Re: [bess] Status of draft-ietf-l3vpn-acceptown-community

[Took Adrian off.] Hi! Any ideas on when we might see the update? Thanks! Alvaro. On 2/8/15, 5:50 PM, "Adrian Farrel" wrote: >Hi authors, > >Good news /bad news :-) > >The IESG reviewed your document on Thursday on the telechat and approved >it for publication as an RFC. Well done. > >Howeve

Re: [bess] Status of draft-ietf-l3vpn-acceptown-community

Pradosh?? Thanks! Alvaro. On 5/6/15, 5:41 PM, "David Smith (djsmith)" wrote: >Pradosh is working on so I'll defer to him. /dave > >-Original Message----- >From: Alvaro Retana (aretana) >Sent: Friday, May 01, 2015 3:40 PM >To: draft-ietf-l3vpn-acceptown

[bess] AD Review of draft-ietf-bess-spbm-evpn

Hi! I think the general readability of the document could improve. See below for some suggestions. While that is not a showstopper, I would like to see my comments about the Security Considerations (see below) addressed before starting the IETF Last Call. Thanks! Alvaro. Major: 1. Sec

Re: [bess] AD Review of draft-ietf-bess-spbm-evpn

On 8/4/15, 10:08 PM, "BESS on behalf of Alvaro Retana (aretana)" mailto:bess-boun...@ietf.org> on behalf of aret...@cisco.com<mailto:aret...@cisco.com>> wrote: Hi! I just looked at the update in the –01 version that you published last week. I think the general reada

[bess] AD Review of draft-ietf-bess-mvpn-bidir-ingress-replication-02

Hi! I just finished reading this document. In general I think that there are some things that could be done to improve the readability/clarity. While the authors address the items below, I’ll start he IETF Last Call and put the document on the IESG Agenda (probably for Oct/15). Please post an

Re: [bess] AD Review of draft-ietf-bess-mvpn-bidir-ingress-replication-02

On 9/25/15, 2:11 PM, "Jeffrey (Zhaohui) Zhang" mailto:zzh...@juniper.net>> wrote: Jeffrey: Hi! . . . Major: 1. I-D.ietf-bess-ir and I-D.ietf-bess-mvpn-extranet should be Normative References. Zzh> Done. I-D.ietf-bess-ir wasn’t moved. . . . 1. Section 4. (Security Considerations) Are

Re: [bess] AD Review of draft-ietf-bess-mvpn-bidir-ingress-replication-02

On 9/28/15, 10:39 AM, "thomas.mo...@orange.com" mailto:thomas.mo...@orange.com>> wrote: Jeffrey/Thomas: Hi! First of all, please note that the Gen-ART review that came in today had the same comment about the Normative references…which really indicates that if yo

Re: [bess] AD Review of draft-ietf-bess-mvpn-bidir-ingress-replication-02

On 9/30/15, 2:34 AM, "thomas.mo...@orange.com" mailto:thomas.mo...@orange.com>> wrote: Thomas: Hi! . . . Current: The label may be shared with other P-tunnels, subject to the anti-ambiguity rules for extranet [I-D.ietf-bess-mvpn-extranet

Re: [bess] Stephen Farrell's No Objection on draft-ietf-bess-mvpn-bidir-ingress-replication-03: (with COMMENT)

On 10/15/15, 8:28 AM, "Stephen Farrell" wrote: Stephen (and everyone else): >IMO enough folks have commented on this aspect >that the wg would be wise to seriously consider the >readibility of their output...(This is not a discuss since >I've been assured that this is not a problem for implement

[bess] AD Review of draft-ietf-bess-virtual-subnet-02

Dear authors: I just finished reading this document. All of what is described in this document is straight forward, so much so that it requires no change to existing technology, which makes me think that users/operators have been able to do this all along. Is that correct? Is there anything

Re: [bess] Poll for adoption: draft-morin-bess-mvpn-fast-failover

bess WG: As those of you following this thread may have already noticed, no IPR had been disclosed related to this document, or any of the documents it replaces ([1] and [2]), at the time this adoption poll started..nor by the time the poll was to end on Oct/16. On Oct/17 the WG received a note a

Re: [bess] AD Review of draft-ietf-bess-virtual-subnet-02

On 11/10/15, 2:18 AM, "Xuxiaohu" mailto:xuxia...@huawei.com>> wrote: Xiaohu: Hi! We have updated the draft according to your comments and suggestions. I just have a couple of small items. Please see my comments below.. I'm going to start the IETF Last Call and put this document up for the IE

[bess] AD Review of draft-ietf-bess-mvpn-extranet-03

Hi! I just finished reading this document. As mentioned by the WG chairs at the meeting in Yokohama, the technology in bess can be complex and hard to penetrate for the average (or novice) reader. While the target of documents like this one is not always the average (or novice) reader, it is

