0bKdSISH/1c2q4Vk5gTd79DmLK09R0V1sCU7YNRI8dlPwg0kJOkZlMR41bsFvWRDBM9R9bH15h/br3/h4UOP6YsirGYPUsciwn8Bhe2vyn+MFRX/K7Zld/qAhDTOQHcr8XapBMvTY2l6IULR
Cc: Olen Stokes <ostokes@extremenetworks.com>, "irs-discuss@ietf.org" <irs-discuss@ietf.org>, "David Lake (dlake)" <dlake@cisco.com>, Alia Atlas <akatlas@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments
X-BeenThere: irs-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Interface to The Internet Routing System \(IRS\)" <irs-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/irs-discuss>, <mailto:irs-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/irs-discuss>
List-Post: <mailto:irs-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:irs-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/irs-discuss>, <mailto:irs-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2012 18:26:58 -0000
It's not clear to me that IRS has 'tentacles' (;)) in the LFIB... Is this the case? And if so, I guess I'll repeat the question I asked after Alia's presentation in the RTG meeting: will there be a mechanism to negotiate and specify encapsulation types as well as form FECs etc? On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 11:21 AM, Shah, Himanshu <hshah@ciena.com> wrote: > *I will let Ed clarify on what he means by “controller” .* > > * * > > *But here is my view of “application”, “controller”, “use-case” etc etc, * > > * * > > *When an XaaS processes a request it takes into consideration of > availability of the CPU, memory, application data, cost of power, etc. to > instantiate a VM on some host machine.* > > *One additional resource taken into consideration is the availability > and/or requirement of the network connectivity between the resources* > > *such as VM, application data, requester, etc.* > > * * > > *The provider of XaaS thingy is the application server.* > > *(Centralized) Network “Controller(s)” knows current state of network > infrastructure and (to be decided how much it) controls member network > nodes using IRS.* > > *The “use case” here is to be able to dynamically create L2/L2.5/L3 > connectivity with specific TE characteristics between the (perhaps > geographically dispersed) resource points.* > > * * > > *In hierarchical fashion: Application server <- (application interface) > -> Network Controller <- (IRS) -> Network Node* > > * * > > *As we heard at IETF, IRS has tentacles in network nodes from BGP > policies, all the way down to FIBs/LFIBs/ACL.* > > * * > > *So we need use cases for which applications would require accessibility > to –* > > *BGP Policies* > > *RIB* > > *LSDB ( I saw an email which talks about reducing IGP to link > distribution protocol and running SPF in centralized network controller)* > > *LIB* > > *FIB* > > *ACL (this is perhaps obvious)* > > *Etc etc* > > * * > > *I broad brushed and simplified a lot here to express my view – not sure > if this jives with others.* > > * * > > */Himanshu* > > * * > > * * > > * * > > * * > > * * > > * * > > * * > > * * > > *From:* irs-discuss-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:irs-discuss-bounces@ietf.org] > *On Behalf Of *Olen Stokes > *Sent:* Wednesday, August 15, 2012 1:30 PM > *To:* Edward Crabbe; Alia Atlas > *Cc:* David Lake (dlake); irs-discuss@ietf.org > > *Subject:* Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments**** > > ** ** > > Thanks. Can you also give us what you mean by “controller”. **** > > ** ** > > Olen**** > > ** ** > > *From:* Edward Crabbe [mailto:edc@google.com] > *Sent:* Wednesday, August 15, 2012 1:24 PM > *To:* Alia Atlas > *Cc:* David Lake (dlake); Olen Stokes; irs-discuss@ietf.org > *Subject:* Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments**** > > ** ** > > s/wg/pre-BOF proto-wg :P/g **** > > On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 10:22 AM, Edward Crabbe <edc@google.com> wrote:*** > * > > +1 Alia. There's been a lot of confusion over this term. Having gone a > few rounds with folks on this one in other forums, I'll point out that what > most people mean by application (myself included) is some set of control > software (a scheduler, a path optimizer etc) that provides instructions to > the controller, which are in turn translated to the appropriate PDUs.**** > > ** ** > > Having 'end user' applications request/make changes to forwarding state > without an intermediate broker/aggregator acting on their behalf sounds > like a recipe for disaster for operational networks, or, as is more likely, > a quick hike to the protocol grave yard (followed by a long grave-side > party :P) for the wg. **** > > ** ** > > my 2c. **** > > ** ** > > On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 8:48 AM, Alia Atlas <akatlas@gmail.com> wrote:**** > > Hi David, > > We do need to clarify what is meant by an application. I would not > expect that real user-land applications would talk directly to routing > devices via IRS. I can see that going through an intermediary. The > IRS abstractions are unlikely to be as high-level as user-land > applications would want and the security and policy issues would get > exciting. > > Clarifying what applications are more in-scope initially is part of > where use-cases will help. Can you write up ones to > categorize/describe your thoughts? > > Alia**** > > > On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 11:40 AM, David Lake (dlake) <dlake@cisco.com> > wrote: > > As another newbie to this, I have some questions about "application > vendors." > > > > Who is the target audience here ? That will determine what > functionality and abstraction of the network we need to expose to that > "application." > > > > This presently appears to be a little confused - at least in my mind. > The draft talks very much as if the application we are addressing is an > OSS/BSS system, essentially provisioning from the domain owner. > > > > However, linking this to the wider goals of SDN as voiced by > customers/users at the first Open Network Summit, there appears to be a > desire for cross-domain and user-land application integration. > > > > At this level - as an example giving a content cache the ability to > ensure delivery of an HD video to an end user - the application will not be > interested in the