Re: [trill] 2 week WG LC on draft-ietf-trill-ribridge-multilevel-00.txt. (11/24 to 12/8/2015)

Radia Perlman <radiaperlman@gmail.com> Wed, 09 December 2015 05:28 UTC

Return-Path: <radiaperlman@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: trill@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: trill@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6B1C41A88F7; Tue, 8 Dec 2015 21:28:34 -0800 (PST)
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 6z2RznxIutsk; Tue, 8 Dec 2015 21:28:32 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-oi0-x230.google.com (mail-oi0-x230.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c06::230]) (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 539701A88DF; Tue, 8 Dec 2015 21:28:32 -0800 (PST)
Received: by oies6 with SMTP id s6so21610464oie.1; Tue, 08 Dec 2015 21:28:31 -0800 (PST)
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=XzgOPyxne5ff1CLc8+hCihHliQxuTuAc5f55YORABvY=; b=1AH5FmWvuImWUtzfrbO//Yd725B2IY1tISNrE98bNp4iEZs5LkMPR7sjOBn8hXVcRE RPzEXdorTX/36EnPfmaSGVXLaPHr9vpxpYK6PmUxRsEM78tPIlA3BpII7m1g8V8qsGqL +Z6eN2v14vC0kPtSC62LbJDygDXrLuC1nVlSbpWmw1TU4GFdd+t1cGI4EM2Rhq4AKmXg lFWlSxKe8UQkz9vmmeFhrtOHcuHYNtq8Mnvl6EMv51u71TJkIqrZaM7rkH3d2+svhfjJ hFDuem/oPVYdytK+O6RUU3NTaZPBIq71VawECFw66rFlhdxiWu2ttS1pN1hPCGRDBmx1 MLqg==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.202.169.193 with SMTP id s184mr2678454oie.28.1449638911470; Tue, 08 Dec 2015 21:28:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.182.172.40 with HTTP; Tue, 8 Dec 2015 21:28:31 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <051901d126a1$1dd20bb0$59762310$@ndzh.com>
References: <051901d126a1$1dd20bb0$59762310$@ndzh.com>
Date: Tue, 8 Dec 2015 21:28:31 -0800
Message-ID: <CAFOuuo4Nn1SgMkEt7HHYrvxhK8A0o9mWO1DmKy31JQF3pREXpA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Radia Perlman <radiaperlman@gmail.com>
To: Susan Hares <shares@ndzh.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113cc5885ef1950526705c5f
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/trill/Cye5FyJbLMyhYQ6Ju9auG51yPsc>
Cc: Donald Eastlake <d3e3e3@gmail.com>, Jon Hudson <jon.hudson@gmail.com>, Alia Atlas <akatlas@gmail.com>, draft-ietf-trill-rbridge-multilevel@ietf.org, "trill@ietf.org" <trill@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [trill] 2 week WG LC on draft-ietf-trill-ribridge-multilevel-00.txt. (11/24 to 12/8/2015)
X-BeenThere: trill@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Wed, 09 Dec 2015 05:28:34 -0000

I know of no additional IPR.  And,  I think the draft is ready for last
call, and I think it is important for TRILL scalability.

Radia

On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 2:15 AM, Susan Hares <shares@ndzh.com> wrote:

> TRILL WG:
>
>
>
> This begins a 2 week WG LC on
> draft-ietf-trill-rbridge-multilevel-00.txt.   This draft is going for
> informational RFC to explain the two technical approaches for extending
> TRILL protocol to be multi-level.
>
>
>
> Please note that this draft has 2 IPR:
>
>
>
> http://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/1813/
>
>
>
> http://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/1579/
>
>
>
> Each author of this draft should respond on the list if they know of
> additional IPR.
>
>
>
> The IESG has recently asked WGs to consider the value of information
> documents now and in 5 years.  Therefore, in your comments regarding WG LC,
> please consider:
>
> a)      Is the draft technically ready for WG last call?
>
> b)      Will this architectural type draft be useful to you as you
> explain these two options of multi-level TRILL?
>
> c)       Will this architectural document be critical in 5 years for
> TRILL deployments?
>
>
>
> Thank you,
>
> Sue Hares and Jon Hudson
>
>
>
>