RE: Request for WG adoption of draft-litkowski-rtgwg-spf-uloop-pb-statement and draft-decraene-rtgwg-backoff-algo

<bruno.decraene@orange.com> Fri, 17 April 2015 15:16 UTC

Return-Path: <bruno.decraene@orange.com>
X-Original-To: rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C800B1B2BDA for <rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 17 Apr 2015 08:16:31 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001] autolearn=ham
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 pPe-NxRUrYDL for <rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 17 Apr 2015 08:16:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from relais-inet.francetelecom.com (relais-ias243.francetelecom.com [80.12.204.243]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 52F951B2BD3 for <rtgwg@ietf.org>; Fri, 17 Apr 2015 08:16:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from omfeda05.si.francetelecom.fr (unknown [xx.xx.xx.198]) by omfeda10.si.francetelecom.fr (ESMTP service) with ESMTP id A89F63742EB; Fri, 17 Apr 2015 17:16:26 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from Exchangemail-eme1.itn.ftgroup (unknown [10.114.1.183]) by omfeda05.si.francetelecom.fr (ESMTP service) with ESMTP id 8FD8318004F; Fri, 17 Apr 2015 17:16:26 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from PEXCVZYM11.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup ([fe80::a441:e6a9:6143:6f0f]) by PEXCVZYH02.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup ([::1]) with mapi id 14.03.0224.002; Fri, 17 Apr 2015 17:16:26 +0200
From: bruno.decraene@orange.com
To: Jeff Tantsura <jeff.tantsura@ericsson.com>
Subject: RE: Request for WG adoption of draft-litkowski-rtgwg-spf-uloop-pb-statement and draft-decraene-rtgwg-backoff-algo
Thread-Topic: Request for WG adoption of draft-litkowski-rtgwg-spf-uloop-pb-statement and draft-decraene-rtgwg-backoff-algo
Thread-Index: AQHQeGozBdo1pgIIQk2vMrK3UlMfNJ1QzIvA
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2015 15:16:25 +0000
Message-ID: <18135_1429283786_553123CA_18135_4513_1_53C29892C857584299CBF5D05346208A0EBA5C42@PEXCVZYM11.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup>
References: <D1553E65.9546D%jeff.tantsura@ericsson.com>
In-Reply-To: <D1553E65.9546D%jeff.tantsura@ericsson.com>
Accept-Language: fr-FR, en-US
Content-Language: fr-FR
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.197.38.2]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-PMX-Version: 6.2.1.2478543, Antispam-Engine: 2.7.2.2107409, Antispam-Data: 2015.4.17.145722
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtgwg/bq7m_qsLg_c1Mvfx60uyebHS0WE>
Cc: "rtgwg@ietf.org" <rtgwg@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: rtgwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Fri, 17 Apr 2015 15:16:32 -0000

Hi Jeff, Chris, all

Support.
Having different SPF-delays across the IGP domain increases micro-loops probability and/or duration. We don't need this, especially when the IGP is experiencing instability (i.e. when SPF back-off algorithm kicks in). Hence having a common SPF back-off procedure is an improvement. IMHO it's a low cost one.

I'm not aware of IPR.

Thanks,
Bruno

> -----Original Message-----
> From: rtgwg [mailto:rtgwg-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Jeff Tantsura
> Sent: Thursday, April 16, 2015 7:25 PM
> To: rtgwg@ietf.org
> Subject: Request for WG adoption of draft-litkowski-rtgwg-spf-uloop-pb-
> statement and draft-decraene-rtgwg-backoff-algo
> 
> Hi RTGWG,
> 
> The authors have requested the RTGWG to adopt:
> draft-litkowski-rtgwg-spf-uloop-pb-statement and draft-decraene-rtgwg-
> backoff-algo as working group documents.
> 
> There was support during the last IETF meeting (92) in Dallas.
> Please indicate support or no-support by May 1st, 2015.
> 
> 
> If you are listed as a document author or contributor please respond to this
> email stating of 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.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> 
> Jeff & Chris
> 
> _______________________________________________
> rtgwg mailing list
> rtgwg@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc
pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler
a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,
Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci.

This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law;
they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.
If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments.
As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified.
Thank you.