underlying topology of the network; it will need to know > that application X can be delivered with parameters Y between reading from > the content store to delivery to the user's browser. How the stream > traverses the infrastructure is immaterial. > > > > Are we intending that IRS satisfies BOTH these requirements (i.e. for > ALL applications ?), or should we be more prescriptive about which > application space we are addressing ? > > > > Thanks > > > > David > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: irs-discuss-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:irs-discuss-bounces@ietf.org] > On Behalf Of Alia Atlas > > Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2012 7:23 AM > > To: Olen Stokes > > Cc: irs-discuss@ietf.org > > Subject: Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments > > > > I have not specifically heard from application vendors about this. > > My current plan is that we focus on a Use-Cases draft and define within > that some motivating use-cases that we agree are good first targets. Those > can drive which subset of functionality we focus on. > > > > More use-cases are, of course, quite welcome. Posting them to the > mailing list is a good first start. Russ White is starting the general > use-cases draft based on the three use-cases that he sent to the list. > > > > Alia > > > > On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 9:43 AM, Olen Stokes < > ostokes@extremenetworks.com> wrote: > >> Are there applications vendors out there that already have specific > requirements for what this " subset of the data-models for sub-interfaces" > should be? > >> > >> Olen > >> > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: irs-discuss-bounces@ietf.org > >> [mailto:irs-discuss-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Alia Atlas > >> Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2012 9:08 AM > >> To: Shah, Himanshu > >> Cc: Gert Grammel; irs-discuss@ietf.org; Lenny Giuliano; Thomas Nadeau; > >> Alia Atlas; Scott Whyte > >> Subject: Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments > >> > >> Hi Himanshu, > >> > >> Welcome. I agree that IRS isn't going to spring into being fully > >> formed - I expect that we'll focus on a subset of the data-models for > sub-interfaces along with an associated protocol (whether that is a new one > or extending an existing one). > >> > >> Alia > >> > >> On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 7:41 AM, Shah, Himanshu <hshah@ciena.com> > wrote: > >>> Newbie to this discussions list and have read only a last couple of > mails, so pardon the repeat if somebody has already raised the following as > a concern. > >>> > >>> I realize we are early in IRS architecture definition but one thing to > keep in mind is the user experience. > >>> We need to make sure that exposed interface to > >>> RIB/LFIB/FIB/IGPs/BGP/LSDBs etc etc provide a consistent predictive > action/response/events even when different implementations has varying > capabilities. > >>> > >>> At the moment it seems like a wild wild west. > >>> Perhaps IRS can be defined in phases starting with a simpler, limited > version.. > >>> > >>> Thanks, > >>> himanshu > >>> > >>> > >>> -----Original Message----- > >>> From: irs-discuss-bounces@ietf.org > >>> [mailto:irs-discuss-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Alia Atlas > >>> Sent: Monday, August 13, 2012 8:41 AM > >>> To: Scott Whyte > >>> Cc: Thomas Nadeau; Gert Grammel; Alia Atlas; Lenny Giuliano; > >>> irs-discuss@ietf.org > >>> Subject: Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments > >>> > >>> ...snip... > >>> > >>> On Fri, Aug 10, 2012 at 9:03 PM, Scott Whyte <swhyte@google.com> > wrote: > >>>> On Fri, Aug 10, 2012 at 5:16 PM, Alia Atlas <akatlas@gmail.com> > wrote: > >>> > >>>>> I do think it is important to have the RIB as an arbitration > mechanism > >>>>> on the device. Russ's suggestion that for the RIB sub-interface, > the > >>>>> IRS agent might communicate logically to an IRS routing process > >>>>> gives good semantics and interactions. Obviously, implementations > >>>>> may differ. > >>>> > >>>> As long as the arbitration mechanism is reconfigurable by the > >>>> operator to whatever precedence they want, I agree. Its not clear > >>>> to me if various RIB implementations treat all proffered routes the > >>>> same, nor if they store the same meta-data with all protocol sources. > >>>> So there needs to be some way for the operator to leverage exposed > >>>> protocol-specific optimizations, without conflict from the other > >>>> routing processes, if they so desire. OTOH if it can all be done > >>>> via static routes, it seems much simpler. :) > >>> > >>> Clearly the IRS sub-interface for the RIB needs to introduce/define > the different precedences; my assumption is that it would be per route with > a well-defined small set of meta-data. This is part of where having good > use-cases will help us understand what behavior is necessary. The static > routes do seem like a simpler case to start with. > >>> > >>> Alia > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> irs-discuss mailing list > >>> irs-discuss@ietf.org > >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/irs-discuss > >> _______________________________________________ > >> irs-discuss mailing list > >> irs-discuss@ietf.org > >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/irs-discuss > > _______________________________________________ > > irs-discuss mailing list > > irs-discuss@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/irs-discuss > _______________________________________________ > irs-discuss mailing list > irs-discuss@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/irs-discuss**** > > ** ** > > ** ** >
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Thomas Nadeau
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Gert Grammel
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Alia Atlas
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Gert Grammel
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Alia Atlas
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Thomas Nadeau
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Lin Han
