Hi Zaheduzzaman, Thanks for your review. I have posted -11, which I hope addresses your concern on skew below – the definition has been updated to be clearer (more precise).
Regards, Luc André Luc André Burdet | lbur...@cisco.com<mailto:lbur...@cisco.com> | Tel: +1 613 254 4814 From: Zaheduzzaman Sarker via Datatracker <nore...@ietf.org> Date: Wednesday, August 21, 2024 at 07:16 To: The IESG <i...@ietf.org> Cc: draft-ietf-bess-evpn-fast-df-recov...@ietf.org <draft-ietf-bess-evpn-fast-df-recov...@ietf.org>, bess-cha...@ietf.org <bess-cha...@ietf.org>, bess@ietf.org <bess@ietf.org>, matthew.bo...@nokia.com <matthew.bo...@nokia.com>, matthew.bo...@nokia.com <matthew.bo...@nokia.com> Subject: Zaheduzzaman Sarker's No Objection on draft-ietf-bess-evpn-fast-df-recovery-10: (with COMMENT) Zaheduzzaman Sarker has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-bess-evpn-fast-df-recovery-10: 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/about/groups/iesg/statements/handling-ballot-positions/ for more information about how to handle DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bess-evpn-fast-df-recovery/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Thanks for working on this specification. I have no comments from transport protocol point of view. However, I am missing how the skew (in section 3) will be calculated. Is this well defined? Is there a scenario where more than one PEs take over if PE2 (in the example) fails? if yes, how would then the skewing work?
_______________________________________________ BESS mailing list -- bess@ietf.org To unsubscribe send an email to bess-le...@ietf.org
