Re: [mpls] Poll to see if we have consensus to adopt draft-kompella-mpls-rmr as an MPLS wg dcument
Shahram Davari <davari@broadcom.com> Thu, 01 October 2015 14:06 UTC
Return-Path: <davari@broadcom.com>
X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0FD471A6F2E; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 07:06:44 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.21
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.21 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] 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 T4ljxYJvvaI0; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 07:06:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-gw2-out.broadcom.com (mail-gw2-out.broadcom.com [216.31.210.63]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2ED651A6F2D; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 07:06:41 -0700 (PDT)
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.17,617,1437462000"; d="scan'208";a="76524256"
Received: from irvexchcas06.broadcom.com (HELO IRVEXCHCAS06.corp.ad.broadcom.com) ([10.9.208.53]) by mail-gw2-out.broadcom.com with ESMTP; 01 Oct 2015 07:33:32 -0700
Received: from SJEXCHCAS06.corp.ad.broadcom.com (10.16.203.14) by IRVEXCHCAS06.corp.ad.broadcom.com (10.9.208.53) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.235.1; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 07:06:30 -0700
Received: from SJEXCHMB12.corp.ad.broadcom.com ([fe80::bc15:c1e1:c29a:36f7]) by SJEXCHCAS06.corp.ad.broadcom.com ([::1]) with mapi id 14.03.0235.001; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 07:06:30 -0700
From: Shahram Davari <davari@broadcom.com>
To: Italo Busi <Italo.Busi@huawei.com>
Thread-Topic: [mpls] Poll to see if we have consensus to adopt draft-kompella-mpls-rmr as an MPLS wg dcument
Thread-Index: AQHQ/EzvUDMYkZqn00iPlN0oZIhCn55WrCLV
Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2015 14:06:29 +0000
Message-ID: <7C5724FE-716A-45B6-ACD3-4690B0797E9C@broadcom.com>
References: <mailman.138.1443452463.3777.mpls@ietf.org>, <91E3A1BD737FDF4FA14118387FF6766B155C666A@lhreml504-mbs>
In-Reply-To: <91E3A1BD737FDF4FA14118387FF6766B155C666A@lhreml504-mbs>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mpls/3FgXPB5zIw2ELplR9jKUBF-dZOY>
Cc: "mpls@ietf.org" <mpls@ietf.org>, "mpls-chairs@ietf.org" <mpls-chairs@ietf.org>, "draft-kompella-mpls-rmr@ietf.org" <draft-kompella-mpls-rmr@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [mpls] Poll to see if we have consensus to adopt draft-kompella-mpls-rmr as an MPLS wg dcument
X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG <mpls.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/mpls>, <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/mpls/>
List-Post: <mailto:mpls@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls>, <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2015 14:06:44 -0000
I also Support this draft. Nicely done with almost no configuration. Regards, Shahram > On Oct 1, 2015, at 3:28 PM, Italo Busi <Italo.Busi@huawei.com> wrote: > > Yes, support > > Italo > >> Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2015 19:07:20 +0800 >> From: Loa Andersson <loa@pi.nu> >> To: "mpls@ietf.org" <mpls@ietf.org>, "mpls-chairs@ietf.org" >> <mpls-chairs@ietf.org>, "draft-kompella-mpls-rmr@ietf.org" >> <draft-kompella-mpls-rmr@ietf.org> >> Subject: [mpls] Poll to see if we have consensus to adopt >> draft-kompella-mpls-rmr as an MPLS wg dcument >> Message-ID: <56091F68.8050000@pi.nu> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed >> >> Working Group, >> >> This is to start a two week poll on adopting draft-kompella-mpls-rmr-02 >> as an MPLS working group document. >> >> Please send your comments (support/not support) to the mpls working >> group mailing list (mpls@ietf.org). Please give a technical motivation >> for your support/not support, especially if you think that the document >> should not be adopted as a working group document. >> >> There is currently one IPR disclosure against this document. All the >> authors has stated on the working group mailing that they are unaware >> of any undisclosed IPRs that relates to this draft.. >> >> However if you are on the the mpls working group mailing list and aware >> of IPR that relates to this draft, the time to disclose this is now. >> >> This poll ends October 12, 2015. >> >> /Loa >> mpls wg co-chair >> >> -- >> >> >> Loa Andersson email: loa@mail01.huawei.com >> Senior MPLS Expert loa@pi.nu >> Huawei Technologies (consultant) phone: +46 739 81 21 64 >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 4 >> Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2015 14:29:54 +0000 >> From: Gregory Mirsky <gregory.mirsky@ericsson.com> >> To: Loa Andersson <loa@pi.nu>, "mpls@ietf.org" <mpls@ietf.org>, >> "mpls-chairs@ietf.org" <mpls-chairs@ietf.org>, >> "draft-kompella-mpls-rmr@ietf.org" <draft-kompella-mpls- >> rmr@ietf.org> >> Subject: Re: [mpls] Poll to see if we have consensus to adopt >> draft-kompella-mpls-rmr as an MPLS wg dcument >> Message-ID: >> <7347100B5761DC41A166AC17F22DF112218E5ECE@eusaamb103.ericsson.se> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >> >> yes/support >> >> Regards, >> Greg >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: mpls [mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Loa Andersson >> Sent: Monday, September 28, 2015 4:07 AM >> To: mpls@ietf.org; mpls-chairs@ietf.org; draft-kompella-mpls- >> rmr@ietf.org >> Subject: [mpls] Poll to see if we have consensus to adopt draft- >> kompella-mpls-rmr as an MPLS wg dcument >> >> Working Group, >> >> This is to start a two week poll on adopting draft-kompella-mpls-rmr-02 >> as an MPLS working group document. >> >> Please send your comments (support/not support) to the mpls working >> group mailing list (mpls@ietf.org). Please give a technical motivation >> for your support/not support, especially if you think that the document >> should not be adopted as a working group document. >> >> There is currently one IPR disclosure against this document. All the >> authors has stated on the working group mailing that they are unaware >> of any undisclosed IPRs that relates to this draft.. >> >> However if you are on the the mpls working group mailing list and aware >> of IPR that relates to this draft, the time to disclose this is now. >> >> This poll ends October 12, 2015. >> >> /Loa >> mpls wg co-chair >> >> -- >> >> >> Loa Andersson email: loa@mail01.huawei.com >> Senior MPLS Expert loa@pi.nu >> Huawei Technologies (consultant) phone: +46 739 81 21 64 >> >> _______________________________________________ >> mpls mailing list >> mpls@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 5 >> Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2015 07:45:14 -0700 >> From: "Kathleen Moriarty" <Kathleen.Moriarty.ietf@gmail.com> >> To: "The IESG" <iesg@ietf.org> >> Cc: mpls@ietf.org, draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-relay-reply@ietf.org, >> mpls-chairs@ietf.org >> Subject: [mpls] Kathleen Moriarty's No Objection on >> draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-relay-reply-10: (with COMMENT) >> Message-ID: <20150928144514.27528.79571.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" >> >> Kathleen Moriarty has entered the following ballot position for >> draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-relay-reply-10: No Objection >> >> When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all >> email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this >> introductory paragraph, however.) >> >> >> Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss- >> criteria.html >> for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. >> >> >> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-relay-reply/ >> >> >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> COMMENT: >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> Thanks for your work on this draft. The security review from 6 months >> ago hasn't been fully addressed in the draft and I think it would be >> helpful to do so. There were responses given on list, but >> corresponding updates didn't happen for all of the comments. >> >> https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/secdir/current/msg05301.html >> >> For the first comment, the response was that this mechanism does not >> deprecate use of "Echo Reply". The language in the first paragraph of >> section 3 should be made clear on that point. >> >> For the second comment: >> s4.1: Is the outermost label allowed to be set to 255 to support >> the >> ?ping? mode or must it always be set to 1, 2, etc. to >> support ?traceroute" >> mode - as described in RFC 4379 s4.3? I know s5 is just an >> example >> but it really looks like this extension is just supposed to be for >> fault >> isolation. >> >> The response via email says it is possible to set it to 255, could this >> be made clear in the draft? >> >> The third comment was addressed, thank you. >> >> It was also good to see the security considerations cover path >> discovery as well as DoS related attacks. Thanks for that! >> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 6 >> Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2015 07:55:10 -0700 >> From: "Alia Atlas" <akatlas@gmail.com> >> To: "The IESG" <iesg@ietf.org> >> Cc: mpls@ietf.org, >> draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-reply-mode-simple.shepherd@ietf.org, >> mpls-chairs@ietf.org, >> draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-reply-mode-simple@ietf.org, >> draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-reply-mode-simple.ad@ietf.org, >> rcallon@juniper.net >> Subject: [mpls] Alia Atlas' Yes on >> draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-reply-mode-simple-04: (with COMMENT) >> Message-ID: <20150928145510.31971.547.