IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Teas] Agenda requests for Yokohama

Vishnu Pavan Beeram <vishnupavan@gmail.com> Tue, 27 October 2015 15:30 UTC

Return-Path: <vishnupavan@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: teas@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: teas@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DBA691A9086 for <teas@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 27 Oct 2015 08:30:44 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 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, SPF_PASS=-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 JvaUN7c_PgDx for <teas@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 27 Oct 2015 08:30:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-vk0-x22d.google.com (mail-vk0-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400c:c05::22d]) (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 0B3691A9080 for <teas@ietf.org>; Tue, 27 Oct 2015 08:30:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by vkfw189 with SMTP id w189so122624680vkf.2 for <teas@ietf.org>; Tue, 27 Oct 2015 08:30:42 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=big7HGj54MRBAQ41tuiBuXzK/0TYR2sJpSrI7y31hPA=; b=e6PIDE5+IU+FzaiE4yTztsMyhtOsqrvqxRMiOgEgPt1K4ofKcRB2G9pFwu/FCqjHD/ 58+TNlgTI4ILwfFLSaDEXRuSdrutAxvXSY9T4M3l0HLtvYrFWY/sl3h89WGnh1u2a+bc oJmGzU0n+UXVM2hH6//bSKna3MU+BqNtOTAsec4ejr/QK164vNGs/gDIC2Bhq/KXuoc0 Iv2tTMfD5qPIovB22XwdSa2R5IMFBpInypen3tzRpV8ezGxbKq0kENLsBHuHhI/HJTo3 u/genTuopFpE8l11L836aT7Ls4jD1U947ef25OBA3u9XEhcCY8fnJPSSii36LpJzPxbg Tcfg==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.31.36.151 with SMTP id k145mr30002640vkk.71.1445959842135; Tue, 27 Oct 2015 08:30:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.31.193.197 with HTTP; Tue, 27 Oct 2015 08:30:42 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <5316A0AB3C851246A7CA5758973207D44E4A43B7@SJCEML701-CHM.china.huawei.com>
References: <0edad2bd384549ca861ef7f2c0f9ca1c@XCH-RCD-001.cisco.com> <5316A0AB3C851246A7CA5758973207D44E4A43B7@SJCEML701-CHM.china.huawei.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2015 11:30:42 -0400
Message-ID: <CA+YzgTuodNTU8ufBi2qcOFe-CJsd4G8q5np-ba=9nmwfm_wJOQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Vishnu Pavan Beeram <vishnupavan@gmail.com>
To: Huaimo Chen <huaimo.chen@huawei.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a11425878c004e6052317c276"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/teas/Isfmk7n8BmXUSombUIczxK6MXZE>
Cc: "Matt Hartley (mhartley)" <mhartley@cisco.com>, "Lou Berger (lberger@labn.net)" <lberger@labn.net>, "TEAS WG (teas@ietf.org)" <teas@ietf.org>, "Vishnu Pavan Beeram (vbeeram@juniper.net)" <vbeeram@juniper.net>
Subject: Re: [Teas] Agenda requests for Yokohama
X-BeenThere: teas@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Traffic Engineering Architecture and Signaling working group discussion list <teas.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/teas>, <mailto:teas-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/teas/>
List-Post: <mailto:teas@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:teas-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/teas>, <mailto:teas-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2015 15:30:45 -0000

Huaimo (, other authors of <draft-ietf-teas-rsvp-ingress-protection>, Hi!

Thanks for the update on <draft-ietf-teas-rsvp-ingress-protection>.

It would be useful to bring the discussion surrounding the 2 methods to the
list. Please elucidate upon the rationale for picking one method over the
other and then open up for others on the list to weigh in. Also, please do
plan on presenting a brief summary of the discussion during next week's
session.

Regards,
-Pavan

On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 10:46 PM, Huaimo Chen <huaimo.chen@huawei.com>
wrote:

> Hi Matt, Lou and Pavan,
>
>     draft-ietf-teas-rsvp-ingress-protection-04 will not be presented in
> IETF 94.
>     This version removed a sub-field (secondary LSP ID, which is not
> needed) in INGRESS_PROTECTION object and selected the relay-message method.
>
> Best Regards,
> Huaimo
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Teas [mailto:teas-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Matt Hartley
> (mhartley)
> Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2015 10:05 AM
> To: TEAS WG (teas@ietf.org)
> Cc: Matt Hartley (mhartley); Lou Berger (lberger@labn.net); Vishnu Pavan
> Beeram (vbeeram@juniper.net)
> Subject: [Teas] Agenda requests for Yokohama
>
> All,
>
> It's that time again. We have 2.5 hours on Thursday morning.
>
> Please send slot requests to me by UTC 23:59 on Friday October 16th.
> Please note also that the deadline for drafts is the same time on the
> Monday afterward.
>
> For drafts that are not being presented, please plan to send an update to
> the WG by October 30th.
>
> Cheers
>
> Matt, Lou and Pavan
>
> _______________________________________________
> Teas mailing list
> Teas@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/teas
>
> _______________________________________________
> Teas mailing list
> Teas@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/teas
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email