IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: WG last call for draft-ietf-rtgwg-uloop-delay

Stewart Bryant <stewart.bryant@gmail.com> Mon, 05 June 2017 09:36 UTC

Return-Path: <stewart.bryant@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 13354128BA2 for <rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 5 Jun 2017 02:36:53 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.698
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.698 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 Yx1bjA1KTicp for <rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 5 Jun 2017 02:36:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wm0-x22a.google.com (mail-wm0-x22a.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c09::22a]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C71B1127333 for <rtgwg@ietf.org>; Mon, 5 Jun 2017 02:36:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wm0-x22a.google.com with SMTP id x70so7963481wme.0 for <rtgwg@ietf.org>; Mon, 05 Jun 2017 02:36:50 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version :in-reply-to:content-language; bh=zj0VbTIdyNqB4VR36SASBJyQ3FlpYVat6kPk/tMW0Mc=; b=cv81c2kgeh0yREndl205MJTqdk3Q5bYEBfTks7SIvl27up/NJfrHjj4nn952S4seg0 c/JgrtW5dt4B41BWdmPGhhLPXhLP56yl1hNlkH2+Z2YlKzZJHu3zVw+sRy1CGHCF+BTP 6JCANssQvf7jP7n6gKLrmoIBYcxVEM/dWlJ3tamF445ys0Qy1cyk1LSqIwFgkw2/GRHS Xp1//VMoOe7Hj6OIPe6WIqchZXz7a7Qe7hGx4fIUob0VME7y1EXON8Lnv883AhWc2sBl zvDFDx5SCCdNqQBgSbb5wEVVYKNxRaIL69HdJGZJrHhglTNK5OIaQ/xL8bzqnL/dkvV2 yAhg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language; bh=zj0VbTIdyNqB4VR36SASBJyQ3FlpYVat6kPk/tMW0Mc=; b=ld9dIO2V9baA7yBvY3vPswh7qGyiy4X+ibksXqONjvtf8i6rTd7AXSetmIIJDwgwFH hIxrwXfptoTjbAprQCLnFamEtvcELl5Uka0s1XN/6xdp8Lwy5l7dMGbKUHnHEFlTb9NY DLcVUXKn14fS2ahF9ZWSPaG/owI1kGJ4RGQM/9ia6+5TqzsVMNpaiFdGm0OmJjy08Z2h RWIUHW6kLldpWdULnEX1RqE5dWXfAPlYB2dsRAGdKJFbH7Jk/txCZs7/VbuG7BrRn8OL 593OXixsaK+8MSmSAGWBFK4ZDFqFMpk0U+K9CsJgQ5Rjcu7M6cLLZMdqr4obY3N588MU FCoA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AODbwcDrsLt/3NY7AtNgt72ic8hBmO7ET1uTn7KnkwrRL1HTXsY5RIF7 nrKqOJK2/ChHbHLgziI=
X-Received: by 10.28.88.3 with SMTP id m3mr7253258wmb.28.1496655409162; Mon, 05 Jun 2017 02:36:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.2.126] (host213-123-124-182.in-addr.btopenworld.com. [213.123.124.182]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id e73sm9481577wmd.1.2017.06.05.02.36.48 for <rtgwg@ietf.org> (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 05 Jun 2017 02:36:48 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: WG last call for draft-ietf-rtgwg-uloop-delay
To: rtgwg@ietf.org
References: <MWHPR05MB2829DC391A9101895C1D297FA9F70@MWHPR05MB2829.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> <D558B7A5.B2045%acee@cisco.com>
From: Stewart Bryant <stewart.bryant@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <dbfe31f4-68c9-6e37-4515-ef99bb217bd5@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 05 Jun 2017 10:36:45 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.1.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <D558B7A5.B2045%acee@cisco.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------06AABB85B41BD0A349A7AF47"
Content-Language: en-GB
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtgwg/Bp8wCRZjhXZQT2vhMSk6t2B4iCk>
X-BeenThere: rtgwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: Routing Area Working Group <rtgwg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/rtgwg>, <mailto:rtgwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/rtgwg/>
List-Post: <mailto:rtgwg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rtgwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg>, <mailto:rtgwg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Jun 2017 09:36:53 -0000

In section 3 it states:

    This ordered convergence, is similar to the ordered FIB proposed
    defined in [RFC6976], but limited to only a "one hop" distance.  As a
    consequence, it is simpler and becomes a local only feature not
    requiring interoperability; at the cost of only covering the
    transient forwarding loops involving this local router.

Thus this mechanism is a private matter to the PLR and therefore does 
not introduce a requirement for multiple routers to co-operate, it seems 
like it ought to be informational.

- Stewart

On 04/06/2017 00:04, Acee Lindem (acee) wrote:
> I support advancement and publication of this draft.  I think we 
> should have the discussion of whether or not it should be standards 
> track, BCP, or informational as invariably this question will arise 
> during all the reviews.
> Thanks,
> Acee
>
> From: rtgwg <rtgwg-bounces@ietf.org <mailto:rtgwg-bounces@ietf.org>> 
> on behalf of Chris Bowers <cbowers@juniper.net 
> <mailto:cbowers@juniper.net>>
> Date: Friday, June 2, 2017 at 4:43 PM
> To: Routing WG <rtgwg@ietf.org <mailto:rtgwg@ietf.org>>
> Subject: WG last call for draft-ietf-rtgwg-uloop-delay
>
>     RTGWG,
>     This email starts the two week WG last call for
>     draft-ietf-rtgwg-uloop-delay.
>     https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-rtgwg-uloop-delay/
>     Please indicate support for or opposition to the publication of this
>     standards track document, along with the reasoning for that
>     support or
>     opposition.
>     IPR:
>     If you are listed as a document author or contributor, please
>     respond to
>     this email stating whether or not you are aware of any relevant
>     IPR. The
>     response needs to be sent to the RTGWG mailing list. The document
>     will
>     not advance to the next stage until a response has been received from
>     each author and each individual that has contributed to the document.
>     The document currently has the following IPR disclosure associated
>     with it.
>     https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/2565/
>     This last call will end on Friday June 16th.
>     Thanks,
>     Chris and Jeff
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> rtgwg mailing list
> rtgwg@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email