Re: [bess] AD Review of draft-ietf-bess-mvpn-extranet-03

On 11/17/15, 4:33 PM, "Eric C Rosen" wrote: >[Eric] Alvaro, thanks for your review. I just posted revision -04, >with a number of edits made in response to your comments. Thanks! I've requested IETF Last Call and put the document on the Telechat agenda. Alvaro. _

Re: [bess] Spencer Dawkins' No Objection on draft-ietf-bess-virtual-subnet-06: (with COMMENT)

On 12/3/15, 10:15 AM, "Spencer Dawkins at IETF" mailto:spencerdawkins.i...@gmail.com>> wrote: I may be confused ... On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 9:13 AM, Alia Atlas mailto:akat...@gmail.com>> wrote: Oh - looping can happen naturally as a result of routing reconvergence. That's what the TTL is for, in

Re: [bess] Alia Atlas' Discuss on draft-ietf-bess-virtual-subnet-06: (with DISCUSS)

Alia: Hi! Xiaohu posted an update which I think should address your concerns. Please take a look. Thanks! Alvaro. On 12/2/15, 11:13 PM, "Alia Atlas" mailto:akat...@gmail.com>> wrote: That works for me. Thanks, Alia On Dec 2, 2015 11:08 PM, "Xuxiaohu" mailto:xuxia...@huawei.com>> wrote:

Re: [bess] Stephen Farrell's Discuss on draft-ietf-bess-virtual-subnet-06: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

Stephen: Hi! Xiaohu posted an update that we hope addresses your concerns. Pelase take a look. Thanks! Alvaro. ___ BESS mailing list BESS@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess

Re: [bess] Kathleen Moriarty's Discuss on draft-ietf-bess-mvpn-extranet-04: (with DISCUSS)

Kathleen: Hi! Eric updated the draft a couple of hours ago. ;-) Please take a look. Thanks! Alvaro. On 12/18/15, 11:19 AM, "Kathleen Moriarty" wrote: >> >>I understand that there are issues having to do with the possibility of >>observing or altering the traffic on the wire. Certainly I c

Re: [bess] [mpls] draft-rosen-idr-rfc3107bis-00

On 1/13/16, 1:11 PM, "mpls on behalf of Eric C Rosen" wrote: Hi! >While I put "idr" in the name of the draft, it's not completely >obvious which WG should own this draft (assuming it progresses) Deborah and I had a quick chat about this point and we think that (if it progresses) this document s

[bess] AD Review of draft-ietf-bess-multicast-damping-03

Hi! I think that the title of this document clearly reflects what you want to do — which may be one of the reasons there was virtually no discussion about it (or any of its predecessors) on the list. However, I think the contents leave many open doors that need to be closed before this documen

Re: [bess] Joel Jaeggli's Discuss on draft-ietf-bess-mvpn-extranet-06: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

On 2/28/16, 5:37 PM, "Joel Jaeggli" wrote: Joel: Hi! How are you? ... >-- >DISCUSS: >-- > >After further discussion related to the ops dir review, I'm going t

Re: [bess] AD Review of draft-ietf-bess-multicast-damping-03

On 2/24/16, 11:58 AM, "Thomas Morin" mailto:thomas.mo...@orange.com>> wrote: Thomas: Hi! There are several places where we're still not in sync. Please se below. Maybe talking in person would be good. Thanks! Alvaro. 2016-02-23, Alvaro Retana (aretana): The A

[bess] FW: Last Call: (Multicast VPN state damping) to Proposed Standard

idr and pim WGs: Hi! Please take a look at this document and send comments to the bess WG. The IETF Last Call expires on Apr/13, but the document is scheduled to be reviewed by the IESG on May/5, so there's enough time to address comments. Thanks! Alvaro. On 3/23/16, 3:18 PM, "iesg-secret...@

Re: [bess] Benoit Claise's Discuss on draft-ietf-bess-mvpn-extranet-04: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

Sue: Hi! Can you please take a look at this? Thanks! Alvaro. On 4/12/16, 3:29 PM, "Martin Vigoureux" wrote: >Dear all, > >we took the opportunity of this IETF meeting to discuss with Sue, Joel >and Benoit, and with Eric. > >Sue has had two requests: >1/ to add some text clarifying the encodi

[bess] FW: Internal WG Review: L2VPN Service Model (l2sm)

Hi! If you haven’t done so, it would be a good idea for the participants in this WG to review this charter. Thanks! Alvaro. On 10/10/16, 6:29 AM, "iesg on behalf of IETF Secretariat" mailto:iesg-boun...@ietf.org> on behalf of ietf-secretariat-re...@ietf.org

