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

Support please, customers are very interested.

Thanks
Max,

Il giorno ven 13 set 2019 alle ore 23:50 Krzysztof Szarkowicz <
kszarkowicz@gmail.com> ha scritto:

> Support,
>
> Not aware of any undisclosed IPR.
>
> Thanks,
> Krzysztof
>
>
> On 2019-Sep-13, at 22:21, Tony Przygienda <tonysietf@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> +1
>
> not aware of any undisclosed IPR
>
> On Fri, Sep 13, 2019 at 1:06 PM Alankar Sharma <as3957@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Support.
>> I am not aware of any undisclosed IPR.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Alankar Sharma
>>
>> On Fri, Sep 13, 2019 at 3:40 PM Jeffrey (Zhaohui) Zhang <zzhang=
>> 40juniper.net@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
>>
>>> 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
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> RIFT mailing list
>>> RIFT@ietf.org
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rift
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> RIFT mailing list
>> RIFT@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rift
>>
> _______________________________________________
> RIFT mailing list
> RIFT@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rift
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> RIFT mailing list
> RIFT@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rift
>