Hello,
This email begins a two-week WG adoption poll for
draft-mohanty-bess-ebgp-dmz-03 [1].
Please review the draft and post any comments to the BESS working group list.
We are also polling for knowledge of any undisclosed IPR that applies to this
document, to ensure that IPR has been disclos
Hi Matt,
Thanks for comment. Most of comments I have taken care. Please find inline
questions.
From: Matt Joras via Datatracker
Date: Friday, August 27, 2021 at 8:39 AM
To: gen-...@ietf.org
Cc: bess@ietf.org ,
draft-ietf-bess-evpn-igmp-mld-proxy@ietf.org
, last-c...@ietf.org
Subject: G
Hello Authors of draft-ietf-bess-evpn-lsp-ping draft,
Please help me with below.
Apology, if these queries have come in too late in the cycle.
Thanks
Saumya.
From: Dikshit, Saumya
Sent: Thursday, September 2, 2021 11:12 PM
To: draft-ietf-bess-evpn-lsp-p...@ietf.org; bess@ietf.org
Cc: bess-cha...
Hi Saumya
The remote PE router processing the lsp ping packet, does consistency checks
between data plane and control plane. RD, ESI fields along with other fields
defined in the sub-tlvs are used for that purpose. Wildcard/don’t care values
for these fields will defeat the purpose of DP-CP con
Hi Parag,
Thanks for the response. I have few bullets on the same.
Please help clarify and if there is a need to call them out explicitly.
1. “Consistency checkers” feature-set does validates the CP-DP parity and
can be leveraged via management interface to the box.
a. Do you imply
Reviewer: Michael Tüxen
Review result: Ready with Nits
This document has been reviewed as part of the transport area review team's
ongoing effort to review key IETF documents. These comments were written
primarily for the transport area directors, but are copied to the document's
authors and WG to
I support WG adoption.
Thanks,
Acee
From: BESS on behalf of "Bocci, Matthew (Nokia - GB)"
Date: Tuesday, September 7, 2021 at 8:42 AM
To: "bess@ietf.org"
Cc: "draft-mohanty-bess-ebgp-...@ietf.org"
Subject: [bess] WG adoption poll and IPR poll for
draft-mohanty-bess-ebgp-dmz-03 [1].
Hello,
