Alvaro:
Can we set a date to discuss the IP sec tunnels? Do you want to talk as routing chairs before we include the IPSEC and I2NSF chairs? Sue Hares From: Alvaro Retana [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, April 2, 2019 10:20 AM To: Linda Dunbar Cc: [email protected] WG; [email protected]; [email protected]; idr wg; [email protected]; <[email protected]> Subject: Re: 答复: [I2nsf] 答复: [IPsec] using BGP signaling to achieve IPsec Tunnel configuration (draft-hujun-idr-bgp-ipsec): potential conflict with the I2NSF's Controller facilitated IPsec configuration On April 2, 2019 at 5:21:09 AM, Xialiang (Frank, Network Standard & Patent Dept) ([email protected]) wrote: [Trimmed individual addresses and consolidated (sec-ads, i2nsf-chairs) to avoid a bounce + bess-chairs + rtg-ads.] Hi! Thank you all for the discussion. I’m replying to this message to pick on what Frank said…but in reality is a general reply to the thread. the key point is...the function gaps each draft can fill in. Because there are several drafts that may overlap in function and content, I have asked John/Sue (idr-chairs) to work with Stephane/Matthew (bess-chairs) in figuring out the overlaps and helping the authors (if needed) to rationalize what should go forward and what is not needed because it may be a duplicate…at least starting from the RTG area point of view. Once the consolidation is done, we should have a clearer picture on the type of interaction we need to have with i2nsf/ipsecme. Since we’re all just getting back from Prague, please give the Chairs a little bit of time. Thanks! Alvaro.
_______________________________________________ BESS mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess
