IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [OSPF] WG Adoption Poll for "Using Operator-defined TLVs for Agile Service Deployment"

Xuxiaohu <xuxiaohu@huawei.com> Thu, 14 April 2016 08:34 UTC

Return-Path: <xuxiaohu@huawei.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 6877912E20D for <ospf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 14 Apr 2016 01:34:22 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.217
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.217 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.996, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 vOpj_6iqIT1k for <ospf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 14 Apr 2016 01:34:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [194.213.3.17]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5469212E255 for <ospf@ietf.org>; Thu, 14 Apr 2016 01:34:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from 172.18.7.190 (EHLO lhreml705-cah.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.7.190]) by lhrrg01-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.3.7-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id CMD44912; Thu, 14 Apr 2016 08:34:14 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from NKGEML413-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.98.56.74) by lhreml705-cah.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.168) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.235.1; Thu, 14 Apr 2016 09:34:14 +0100
Received: from NKGEML515-MBX.china.huawei.com ([fe80::a54a:89d2:c471:ff]) by NKGEML413-HUB.china.huawei.com ([10.98.56.74]) with mapi id 14.03.0235.001; Thu, 14 Apr 2016 16:34:06 +0800
From: Xuxiaohu <xuxiaohu@huawei.com>
To: "Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee@cisco.com>, OSPF WG List <ospf@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: WG Adoption Poll for "Using Operator-defined TLVs for Agile Service Deployment"
Thread-Index: AQHRf/Ho6WRxQA5zQE2bUJRokiTbP5+JUGMw
Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2016 08:34:06 +0000
Message-ID: <1FEE3F8F5CCDE64C9A8E8F4AD27C19EE0D53A022@NKGEML515-MBX.china.huawei.com>
References: <D30F89DE.51A65%acee@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <D30F89DE.51A65%acee@cisco.com>
Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US
Content-Language: zh-CN
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.111.99.55]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
X-Mirapoint-Virus-RAPID-Raw: score=unknown(0), refid=str=0001.0A020203.570F5607.0051, ss=1, re=0.000, recu=0.000, reip=0.000, cl=1, cld=1, fgs=0, ip=0.0.0.0, so=2013-06-18 04:22:30, dmn=2013-03-21 17:37:32
X-Mirapoint-Loop-Id: 3e63a92653eb7b2b54961c584ceeebaa
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ospf/wAsUw0F_FX-lJg0fZa9Bsm3JaSA>
Subject: Re: [OSPF] WG Adoption Poll for "Using Operator-defined TLVs for Agile Service Deployment"
X-BeenThere: ospf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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, 14 Apr 2016 08:34:22 -0000

Support the WG adoption of this doc (as a co-author).

Best regards,
Xiaohu

> -----Original Message-----
> From: OSPF [mailto:ospf-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Acee Lindem (acee)
> Sent: Thursday, March 17, 2016 10:09 AM
> To: OSPF WG List
> Subject: [OSPF] WG Adoption Poll for "Using Operator-defined TLVs for Agile
> Service Deployment"
> 
> We’ve discussed this draft a number of times. In my opinion, it seems like a
> useful mechanism if one envisions a generalized API between OSPF and user and
> third-party applications to convey application-specific information learned from
> other OSPF routers. In many respects, this has already been envisioned for OSPF
> Node Tags. Please indicate your opinion on this draft before March 31st, 2016.
> 
> Thanks,
> Acee
> 
> _______________________________________________
> OSPF mailing list
> OSPF@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email