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

<zhang.zheng@zte.com.cn> Wed, 25 September 2019 06:30 UTC

Return-Path: <zhang.zheng@zte.com.cn>
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 1145B120041; Tue, 24 Sep 2019 23:30:20 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.198
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.198 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001] autolearn=unavailable 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 6aZ5Y1jiiQTG; Tue, 24 Sep 2019 23:30:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mxhk.zte.com.cn (mxhk.zte.com.cn [63.217.80.70]) (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 E5E721200FD; Tue, 24 Sep 2019 23:22:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mse-fl1.zte.com.cn (unknown [10.30.14.238]) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTPS id EDB97A6CDE575D135399; Wed, 25 Sep 2019 14:22:49 +0800 (CST)
Received: from njxapp04.zte.com.cn ([10.41.132.203]) by mse-fl1.zte.com.cn with SMTP id x8P6LXE2096844; Wed, 25 Sep 2019 14:21:33 +0800 (GMT-8) (envelope-from zhang.zheng@zte.com.cn)
Received: from mapi (njxapp01[null]) by mapi (Zmail) with MAPI id mid203; Wed, 25 Sep 2019 14:21:33 +0800 (CST)
Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2019 14:21:33 +0800 (CST)
X-Zmail-TransId: 2af95d8b076d40349e19
X-Mailer: Zmail v1.0
Message-ID: <201909251421335202227@zte.com.cn>
In-Reply-To: <DM5PR05MB35489E9A98D0A9508C9158CAD4B30@DM5PR05MB3548.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
References: DM5PR05MB35489E9A98D0A9508C9158CAD4B30@DM5PR05MB3548.namprd05.prod.outlook.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
From: <zhang.zheng@zte.com.cn>
To: <zzhang=40juniper.net@dmarc.ietf.org>
Cc: <jefftant.ietf@gmail.com>, <rift@ietf.org>, <rift-chairs@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="=====_001_next====="
X-MAIL: mse-fl1.zte.com.cn x8P6LXE2096844
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rift/AKm67EC1NE7zXi6PTfo9kYEM7js>
Subject: Re: [Rift] =?utf-8?q?WGLC=2CIPR_and_Implementation_polling_for_draft?= =?utf-8?q?-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, 25 Sep 2019 06:30:20 -0000

Support the advancement of this draft.


And ZTE is doing the implementation work about RIFT prototol.






Thanks,


Sandy











原始邮件



发件人:Jeffrey(Zhaohui)Zhang <zzhang=40juniper.net@dmarc.ietf.org>;
收件人:Jeff Tantsura <jefftant.ietf@gmail.com>;rift@ietf.org <rift@ietf.org>;rift-chairs@ietf.org <rift-chairs@ietf.org>;;
日 期 :2019年09月14日 03:41
主 题 :[Rift] 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 
_______________________________________________
RIFT mailing list
RIFT@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rift