Re: [mpls] IPR poll on draft-ietf-mpls-tp-mip-mep-map

Gregory Mirsky <gregory.mirsky@ericsson.com> Tue, 06 November 2012 19:27 UTC

Return-Path: <gregory.mirsky@ericsson.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 0467521F851C for <mpls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 6 Nov 2012 11:27:10 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.598
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id b-1otN5SAjXt for <mpls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 6 Nov 2012 11:27:09 -0800 (PST)
Received: from imr4.ericy.com (imr4.ericy.com [198.24.6.9]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 41BF221F8C25 for <mpls@ietf.org>; Tue, 6 Nov 2012 11:27:09 -0800 (PST)
Received: from eusaamw0707.eamcs.ericsson.se ([147.117.20.32]) by imr4.ericy.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/Debian-9.1ubuntu1) with ESMTP id qA6JW8cd024205; Tue, 6 Nov 2012 13:32:09 -0600
Received: from EUSAAHC006.ericsson.se (147.117.188.90) by eusaamw0707.eamcs.ericsson.se (147.117.20.32) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.3.279.1; Tue, 6 Nov 2012 14:27:01 -0500
Received: from EUSAAMB103.ericsson.se ([147.117.188.120]) by EUSAAHC006.ericsson.se ([147.117.188.90]) with mapi id 14.02.0318.001; Tue, 6 Nov 2012 14:27:01 -0500
From: Gregory Mirsky <gregory.mirsky@ericsson.com>
To: Loa Andersson <loa@pi.nu>, "mpls@ietf.org" <mpls@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-mpls-tp-mip-mep-map@tools.ietf.org" <draft-ietf-mpls-tp-mip-mep-map@tools.ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [mpls] IPR poll on draft-ietf-mpls-tp-mip-mep-map
Thread-Index: AQHNu/vWDlKD9aB0dkCMHDC0/wbCX5fc8F3w
Date: Tue, 06 Nov 2012 19:27:00 +0000
Message-ID: <7347100B5761DC41A166AC17F22DF112F1C7@EUSAAMB103.ericsson.se>
References: <5098CF68.2000105@pi.nu>
In-Reply-To: <5098CF68.2000105@pi.nu>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [147.117.188.135]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_7347100B5761DC41A166AC17F22DF112F1C7EUSAAMB103ericssons_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: "mpls-chairs@tools.ietf.org" <mpls-chairs@tools.ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [mpls] IPR poll on draft-ietf-mpls-tp-mip-mep-map
X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Tue, 06 Nov 2012 19:27:10 -0000

Dear Authors, Editors, WG chairs, et al.,
Please kindly consider my notes below as WG LC on draft-ietf-mpls-tp-mip-mep-map-03:
*       Section 3
*       Note that RFC 6371 refers to per-interface MEP as Up and Down (Section 3.3, p.15) whereas in this document per-interface MIPs referred as in- and out-. I think that both types of Maintanence Points (MP) must use one terminology in regard to location in per-interface model.
*       Section 4.
*       I believe that CV operation can be performed only between MEPs, not between MEP and MIP, as stated in the document.
      * I think that "diagnostic tests" is bit too open-ended and would suggest considering making this bullet more specific or removing it altogether.

        Regards,
                Greg

-----Original Message-----
From: mpls-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Loa Andersson
Sent: Tuesday, November 06, 2012 12:51 AM
To: mpls@ietf.org; draft-ietf-mpls-tp-mip-mep-map@tools.ietf.org
Cc: mpls-chairs@tools.ietf.org; MPLS-TP ad hoc team
Subject: [mpls] IPR poll on draft-ietf-mpls-tp-mip-mep-map

Working Group,

the authors of draft-ietf-mpls-tp-mip-mep-map have indicated that the draft is ready for working group last call.

Before we start the working group last call an IPT poll is needed.

This is to start the IPR Poll.

Are you aware of any IPR that applies to draft-ietf-mpls-tp-mip-mep-map?

If so, has this IPR been disclosed in compliance with IETF IPR rules (see RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669 and 5378 for more details).

If you are listed as a document author or contributor please respond to this email regardless of whether or not you are aware of any relevant IPR. The response needs to be sent to the MPLS wg mailing list. The documents will not advance to the next stage until a response has been received from each author and contributor.

If you are on the MPLS WG email list but are not listed as an author or contributor, then please explicitly respond only if you are aware of any IPR that has not yet been disclosed in conformance with IETF rules.


Thanks, Loa
(as MPLS WG co-chair)


--


Loa Andersson                         email: loa.andersson@ericsson.com
Sr Strategy and Standards Manager            loa@pi.nu
Ericsson Inc                          phone: +46 10 717 52 13
                                              +46 767 72 92 13 _______________________________________________
mpls mailing list
mpls@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls