IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Request for WG adoption of draft-bashandy-rtgwg-segment-routing-ti-lfa

"Ahmed Bashandy (bashandy)" <bashandy@cisco.com> Wed, 24 May 2017 15:06 UTC

Return-Path: <bashandy@cisco.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 5D086126FB3 for <rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 24 May 2017 08:06:20 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -12.623
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-12.623 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_20=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.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 TsK6ruatybRs for <rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 24 May 2017 08:06:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rcdn-iport-2.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-2.cisco.com [173.37.86.73]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 456E912949A for <rtgwg@ietf.org>; Wed, 24 May 2017 08:06:15 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=982; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1495638375; x=1496847975; h=message-id:date:from:mime-version:to:cc:subject: references:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=FSYxSmEgtrnINWemoCsg33wxeNAlLN1DgIRIeYjMSLw=; b=kWiRJ4BnJqpGbiroKoU2kW6gmB1OBj41I2qbFLoI/OWaoxiccTr40/3s zzFIqRQiDXrwfyEYrQaz5YBzD+gUHwALeEjX6PWrZ/2OlvI714T0OkMmM 9Q3ygYrE6oSfNFp/gnQzMzPWSnJno07x28s+2BUhpef18Hrqlb+gilMGs I=;
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.38,386,1491264000"; d="scan'208";a="252329656"
Received: from rcdn-core-8.cisco.com ([173.37.93.144]) by rcdn-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 24 May 2017 15:06:11 +0000
Received: from [10.24.57.247] ([10.24.57.247]) by rcdn-core-8.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id v4OF69R6022051; Wed, 24 May 2017 15:06:09 GMT
Message-ID: <5925A15E.80109@cisco.com>
Date: Wed, 24 May 2017 08:06:06 -0700
From: "Ahmed Bashandy (bashandy)" <bashandy@cisco.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.3.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Jeff Tantsura <jefftant.ietf@gmail.com>, chrisbowers.ietf@gmail.com
CC: "rtgwg@ietf.org" <rtgwg@ietf.org>, LITKOWSKI Stephane SCE/IBNF <stephane.litkowski@orange.com>, DECRAENE Bruno IMT/OLN <bruno.decraene@orange.com>, "pfrpfr@gmail.com" <pfrpfr@gmail.com>, "Clarence Filsfils (cfilsfil)" <cfilsfil@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: Request for WG adoption of draft-bashandy-rtgwg-segment-routing-ti-lfa
References: <59162450.7020508@cisco.com> <1B822DAB-9680-4E8F-AC07-06196D1853A5@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <1B822DAB-9680-4E8F-AC07-06196D1853A5@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtgwg/lpuJMPKSwpWdnoDHJR6CHJY5lkk>
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: Wed, 24 May 2017 15:06:20 -0000

I know of 4 implementation by Cisco: 2 ISIS on IOS-XE and IOS-XR and 2 
OSPF on IOS-XE and IOS-XR


If you know of any other implementations it would be great to share them

Ahmed

On 5/24/2017 1:18 AM, Jeff Tantsura wrote:
> Hi Ahmed,
>
> I’ll start the process, you will see early review comments coming your way.
> There should be at least 3 implementations of TI-LFA (to my knowledge), would you please gather this data and if possible implementation report and include it in the draft?
>
> Thanks!
>   
> Cheers,
> Jeff
>   
>
> On 5/12/17, 14:08, "Ahmed Bashandy (bashandy)" <bashandy@cisco.com> wrote:
>
>      Hi
>      
>      We would like to request the WG adoption of
>      draft-bashandy-rtgwg-segment-routing-ti-lfa-00. The draft replaces
>      draft-francois-rtgwg-segment-routing-ti-lfa-04
>      
>      The draft was presented in IETF-96 in Berlin last summer
>      
>      Thanks
>      
>      Ahmed
>      
>      
>
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email