IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [trill] Should we adopt draft-dunbar-trill-directory-assisted-edge-05.txt as a WG document?

"Tissa Senevirathne (tsenevir)" <tsenevir@cisco.com> Tue, 19 June 2012 18:50 UTC

Return-Path: <tsenevir@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: trill@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: trill@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AF7B121F861A for <trill@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 19 Jun 2012 11:50:00 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id gPeUol60MxWF for <trill@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 19 Jun 2012 11:50:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rcdn-iport-4.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-4.cisco.com [173.37.86.75]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C8CD021F85C9 for <trill@ietf.org>; Tue, 19 Jun 2012 11:49:59 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=tsenevir@cisco.com; l=2222; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1340131800; x=1341341400; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:references:in-reply-to: content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=2a4Clv2IRY+toHWusA/bMaa3uJlEw46DAmZ8Lm+e8/g=; b=dCmlmEniHj72sZfyj9QCd8oiXWNhr3HlUDe54IujqVV+vjv2RDWxmD3n 65HMbIRFnSIGrtvrufxDw4ywS14UTIuHu1n6p91tBqSsAGhav+3MSkXqv r/wWOMbAtTTD+K/XDU6nXq1z3qlBKN/O8EQPPL4wZ2Vwad6OdR8pUk5nw 4=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Av8EAOnI4E+tJV2c/2dsb2JhbABFtWqBB4IYAQEBBAEBAQ8BJzQXBAIBCBEEAQELFAkHJwsUCQgBAQQBEggTB4dpC5kjoDoEiy+FOWADkUmRc4FmgmA
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.75,799,1330905600"; d="scan'208";a="93917726"
Received: from rcdn-core-5.cisco.com ([173.37.93.156]) by rcdn-iport-4.cisco.com with ESMTP; 19 Jun 2012 18:49:56 +0000
Received: from xhc-aln-x05.cisco.com (xhc-aln-x05.cisco.com [173.36.12.79]) by rcdn-core-5.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id q5JInuTY015170 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Tue, 19 Jun 2012 18:49:56 GMT
Received: from xmb-rcd-x08.cisco.com ([169.254.8.15]) by xhc-aln-x05.cisco.com ([173.36.12.79]) with mapi id 14.02.0298.004; Tue, 19 Jun 2012 13:49:56 -0500
From: "Tissa Senevirathne (tsenevir)" <tsenevir@cisco.com>
To: Erik Nordmark <nordmark@acm.org>, "trill@ietf.org" <trill@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [trill] Should we adopt draft-dunbar-trill-directory-assisted-edge-05.txt as a WG document?
Thread-Index: Ac1KXkn1kjKWSwMpRtC8oR8wB1th0gD7I4wA
Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2012 18:49:55 +0000
Message-ID: <FBEA3E19AA24F847BA3AE74E2FE19356EF2A@xmb-rcd-x08.cisco.com>
References: <4FDA31F0.5000806@acm.org>
In-Reply-To: <4FDA31F0.5000806@acm.org>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.155.2.44]
x-tm-as-product-ver: SMEX-10.2.0.1135-7.000.1014-18980.000
x-tm-as-result: No--26.457100-8.000000-31
x-tm-as-user-approved-sender: No
x-tm-as-user-blocked-sender: No
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [trill] Should we adopt draft-dunbar-trill-directory-assisted-edge-05.txt as a WG document?
X-BeenThere: trill@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Developing a hybrid router/bridge." <trill.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/trill>, <mailto:trill-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/trill>
List-Post: <mailto:trill@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:trill-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/trill>, <mailto:trill-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2012 18:50:00 -0000

Dear All

I have some clarifications and suggestions.

1. Currently TRILL charter says the following 
  "2) Development, within the TRILL protocol context, of requirements
  and specifications for broadcast/multicast (multi-destination) frame reduction; e.g., ARP/ND (Neighbor Discovery) reduction through use of the TRILL ESADI protocol."

I would like to propose to make this framework document a more generic document that address framework for "broadcast/multicast reduction in TRILL" and make ESADI and Directory assisted as part of that and also explain how they fit in to the overall framework. Otherwise it is kind of odd to have a framework for just one approach and not the other.

2. Based on the TRILL WG web page  this draft has a related IPR. If we are proposing to move this as a framework document to the WG status, it is important to clarify how the IPR applies to solutions coming from the framework. In general sense it may not be a good idea to have a framework document that has IPR restrictions. Because framework documents are  too broad in scope.

Thanks
Tissa
-----Original Message-----
From: trill-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:trill-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Erik Nordmark
Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2012 11:48 AM
To: trill@ietf.org
Subject: [trill] Should we adopt draft-dunbar-trill-directory-assisted-edge-05.txt as a WG document?


<http://http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-dunbar-trill-directory-assisted-edge-05>

We've discussed earlier versions of this document in the WG in the past, and it seems like useful information for a technique that helps with ARP and ND scaling. It does not include any protocol changes or extensions.

The document is intended as an informational document (it says "Intended
status: Standard Track" but that is incorrect) explaining how directories can fit into TRILL.

Note that there is claimed IPR associated with the draft:
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/1788/>

Please send comments to the TRILL list before June 27.

Thanks,
    Erik
_______________________________________________
trill mailing list
trill@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/trill

v2.15.0 | Report a Bug | By Email