Re: [Lsvr] WGLC for draft-ietf-lsvr-bgp-spf-05 (to end October 7, 2019)

Matt Anderson <matt@mattanderson.net> Tue, 01 October 2019 17:38 UTC

Return-Path: <the.maanderson@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: lsvr@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: lsvr@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A9A781208CB for <lsvr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 1 Oct 2019 10:38:35 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.477
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.477 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.172, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.25, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
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 2ld-ZbdDYX8r for <lsvr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 1 Oct 2019 10:38:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ot1-f43.google.com (mail-ot1-f43.google.com [209.85.210.43]) (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 CE247120883 for <lsvr@ietf.org>; Tue, 1 Oct 2019 10:38:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ot1-f43.google.com with SMTP id 67so12312525oto.3 for <lsvr@ietf.org>; Tue, 01 Oct 2019 10:38:32 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:reply-to :from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=jFqmtE/Rwu8jfI+YAiIz82DqKkNePjE+r5VZNmCtD/s=; b=H3e0brkyetxhfPyCbsXrOyN56kBsuFoZeOKZ0vaDJ36SfvTi6ycm++xvo2NCrMHVkP Tlu0At7DB+nkNxBgjfuAWl73Z6tbwpNy3xsLQAYARNMlXwK6/RRw1lIJqGOeSBzogPAw F2raat+EnO1cMuiAFxzvQombhEM1FMXv4IzEIrXGP+5FSzElVr9OhzYydJ1i8E7Pcv76 Z83eCIfon87z9WM/0EowW5VtsdGC/psX4ojsUr2ZHccqUbZlTSWppgXkpErBsoGunkkU kRG6Qd4uFfnq7K3Zzk0ZpTy0BJS+RPp1yMqH52kJ4/bUscBQ7l4emKI7ZFg2Q+c39JIw aTJw==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAWKbbTiaSMcccTi/Alqnl3SLDfkePBxEkehWXSgdbIhPhaFPG6O u6oubpUJ/wRZ4L0Vjc29eCk83lDLBOwRlxA6KyA=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwtM5ADTkO9+Qt2pS35DuM2RF77gS5CE56pbTaxjJhHFbdkvYQdlm1r8ojCKQO7ZTk7OdSAQED4QXuyOD4B6UY=
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6830:1292:: with SMTP id z18mr19717363otp.7.1569951511941; Tue, 01 Oct 2019 10:38:31 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <AB04EC86-01F5-41B3-A830-5DF5F898D5BD@arrcus.com>
In-Reply-To: <AB04EC86-01F5-41B3-A830-5DF5F898D5BD@arrcus.com>
Reply-To: matt@mattanderson.net
From: Matt Anderson <matt@mattanderson.net>
Date: Tue, 1 Oct 2019 10:38:21 -0700
Message-ID: <CAAWndM1XSBnS2tCmKe+8jwgFx2sVdJx=zXNvKmCpRSGS6_vmQA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Satish Mynam <satishm@arrcus.com>
Cc: "lsvr@ietf.org" <lsvr@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000002f156d0593dcd258"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lsvr/lfzCg8pcW9Xib5VFvhkv9pOoBlA>
Subject: Re: [Lsvr] WGLC for draft-ietf-lsvr-bgp-spf-05 (to end October 7, 2019)
X-BeenThere: lsvr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Link State Vector Routing <lsvr.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/lsvr>, <mailto:lsvr-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/lsvr/>
List-Post: <mailto:lsvr@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:lsvr-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsvr>, <mailto:lsvr-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 01 Oct 2019 17:38:42 -0000

I read v05 before, and appreciate the v06 updates regarding the Node Status
TLV and mechanism to exclude a node from transit.

I support the draft for the flexibility it gives to existing MSDCs with RFC
7938-like deployments to improve scale and convergence performance, as well
as to greenfield scenarios where an functional alternative to an IGP is
being considered.


On Fri, Sep 27, 2019 at 6:52 PM Satish Mynam <satishm@arrcus.com>; wrote:

> I support the draft as it helps in the Dense CLOS and MSDC Data Center
> Topologies with the additional NLRI and  SPF algorithm in  BGP best-path
> Decision.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Satish
>
>
>
>
>
> Bhav Par <bhavpar9@gmail.com>; Tue, 24 September 2019 17:23 UTCShow header
> <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/lsvr/>
>
> I support this draft.
>
>
>
> thanks,
>
> Bhavani
>
>
>
> On Sun, Sep 22, 2019 at 8:53 PM Van De Velde, Gunter (Nokia - BE/Antwerp) <
>
> gunter.van_de_velde@nokia.com>; <gunter.van_de_velde@nokia.com&gt>;; wrote:
>
>
>
> > [corrected date typo]
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Hi All,
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > The LSVR WG starts a fresh working group last call for “draft-ietf-lsvr-bgp-spf-05”. Please send your comments to the list before Monday October 7.
>
> >
>
> > (This is a 2nd WGLC following first WGLC 3-17 December 2018)
>
> >
>
> > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-lsvr-bgp-spf/
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Authors, please reply on-list indicating if you're aware of any relevant IPR.
>
> >
>
> > All, please reply on-list indicating if you're aware of an implementation.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Brgds,
>
> >
>
> > Gunter & Victor
>
> >
>
> > LSVR WG co-chairs
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > _______________________________________________
>
> > Lsvr mailing list
>
> > Lsvr@ietf.org
>
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsvr
>
> >
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Lsvr mailing list
> Lsvr@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsvr
>
-- 
Matt