[trill] Eric Rescorla's No Objection on draft-ietf-trill-multi-topology-05: (with COMMENT)
Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com> Thu, 08 March 2018 14:05 UTC
Return-Path: <ekr@rtfm.com>
X-Original-To: trill@ietf.org
Delivered-To: trill@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E79B1126D85; Thu, 8 Mar 2018 06:05:06 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>
To: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Cc: draft-ietf-trill-multi-topology@ietf.org, trill-chairs@ietf.org, shares@ndzh.com, trill@ietf.org
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.74.0
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Message-ID: <152051790690.14018.12630385210703102002.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2018 06:05:06 -0800
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/trill/s0m5-Ryvlytmgo4fylnRSYA6o3s>
Subject: [trill] Eric Rescorla's No Objection on draft-ietf-trill-multi-topology-05: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: trill@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: Thu, 08 Mar 2018 14:05:07 -0000
Eric Rescorla has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-trill-multi-topology-05: No Objection When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-trill-multi-topology/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Review in context: https://mozphab-ietf.devsvcdev.mozaws.net/D3642 A diagram in the introduction would have helped me. Grained Label [RFC7172]. By implication, an "FGL TRILL switch" does not support MT. You are using MT before expansion here. But I actually don't understand why it does not. Can you explain? implication, a "VL RBridge" or "VL TRILL switch" does not support FGL or MT. My same question here as above. Why can't a VL TRILL switch support MT? (1) all TRILL switch ports on the link advertise topology T support in their Hellos and (2) if any TRILL switch port on the link requires explicit TRILL Data Probably stupid question but how do you know that there aren't TRILL switches that you haven't heard from yet that don't support T? V - The version number of the MT label. This document specifies version zero. What do I do if I receive an unknown version? + There may be non-zero topologies with no multi-destination traffic or, as descried in [RFC5120], even topologies with no traffic at all. For example, if only known destination Nit: described topology, there would be no need for a distribution tree for topology T. For this reasons, a Number of Trees to Compute of zero in the Trees sub-TLV for the TRILL switch holding Nit: "reason"
- [trill] Eric Rescorla's No Objection on draft-iet… Eric Rescorla
- Re: [trill] Eric Rescorla's No Objection on draft… Donald Eastlake
- Re: [trill] Eric Rescorla's No Objection on draft… Eric Rescorla