Re: [Rift] WGLC, IPR and Implementation polling for draft-ietf-rift-rift-08

"Jeffrey (Zhaohui) Zhang" <zzhang@juniper.net> Wed, 09 October 2019 20:05 UTC

Return-Path: <zzhang@juniper.net>
X-Original-To: rift@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rift@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 685E71200F7; Wed, 9 Oct 2019 13:05:43 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.701
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.701 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=juniper.net
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 NJjGFOo28tR3; Wed, 9 Oct 2019 13:05:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx0b-00273201.pphosted.com (mx0b-00273201.pphosted.com [67.231.152.164]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3975212004F; Wed, 9 Oct 2019 13:05:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pps.filterd (m0108163.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-00273201.pphosted.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id x99JtwQ2022085; Wed, 9 Oct 2019 13:05:38 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=juniper.net; h=from : to : subject : date : message-id : references : in-reply-to : content-type : content-transfer-encoding : mime-version; s=PPS1017; bh=QSsxBzB+gVZD/1nQLTasUi+s14fYHgXSN0BNA8bMnSs=; b=Smzy2xh3wMNYslLUQSQRGnsPqP/fnUY9/C5WGNe+JVYtn/Cvquv2RP9Hx3SB+msGbe7e hbdOhh3TGRARGQDQTgcwJVK59Cj8DVkPmeN0dkKONt9pNVbYxNK6j1jerkBl2RlVC47G RvSQ9XqhO6g1PU3UwvBAhMK7FMkG1n7Nk2AuGIudVVL4eBoUu8SBIqmVgJKZiAWDMqTT IXRa0+g9TZmpYPxpSrw/toKAXSmbSWn46iziYTjPkxuDOJPsbLYV8pQF8BgBURodIQzY KLhj8BrRkUCnGGr/hlALVgPGgzgLMh3IRh30IDtSwTzIturikVZc2uVT0r5atkQz4TlS uw==
Received: from nam02-sn1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-sn1nam02lp2053.outbound.protection.outlook.com [104.47.36.53]) by mx0b-00273201.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2vgdu93sqf-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 09 Oct 2019 13:05:38 -0700
ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=kmG2+gfbbRge99k6yC2emwd+CiVnAoO3zm66M878Cx9NZCdoD1xrr60shAU21K/Cg5zC21cyAuQfzIpxmX2XIUgsZNSHz4gpi7UMPZFQoWEVURdxWIFQxiXAY+n2USFBmJZSBxCgmHazAjHO4MLE2si3OKUSEREw6XcC3cgsCZMZlhzRobwV70pKAMiNPSJLyoY71Zs+E6YeCZxSynnIhNL8f2DWgIxphQXDXkoZSQWy6yRiLAQrM6aU3j8bvYlWE/hz/huKQT8V/9KKAYlWF2dKIH1vlhr8dir3y6wYdnjXYgLIq2oWHmoOQboUmGjXPKTicgILylh0Vj4hy89pMA==
ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=QSsxBzB+gVZD/1nQLTasUi+s14fYHgXSN0BNA8bMnSs=; b=C6rf4B7AROnzsY7h9AtGrrQ4s3RdAin3fLFTzDpipT5u+rGqyeVDwaVbpTp44fE1yBG9hmjXU7XJwZZWvZs1ETLsZusmVxS0kD6ematXCdxTOFWuo57nq8hPwMcTbM6d/btYSKyDfIp3hWcykNmdeq6JDgqBkiFDc47zwTA6vZFymPpR0tWzZxvxcbHCYn+F36XJ6J0+Ka2cjkRuTBNQaBq+TNc9Byxzv+hIcZrmiHOpvBjQSIcHUyAfp/y2KIRtm1JL0ELPvijiHWFSnTZTV5T+uCigYbZxyvIkQ6DihsKbg3VibXihRmUIc2ezqzlp3aAp1greJNPcPa3jaS+Dgw==
ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=juniper.net; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=juniper.net; dkim=pass header.d=juniper.net; arc=none
Received: from DM5PR05MB3548.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.174.242.153) by DM5PR05MB3609.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.174.242.166) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.2347.13; Wed, 9 Oct 2019 20:05:34 +0000
Received: from DM5PR05MB3548.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::4949:bb34:ba48:1913]) by DM5PR05MB3548.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::4949:bb34:ba48:1913%7]) with mapi id 15.20.2347.016; Wed, 9 Oct 2019 20:05:34 +0000
From: "Jeffrey (Zhaohui) Zhang" <zzhang@juniper.net>
To: Jeff Tantsura <jefftant.ietf@gmail.com>, "rift@ietf.org" <rift@ietf.org>, "rift-chairs@ietf.org" <rift-chairs@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: WGLC, IPR and Implementation polling for draft-ietf-rift-rift-08
Thread-Index: AdVqVcgVshB/jFDvRM+8c5HjmimYRwPc6lSA
Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2019 20:05:34 +0000
Message-ID: <DM5PR05MB35481174A696F0E9A0406D8DD4950@DM5PR05MB3548.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
