[Teas] FW: Confirm submission of I-D draft-lee-teas-te-service-mapping-yang
Leeyoung <leeyoung@huawei.com> Fri, 30 June 2017 01:58 UTC
Return-Path: <leeyoung@huawei.com>
X-Original-To: teas@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: teas@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0868A128C81 for <teas@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 29 Jun 2017 18:58:23 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.209
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.209 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HK_RANDOM_ENVFROM=0.001, HK_RANDOM_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_KAM_HTML_FONT_INVALID=0.01] autolearn=ham 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 qbrwzMhadd7G for <teas@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 29 Jun 2017 18:58:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [194.213.3.17]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D05F4124D68 for <teas@ietf.org>; Thu, 29 Jun 2017 18:58:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from 172.18.7.190 (EHLO lhreml701-cah.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.7.190]) by lhrrg01-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.3.7-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id DQB88346; Fri, 30 Jun 2017 01:58:17 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from SJCEML701-CHM.china.huawei.com (10.208.112.40) by lhreml701-cah.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.42) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.301.0; Fri, 30 Jun 2017 02:58:16 +0100
Received: from SJCEML702-CHM.china.huawei.com ([169.254.4.142]) by SJCEML701-CHM.china.huawei.com ([169.254.3.186]) with mapi id 14.03.0301.000; Thu, 29 Jun 2017 18:58:04 -0700
From: Leeyoung <leeyoung@huawei.com>
To: "teas@ietf.org" <teas@ietf.org>
CC: Dhruv Dhody <dhruv.dhody@huawei.com>, Dhruv Dhody <dhruv.ietf@gmail.com>, Daniele Ceccarelli <daniele.ceccarelli@ericsson.com>
Thread-Topic: Confirm submission of I-D draft-lee-teas-te-service-mapping-yang
Thread-Index: AQHS8UKid0PE1cnynUeqSjnp0WnHT6I8pIpg
Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2017 01:58:04 +0000
Message-ID: <7AEB3D6833318045B4AE71C2C87E8E172B3D17AA@SJCEML702-CHM.china.huawei.com>
References: <149878715785.4666.609233308303719416.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
In-Reply-To: <149878715785.4666.609233308303719416.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.47.158.200]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_7AEB3D6833318045B4AE71C2C87E8E172B3D17AASJCEML702CHMchi_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
X-Mirapoint-Virus-RAPID-Raw: score=unknown(0), refid=str=0001.0A090206.5955B039.0065, ss=1, re=0.000, recu=0.000, reip=0.000, cl=1, cld=1, fgs=0, ip=169.254.4.142, so=2013-06-18 04:22:30, dmn=2013-03-21 17:37:32
X-Mirapoint-Loop-Id: 980644557dadc5c02575701a26b71453
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/teas/rNwD6GQDLqGs2GM9228fpHT7RZY>
Subject: [Teas] FW: Confirm submission of I-D draft-lee-teas-te-service-mapping-yang
X-BeenThere: teas@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: Fri, 30 Jun 2017 01:58:23 -0000
Hi, We have added new text to address comments received during the presentation in Chicago. Per Michael's question on multi-domain/multi-AS issues, we clarified the scope of the document as follows in the introduction section as follows: The scope of this draft is limited to a set of domain under the same network operators to deliver services requiring TE tunnels. Per Igor's question on the mapping policy, we added the following paragraphs in the introduction: Other mode of operations could be easily added to the current model in future. This could be achieved by adding more granular modes or policy. Such as - o No change to any tunnels is possible, need to reuse existing tunnels. o Change to existing tunnels are possible, but - Only the bandwidth of the existing tunnels can be increased. - Optical Transport tunnels could not be changed, changes only in the IP/MPLS layer. - Optical Transport tunnels can be added on the fly. o A new VN/tunels are setup and bound to the service. - New tunnels in IP/MPLS, that can reuse optical transport tunnels. - New tunnels in both layer. Thanks, Dhruv, Young and Daniele, -----Original Message----- From: IETF I-D Submission Tool [mailto:idsubmission@ietf.org] Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2017 8:46 PM To: Dhruv Dhody <dhruv.ietf@gmail.com>; Leeyoung <leeyoung@huawei.com> Subject: Confirm submission of I-D draft-lee-teas-te-service-mapping-yang Hi, The IETF datatracker draft submission service has received your draft draft-lee-teas-te-service-mapping-yang-01, and requires a confirmation step in order to be able to complete the posting of the draft. Please follow this link to the page where you can confirm the posting: https://datatracker.ietf.org/submit/status/87600/confirm/ed16ac8e3a66bb1d27456eca8ff25fd8/ Best regards, The IETF Secretariat through the draft submission service