IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [OSPF] draft-ppsenak-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse

"Ahmed Bashandy (bashandy)" <bashandy@cisco.com> Thu, 30 March 2017 19:17 UTC

Return-Path: <bashandy@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E919C129464 for <ospf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 30 Mar 2017 12:17:13 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.522
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.522 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.com
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 GUh0uuydjp0n for <ospf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 30 Mar 2017 12:17:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rcdn-iport-8.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-8.cisco.com [173.37.86.79]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8755D129455 for <ospf@ietf.org>; Thu, 30 Mar 2017 12:17:10 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=6974; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1490901430; x=1492111030; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:references:in-reply-to: mime-version; bh=iJivScEYNghOw7w7+Qgdqlsb0H3gZamvEJOeGZ6j6Ec=; b=IQY5y6G5m6pLciJrDmninIEEg4kjoimdyx4lqc+Jq24wvbyD6ECFBWWz Lx5+VIDsR4bp1mpHkDY/48rm534iEbbOBJmyX1rTu4R96BVKLQrqC0+AC RI+Nu7pn1j2TU75RKkZFGvno71d17um/Mh9vVHzCt7DOxN3NNBTptIANj E=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0BtAgBhWN1Y/4QNJK1dGQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBBwEBAQEBgm5oYYELB4NbihGRVJAfgyKCD4IOhiICGoMePxgBAgEBAQEBAQFrKIUVAQEBAQMjClwCAQgRBAEBKAMCAgIwFAkIAgQBEgiKA64KgiaKVQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAR2LPYRrH4JQgl8FnGoBkkaRQJNsAR84PkdbFYcadYkCgQ0BAQE
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.36,248,1486425600"; d="scan'208,217";a="225004489"
Received: from alln-core-10.cisco.com ([173.36.13.132]) by rcdn-iport-8.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA; 30 Mar 2017 19:17:09 +0000
Received: from XCH-RTP-016.cisco.com (xch-rtp-016.cisco.com [64.101.220.156]) by alln-core-10.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id v2UJH9XH008188 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Thu, 30 Mar 2017 19:17:09 GMT
Received: from xch-rtp-020.cisco.com (64.101.220.160) by XCH-RTP-016.cisco.com (64.101.220.156) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1210.3; Thu, 30 Mar 2017 15:17:08 -0400
Received: from xch-rtp-020.cisco.com ([64.101.220.160]) by XCH-RTP-020.cisco.com ([64.101.220.160]) with mapi id 15.00.1210.000; Thu, 30 Mar 2017 15:17:08 -0400
From: "Ahmed Bashandy (bashandy)" <bashandy@cisco.com>
To: Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net>, "ospf@ietf.org" <ospf@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [OSPF] draft-ppsenak-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse
Thread-Index: AQHSqYoGoZHAvRygIkay36g4N17tNaGtwScQ
Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2017 19:17:08 +0000
Message-ID: <318d901fdd4d40c794d79b1e5864e094@XCH-RTP-020.cisco.com>
References: <CA+b+ERkC4h4FY8zrFwbED-hWcQ8YkCOa_zfya6J50pOmSBnFiA@mail.gmail.com> <CA+b+ERm3vebcL2ft_g4870uRN9S_VkXR_-JAWdqueQsPGyFhQQ@mail.gmail.com> <CA+b+ER=KwTOcwsvuoBoD3eim7dkMgSfUtdX-z6B2dU9dmP0aeg@mail.gmail.com> <CA+b+ERkKj=VKNSLW=A_gurMZtZ-sFtvHZdB8r1mTTz77LOcWBg@mail.gmail.com> <CA+b+ERnrVPJyw8RmvD6+3td2eE2q4KZ4-LkcVxL9pk9Km0EK=A@mail.gmail.com> <CA+b+ERmdFbg_cFjysHQwkLY-+i1ERL9u+hEeVThStkhEi9gYxw@mail.gmail.com> <CA+b+ER=+UNUtzamduonsTs3WkZsadSCCa_-6dMb6DCvwyTMDRQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CA+b+ER=+UNUtzamduonsTs3WkZsadSCCa_-6dMb6DCvwyTMDRQ@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [10.24.33.166]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_318d901fdd4d40c794d79b1e5864e094XCHRTP020ciscocom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ospf/rwoHoeUjG3gPAzlrCQAk1O1HHsw>
Subject: Re: [OSPF] draft-ppsenak-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse
X-BeenThere: ospf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: The Official IETF OSPG WG Mailing List <ospf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ospf>, <mailto:ospf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ospf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ospf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ospf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf>, <mailto:ospf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2017 19:17:14 -0000

I am in the room and I certainly support the draft.

Ahmed

From: OSPF [mailto:ospf-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Robert Raszuk
Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2017 12:15 PM
To: ospf@ietf.org
Subject: [OSPF] draft-ppsenak-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse

Hi,

Based on the discussion so far I see that:

A) producing use case document will only delay things further as each use case presented will be questioned as possible already today via MTR, MI, building new separate network etc ...

B) WG members in majority support adoption of draft-ppsenak-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse. Can we get at least sense in the room who is in support of which draft ?

Thx,
R.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email