Some comments on draft-boutros-l2vpn-evpn-vpws-04
"Andrew G. Malis" <agmalis@gmail.com> Wed, 23 July 2014 13:14 UTC
Return-Path: <agmalis@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: l2vpn@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: l2vpn@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7CD631B289E for <l2vpn@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 23 Jul 2014 06:14:55 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 b4L_ba82UwQZ for <l2vpn@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 23 Jul 2014 06:14:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qa0-x233.google.com (mail-qa0-x233.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c00::233]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1B02D1B285A for <l2vpn@ietf.org>; Wed, 23 Jul 2014 06:14:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qa0-f51.google.com with SMTP id k15so1211985qaq.10 for <l2vpn@ietf.org>; Wed, 23 Jul 2014 06:14:53 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to:content-type; bh=Ltm97gCyDM+dyPxpyBO9qW4zXo3F7Lk2hFP3i9sRbBg=; b=hiJ5i1+3bB+O9vy1aVwfKVe/D8FjpuuO+Srnuqv35JvmMOysT3iv/sVDi0+NZNZRNP U0fyyyKE9xuVNFZEwh1MF7ajiis22vgec2tyCidkhoGy41ezt+CrWPPTPS7kx0nep0T1 GJ7+YkFPv+4obWfW+cj79JvMIRmTie3BV20OxG7hLs3IEVgFYmrgd76nCfPrCGIw9bL/ b1k71tWp7arZM6vrY19GN7xu3iIWrIsfnmLwXXcOOpHUm8hq/8TMssnzb4M9J7n13bYQ XcU66055UMTY1y3/BH1fU4+PrDphIip14ddQe0lNKn6dCCYte5QoK8ACg/XILYNMJl4z hiZA==
X-Received: by 10.224.96.137 with SMTP id h9mr2086674qan.96.1406121292666; Wed, 23 Jul 2014 06:14:52 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.140.16.22 with HTTP; Wed, 23 Jul 2014 06:14:32 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Andrew G. Malis" <agmalis@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2014 09:14:32 -0400
Message-ID: <CAA=duU0DFumixKCXk5eYHVFWY1+vnaTTSVioKMj=x21Z5-pMhw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Some comments on draft-boutros-l2vpn-evpn-vpws-04
To: "l2vpn@ietf.org" <l2vpn@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a11c2e0a8291bf504fedc20f6"
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/l2vpn/EblTVCmWbyLKS_KWHWBXyeGOR_c
X-BeenThere: l2vpn@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Layer 2 Virtual Private Networks <l2vpn.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/l2vpn>, <mailto:l2vpn-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/l2vpn/>
List-Post: <mailto:l2vpn@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:l2vpn-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/l2vpn>, <mailto:l2vpn-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2014 13:14:55 -0000
This morning I had a chat with Sami about the draft, to follow up on my comments in the l2vpn meeting. One thing we discussed is the commonality between this draft and RFC 6624. That commonality makes it easier for me to support this draft, but I would suggest that a reference to that RFC be added to the draft. In addition, that RFC is Informational, and this draft should be as well, since it's just discussing a particular application for the Standards Track EVPN draft. Talking about RFC 6624, that RFC has the following statement: "...it is recommended that devices implementing the solution described in this document also implement the approach in [RFC4447] and [RFC6074]." This draft should also have a similar statement. Thanks, Andy
- Some comments on draft-boutros-l2vpn-evpn-vpws-04 Andrew G. Malis
- RE: Some comments on draft-boutros-l2vpn-evpn-vpw… Bitar, Nabil N