References: <DM5PR05MB35489E9A98D0A9508C9158CAD4B30@DM5PR05MB3548.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
In-Reply-To: <DM5PR05MB35489E9A98D0A9508C9158CAD4B30@DM5PR05MB3548.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
dlp-product: dlpe-windows
dlp-version: 11.2.0.14
dlp-reaction: no-action
x-originating-ip: [173.76.174.11]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 0536b1b2-47e2-4a76-b846-08d74cf40baf
x-ms-office365-filtering-ht: Tenant
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: DM5PR05MB3609:
x-ms-exchange-purlcount: 2
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <DM5PR05MB3609E1C2E9A47C9060D3BD5AD4950@DM5PR05MB3609.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:10000;
x-forefront-prvs: 018577E36E
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(136003)(39860400002)(396003)(346002)(366004)(376002)(199004)(189003)(13464003)(476003)(33656002)(110136005)(8936002)(55016002)(7696005)(6436002)(486006)(2201001)(305945005)(102836004)(5660300002)(6246003)(81156014)(81166006)(8676002)(6306002)(99286004)(9686003)(26005)(2501003)(2906002)(446003)(11346002)(25786009)(6506007)(256004)(186003)(66556008)(71200400001)(66476007)(478600001)(53546011)(74316002)(14454004)(52536014)(66066001)(71190400001)(86362001)(966005)(229853002)(316002)(66446008)(66946007)(3846002)(7736002)(76176011)(6116002)(64756008)(76116006); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:DM5PR05MB3609; H:DM5PR05MB3548.namprd05.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; LANG:en; PTR:InfoNoRecords; A:1; MX:1;
received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: juniper.net does not designate permitted sender hosts)
x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0;
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: nFtExzVXTsNbUZfySSk/wNRX5cMr5389nZNHzxsSu2yK2P7BBEG53VGYZOk9efriMKnaKt1+c8P4w2Bf+3AgzoML5yYWAyp9XpY48AwM+/NgYUBNJW0+V8knqyRqbqV/FOTIRjFLTlsnh6XeGznHY4CXNfMcX5bStlbBXu9nAug+AN32lbh68n8g4/EpUwbVK0f4Rf9uVxAIOeCiVRjL1qZyYcIycTEmF5jrkPg95AnIfmt/77rnSR6rPbPzcpNDRQnfJLEz8KcjtxPxDq8F5MUEHJEJAUchU31pGR0lzNKrMF3DRtAUfsAiGNWTt6I7A7oJYEhxGicKbJRJuOGI3zjoFaNwPqMYfETvmxcd4J+DshWVhWE4QgFMthLEwZ9AtXy9r/xITurqFhL1qUEQ8p9RNDtfZgCRLpEamCJmcvf6n8nQrtBWPMW54a4xUYnhsSAKqudEotedbiiLZjGBoA==
x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: juniper.net
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 0536b1b2-47e2-4a76-b846-08d74cf40baf
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 09 Oct 2019 20:05:34.5592 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: bea78b3c-4cdb-4130-854a-1d193232e5f4
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: 5O1/2m8dWrNjyjAtiDoPgBD4LroDBaYqOOO8eCWoMCV4VyIiY1PaoXhBJXBuTcaXfAAeIJKEUADyXXZwFkRh9w==
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: DM5PR05MB3609
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.95,1.0.8 definitions=2019-10-09_09:2019-10-08,2019-10-09 signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_spam_notspam policy=outbound_spam score=0 adultscore=0 impostorscore=0 bulkscore=0 phishscore=0 spamscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 suspectscore=0 clxscore=1011 lowpriorityscore=0 priorityscore=1501 mlxscore=0 malwarescore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-1908290000 definitions=main-1910090158
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rift/0WlBc-Ja5TIW_kJeTd2FTx6YqUc>
Subject: Re: [Rift] WGLC, IPR and Implementation polling for draft-ietf-rift-rift-08
X-BeenThere: rift@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion of Routing in Fat Trees <rift.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/rift>, <mailto:rift-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/rift/>
List-Post: <mailto:rift@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rift-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rift>, <mailto:rift-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 09 Oct 2019 20:05:44 -0000

