IETF Logo Mail Archive

[MBONED] draft-zhou-mboned-multrans-path-optimization

Ronald Bonica <rbonica@juniper.net> Wed, 14 March 2012 15:28 UTC

Return-Path: <rbonica@juniper.net>
X-Original-To: mboned@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mboned@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F57121F862F for <mboned@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 14 Mar 2012 08:28:43 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -106.507
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.507 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.092, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, 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 wkgTwjrZdkGW for <mboned@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 14 Mar 2012 08:28:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from exprod7og124.obsmtp.com (exprod7og124.obsmtp.com [64.18.2.26]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2098221F8700 for <mboned@ietf.org>; Wed, 14 Mar 2012 08:28:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from P-EMHUB03-HQ.jnpr.net ([66.129.224.36]) (using TLSv1) by exprod7ob124.postini.com ([64.18.6.12]) with SMTP ID DSNKT2C5Jd6Pq71mYpRvau76WbvN6DcJSvyj@postini.com; Wed, 14 Mar 2012 08:28:38 PDT
Received: from P-CLDFE02-HQ.jnpr.net (172.24.192.60) by P-EMHUB03-HQ.jnpr.net (172.24.192.37) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.3.213.0; Wed, 14 Mar 2012 08:28:10 -0700
Received: from p-emfe01-wf.jnpr.net (172.28.145.24) by p-cldfe02-hq.jnpr.net (172.24.192.60) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.355.2; Wed, 14 Mar 2012 08:28:10 -0700
Received: from EMBX01-WF.jnpr.net ([fe80::1914:3299:33d9:e43b]) by p-emfe01-wf.jnpr.net ([fe80::d0d1:653d:5b91:a123%11]) with mapi; Wed, 14 Mar 2012 11:28:10 -0400
From: Ronald Bonica <rbonica@juniper.net>
To: "mboned@ietf.org" <mboned@ietf.org>
Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2012 11:28:08 -0400
Thread-Topic: draft-zhou-mboned-multrans-path-optimization
Thread-Index: Ac0B9w89Uun9M1/TTc6mIlfsWKf7WQ==
Message-ID: <13205C286662DE4387D9AF3AC30EF456D7683E5E26@EMBX01-WF.jnpr.net>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-EXCLAIMER-MD-CONFIG: e4081efb-6d29-443c-8708-750833aec629
Subject: [MBONED] draft-zhou-mboned-multrans-path-optimization
X-BeenThere: mboned@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Mail List for the Mboned Working Group <mboned.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/mboned>, <mailto:mboned-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/mboned>
List-Post: <mailto:mboned@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mboned-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mboned>, <mailto:mboned-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2012 15:28:43 -0000

Folks,

Is it appropriate to address the problems raised by draft-zhou-mboned-multrans-path-optimization before the AF function has been defined? I could imagine at least one AF behavior that would pre-empt the entire issue.

--------------------
Ron Bonica
//speaking as individual contributor
vcard:       www.bonica.org/ron/ronbonica.vcf

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email