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" >> >> Alia Atlas has entered the following ballot position for >> draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-reply-mode-simple-04: Yes >> >> When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all >> email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this >> introductory paragraph, however.) >> >> >> Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss- >> criteria.html >> for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. >> >> >> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-reply-mode- >> simple/ >> >> >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> COMMENT: >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> 1) Bottom of page 7: Please describe the meaning of the length field >> in the TLV and whether there is any padding. Alternately (or as well) >> - give a reference that defines these details. >> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 7 >> Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2015 10:57:10 -0400 >> From: "Andrew G. Malis" <agmalis@gmail.com> >> To: Lizhong Jin <lizho.jin@gmail.com> >> Cc: "rtg-ads@ietf.org" <rtg-ads@ietf.org>, "mpls@ietf.org" >> <mpls@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-relay- >> reply.all@ietf.org, >> IETF Discussion <ietf@ietf.org>, "rtg-dir@ietf.org" <rtg- >> dir@ietf.org> >> Subject: Re: [mpls] Last Call: >> <draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-relay-reply-10.txt> (Relayed Echo Reply >> mechanism for LSP Ping) to Proposed Standard >> Message-ID: >> <CAA=duU30D_YoHHx3DWEQBS- >> 7ZnDfWmF=oEt4v43QSNQNdhS2vA@mail.gmail.com> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" >> >> Lizhong, >> >> [Lizhong] I proposed to add the following, and waiting for his >> confirmation. >>> This stack grows downward, with relay node addresses further along >> the >>> LSP appearing lower down in the stack. Please refer to section 4.2 >> for >>> the relay node discovery mechanism. >> >> If this is acceptable to Joel, I'm good with it as well. >> >> Thanks, >> Andy >> -------------- next part -------------- >> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... >> URL: >> <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/mpls/attachments/20150928/e15 >> aedbc/attachment.html> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 8 >> Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2015 11:00:40 -0400 >> From: "Andrew G. Malis" <agmalis@gmail.com> >> To: Lizhong Jin <lizho.jin@gmail.com> >> Cc: "rtg-ads@ietf.org" <rtg-ads@ietf.org>, "mpls@ietf.org" >> <mpls@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-relay- >> reply.all@ietf.org, >> IETF Discussion <ietf@ietf.org>, "rtg-dir@ietf.org" <rtg- >> dir@ietf.org> >> Subject: Re: [mpls] Last Call: >> <draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-relay-reply-10.txt> (Relayed Echo Reply >> mechanism for LSP Ping) to Proposed Standard >> Message-ID: >> <CAA=duU1z+hLZ759TJtjRZOK0s8OsajHcLdzQ0Z- >> OfKvFgrD_QQ@mail.gmail.com> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" >> >> Lizhong, >> >> Responding to myself, I just saw Joel's email, so we're both good with >> this addition. >> >> Thanks, >> Andy >> >> On Mon, Sep 28, 2015 at 10:57 AM, Andrew G. Malis <agmalis@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> Lizhong, >>> >>> [Lizhong] I proposed to add the following, and waiting for his >>>> confirmation. >>>> This stack grows downward, with relay node addresses further along >>>> the LSP appearing lower down in the stack. Please refer to section >>>> 4.2 for the relay node discovery mechanism. >>> >>> If this is acceptable to Joel, I'm good with it as well. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Andy >> -------------- next part -------------- >> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... >> URL: >> <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/mpls/attachments/20150928/d19 >> 42cb3/attachment.html> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Subject: Digest Footer >> >> _______________________________________________ >> mpls mailing list >> mpls@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> End of mpls Digest, Vol 137, Issue 54 >> ************************************* > > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls
- [mpls] Poll to see if we have consensus to adopt … Loa Andersson
- Re: [mpls] Poll to see if we have consensus to ad… Gregory Mirsky
- Re: [mpls] Poll to see if we have consensus to ad… Santosh Esale
- Re: [mpls] Poll to see if we have consensus to ad… Vishnu Pavan Beeram
- Re: [mpls] Poll to see if we have consensus to ad… Ambrose Kwong
- Re: [mpls] Poll to see if we have consensus to ad… weiqiang cheng
- Re: [mpls] Poll to see if we have consensus to ad… Dongjie (Jimmy)
- Re: [mpls] Poll to see if we have consensus to ad… Mach Chen
- Re: [mpls] Poll to see if we have consensus to ad… George Swallow (swallow)
- Re: [mpls] Poll to see if we have consensus to ad… Kireeti Kompella
- Re: [mpls] Poll to see if we have consensus to ad… Nadeau Thomas
- Re: [mpls] Poll to see if we have consensus to ad… Chandrasekar Ramachandran
- Re: [mpls] Poll to see if we have consensus to ad… Huub van Helvoort
- Re: [mpls] Poll to see if we have consensus to ad… Italo Busi
- Re: [mpls] Poll to see if we have consensus to ad… Shahram Davari
- Re: [mpls] Poll to see if we have consensus to ad… LUIS MIGUEL CONTRERAS MURILLO
- [mpls] Closed - Re: Poll to see if we have consen… Loa Andersson