Hi,

Though with some delay in getting IPR statement from all co-authors, the WGLC for draft-ietf-rift-rift-08 has concluded with lots of support and no concerns raised.

There are two existing interoperable implementations as described in https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rift/0VpvFOUQ3M5p0JvtM1xGdCvp0_g, plus another ongoing implementation that we know of.
 
We now proceed to the next stage for the specification.

Thanks!
Jeff & Jeffrey

-----Original Message-----
From: Jeffrey (Zhaohui) Zhang 
Sent: Friday, September 13, 2019 3:40 PM
To: Jeff Tantsura <jefftant.ietf@gmail.com>;; rift@ietf.org; rift-chairs@ietf.org
Subject: WGLC, IPR and Implementation polling for draft-ietf-rift-rift-08

Hi RIFTers,

This email starts WG Last Call, IPR and implementation polling  for our base spec draft-ietf-rift-rift-08. It ends on 9/27.

Please thoroughly review the document and voice your support/objection.

If you’re a co-author/contributor, please explicitly respond to this email and indicate whether or not you are aware of any relevant undisclosed IPR. The Document won't progress without answers from all the Authors and Contributors.

If you're not a co-author/contributor, you need to respond only if you are aware of any relevant IPR not yet disclosed in conformance with IETF rules.

Currently disclosed IPRs can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/search/?submit=draft&id=draft-ietf-rift-rift.

We are also polling for any existing implementation.

Thanks!
Jeff and Jeffrey

-------------------------------

From: RIFT <rift-bounces@ietf.org>; On Behalf Of Tony Przygienda
Sent: Monday, September 9, 2019 3:06 AM
To: rift@ietf.org
Subject: [Rift] LC version -08

LC ready version -08 has been posted 

Last few small changes based on input of people playing with both implementations in different scenarios

* A new prefix tie type has been added PositiveExternalDisaggregationPrefixTIEType since it is necessary to distinguish between normal prefix and external prefix being disaggregated to preserve priorities in complex redistribution scenarios. BTW, negative prefixes are always least preferred and hence they don't need to differentiate. 
* Link pair carries now indication whether BFD is up 9on the link. This allows at the top of the fabric not only see links that are secured and outer keys but also whether link is BFD protected/BFD is up
* NodeCapabilities are required now and minor protocol version is carried since there was no possiblity on adjacency building to check which minor verswion the peer speaks (major is carried in the envelope). Major version compatibility allows to aways decode the model but minor could be used in the future to understand minor schema variations

thanks 

--- tony