IETF Logo Mail Archive

[mpls] Re: WGLC for draft-ietf-mpls-p2mp-bfd

Mach Chen <mach.chen@huawei.com> Tue, 07 May 2024 02:38 UTC

Return-Path: <mach.chen@huawei.com>
X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A420BC14F6AF; Mon, 6 May 2024 19:38:13 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.893
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.893 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id BWejTpZBJiLY; Mon, 6 May 2024 19:38:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from frasgout.his.huawei.com (frasgout.his.huawei.com [185.176.79.56]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8CA4BC14F5E0; Mon, 6 May 2024 19:38:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.maildlp.com (unknown [172.18.186.216]) by frasgout.his.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4VYMrL2qgsz6D9lV; Tue, 7 May 2024 10:37:38 +0800 (CST)
Received: from lhrpeml100002.china.huawei.com (unknown [7.191.160.241]) by mail.maildlp.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8C617140B73; Tue, 7 May 2024 10:38:05 +0800 (CST)
Received: from dggpemm100001.china.huawei.com (7.185.36.93) by lhrpeml100002.china.huawei.com (7.191.160.241) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.1.2507.39; Tue, 7 May 2024 03:38:04 +0100
Received: from dggpemm500002.china.huawei.com (7.185.36.229) by dggpemm100001.china.huawei.com (7.185.36.93) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.1.2507.35; Tue, 7 May 2024 10:38:02 +0800
Received: from dggpemm500002.china.huawei.com ([7.185.36.229]) by dggpemm500002.china.huawei.com ([7.185.36.229]) with mapi id 15.01.2507.035; Tue, 7 May 2024 10:38:02 +0800
From: Mach Chen <mach.chen@huawei.com>
To: "N.Leymann@telekom.de" <N.Leymann@telekom.de>, "mpls@ietf.org" <mpls@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-mpls-p2mp-bfd@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-mpls-p2mp-bfd@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: WGLC for draft-ietf-mpls-p2mp-bfd
Thread-Index: AdqVR1gPbjbPbrgEQtuDRwxUCzL3wwK3N81A
Date: Tue, 07 May 2024 02:38:02 +0000
Message-ID: <050b1e0317484b86bb7f65ef78c12a43@huawei.com>
References: <BEZP281MB20088433D0354C29599DBC5B98112@BEZP281MB2008.DEUP281.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
In-Reply-To: <BEZP281MB20088433D0354C29599DBC5B98112@BEZP281MB2008.DEUP281.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
Accept-Language: en-US, zh-CN
Content-Language: zh-CN
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.110.46.250]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_050b1e0317484b86bb7f65ef78c12a43huaweicom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID-Hash: VZ2FL7HN4AZS3KW7FKQ3FG4P5AONZHDI
X-Message-ID-Hash: VZ2FL7HN4AZS3KW7FKQ3FG4P5AONZHDI
X-MailFrom: mach.chen@huawei.com
X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; header-match-mpls.ietf.org-0; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header
CC: "mpls-chairs@ietf.org" <mpls-chairs@ietf.org>
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc4
Precedence: list
Subject: [mpls] Re: WGLC for draft-ietf-mpls-p2mp-bfd
List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG <mpls.ietf.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mpls/NuR5NlP2NyOzgOkrig2n_zY247s>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/mpls>
List-Help: <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:mpls-owner@ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:mpls@ietf.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:mpls-join@ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:mpls-leave@ietf.org>

Hi Nic,

I have read the latest version of the draft and believe that it's ready  to move forward, therefore I support the publication of the document.

Some nits: The usage of point-to-multipoint term is not consistent,  some places use point-to-multipoint, some use Point-to-Multipoint, and seems that the "Point-to-Multipoint" is more often used in other documents.

Best regards,
Mach

From: N.Leymann@telekom.de <N.Leymann@telekom.de>
Sent: Tuesday, April 23, 2024 2:45 PM
To: mpls@ietf.org; draft-ietf-mpls-p2mp-bfd@ietf.org
Cc: mpls-chairs@ietf.org
Subject: WGLC for draft-ietf-mpls-p2mp-bfd

Dear WG,

This email starts a two-week working group last call for draft-ietf-mpls-p2mp-bfd:

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-mpls-p2mp-bfd/

Please indicate your support or concern for this draft. If you are opposed to the progression of the draft to RFC, please articulate your concern. If you support it, please indicate that you have read the latest version, and it is ready for publication in your opinion. As always, review comments and nits are most welcome.

Please send your comments to the mpls wg mailing list (mpls@ietf.org<mailto:mpls@ietf.org>).
If necessary, comments may be sent unidirectional to the WG chairs.

This poll runs until the 8th of May 2024.

Thank you,
Nic (for the MPLS WG co-chairs)

v2.46.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status