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Thomas Nadeau
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Thomas Nadeau
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Lin Han
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Alia Atlas
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Lin Han
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Susan Hares
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Robert Raszuk
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Thomas Nadeau
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Gert Grammel
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Scott Whyte
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Susan Hares
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Gert Grammel
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Alia Atlas
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Scott Whyte
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Alia Atlas
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Shah, Himanshu
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Alia Atlas
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Olen Stokes
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Alia Atlas
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments David Lake (dlake)
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Alia Atlas
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Dutta, Pranjal K (Pranjal)
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Alia Atlas
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Dutta, Pranjal K (Pranjal)
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments David Lake (dlake)
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Edward Crabbe
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Edward Crabbe
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Olen Stokes
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Alia Atlas
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Alia Atlas
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments David Lake (dlake)
- Re: [irs-discuss] 答复: 答复: IRS comments Thomas Nadeau
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Alia Atlas
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Edward Crabbe
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Shah, Himanshu
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Edward Crabbe
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Olen Stokes
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Edward Crabbe
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Robert Raszuk
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Alia Atlas
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Alia Atlas
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Alia Atlas
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Alia Atlas
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Shah, Himanshu
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments UTTARO, JAMES
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Lin Han
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Shah, Himanshu
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Alia Atlas
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Alia Atlas
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Alia Atlas
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Alia Atlas
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Dutta, Pranjal K (Pranjal)
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Shah, Himanshu
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Shah, Himanshu
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Dutta, Pranjal K (Pranjal)
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Alia Atlas
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Alia Atlas
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Alia Atlas
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Dutta, Pranjal K (Pranjal)
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Ramon Casellas
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Shah, Himanshu
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Shah, Himanshu
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Dutta, Pranjal K (Pranjal)
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Alia Atlas
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Alia Atlas
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Alia Atlas
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Dutta, Pranjal K (Pranjal)
- [irs-discuss] 答复: IRS comments Mach Chen
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Alia Atlas
- Re: [irs-discuss] 答复: IRS comments Alia Atlas
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Dutta, Pranjal K (Pranjal)
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Dutta, Pranjal K (Pranjal)
- [irs-discuss] 答复: 答复: IRS comments Mach Chen
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Alia Atlas
- Re: [irs-discuss] 答复: 答复: IRS comments Alia Atlas
- [irs-discuss] 答复: 答复: 答复: IRS comments Mach Chen
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Dutta, Pranjal K (Pranjal)
- Re: [irs-discuss] 答复: 答复: IRS comments Thomas Nadeau
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Acee Lindem
- Re: [irs-discuss] 答复: 答复: IRS comments Susan Hares
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Edward Crabbe
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Alia Atlas
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Edward Crabbe
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Edward Crabbe
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Alia Atlas
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Dutta, Pranjal K (Pranjal)
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Edward Crabbe
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Dutta, Pranjal K (Pranjal)
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Dutta, Pranjal K (Pranjal)
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Edward Crabbe
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Dutta, Pranjal K (Pranjal)
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Edward Crabbe
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Alia Atlas
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Thomas Nadeau