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

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
>