[bess] FW: WG Action: Formed L2VPN Service Model (l2sm)

FYI… On 11/4/16, 1:58 PM, "iesg on behalf of The IESG" mailto:iesg-boun...@ietf.org> on behalf of iesg-secret...@ietf.org> wrote: A new IETF WG has been formed in the Operations and Management Area. For additional information, please contact the Area Directors or

[bess] AD Review of draft-ietf-bess-evpn-vpws-07

Dear authors: Hi! I just finished reading this document. Please take a look at my comments below – I think they should be easy to resolve. I will start the IETF Last Call when the comments have been addressed and a new revision has been published. Thanks! Alvaro. Major: M1. There are 8 a

Re: [bess] AD Review of draft-ietf-bess-evpn-vpws-07

On 2/3/17, 4:41 PM, "Sami Boutros" wrote: > Thanks for your review. Please have a look at attached draft w/ most of the > comments > addressed. Looking at the published version -08. I have some answers to your answers below. I also see that there may be other changes as a result of th

Re: [bess] AD Review of draft-ietf-bess-evpn-vpws-07

On 2/16/17, 3:57 PM, "Alvaro Retana (aretana)" mailto:aret...@cisco.com>> wrote: On 2/3/17, 4:41 PM, "Sami Boutros" wrote: > Thanks for your review. Please have a look at attached draft w/ most of the > comments > addressed. Looking at the pu

Re: [bess] AD Review of draft-ietf-bess-evpn-vpws-07

On 2/3/17, 4:41 PM, "Sami Boutros" wrote: [Oops…sent the last two too early… ☹ ]   Sami: Hi > Thanks for your review. Please have a look at attached draft w/ most of the > comments > addressed.   Looking at the published version -08.   I have some answers to your answers below.  I also see th

Re: [bess] AD Review of draft-ietf-bess-evpn-vpws-07

On 2/21/17, 12:39 PM, "Sami Boutros" wrote: Sami: Hi! > Please see comments inline. I have submitted 09. I just have a couple of small things below, the biggest being the 24-bit alignment – which seems to be resolved on the list. I’m going to start the IETF Last Call, but please update the d

Re: [bess] AD Review of draft-ietf-bess-evpn-vpws-07

One more thing…you’re missing the reference to RFC5226. Thanks! Alvaro. ___ BESS mailing list BESS@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess

Re: [bess] AD Review of draft-ietf-bess-evpn-vpws-07

Sami: The reference to RFC5226 should be Normative. Other than that, it looks good to me. Thanks! Alvaro. On 2/24/17, 2:54 PM, "Sami Boutros" wrote: > Attached is the -10 draft with all updates. If All good, I will submit it > Monday. ___ BESS

[bess] AD Review of draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree-09

Dear authors: I just finished reading this document. In general, the document could benefit from an editorial pass to improve readability; I put in some suggestions below, but I’m sure I didn’t mention all. I don’t think that my comments (even the Major ones) will be hard to resolve – most ar

Re: [bess] Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on draft-ietf-bess-evpn-vpws-11: (with COMMENT)

Hi! Yes, the WG was made aware of the IPR at the WGLC: https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/bess/I5_GI44221EZJGQGWHVdv0ukbGk/?qid=08649c721ebdb111c215f6854ff0c241 Alvaro. On 4/11/17, 12:34 PM, "Mirja Kühlewind" wrote: -

Re: [bess] Alia Atlas' Discuss on draft-ietf-bess-evpn-vpws-11: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

Sami: Hi! Let’s go ahead and add the text to explain the operation with VXLAN – I think that the reference to rfc7348 should be Normative. I’ll take care of dealing with the downref when we’re ready with the new text. Thanks! Alvaro. On 4/12/17, 2:14 PM, "Sami Boutros" wrote: Hi Alia,

Re: [bess] IETF LC for IDR-ish document (Default EBGP Route Propagation Behavior Without Policies) to Proposed Standard

Hi! The way I see it, the change proposed in this document is a change to the base BGP spec – as such, many/all users of BGP will be affected. I expect bess participants to also participate in idr – I don’t see the need to extend the discussion. Alvaro. On 5/6/17, 1:53 PM, "Warren Kumari"

Re: [bess] Adam Roach's Discuss on draft-ietf-bess-evpn-vpws-13: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

On 5/11/17, 1:19 AM, "Adam Roach" wrote: Adam: Hi! > -- > DISCUSS: > -- > > Looking at the Shepherd write up and the Ballot, I see no mention of the > normativ

Re: [bess] AD Review of draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree-09

On 5/9/17, 8:51 PM, "Ali Sajassi (sajassi)" mailto:saja...@cisco.com>> wrote: Ali: Hi! We’re on the right path, but not there yet. Please see my comments inline below. Thanks! Alvaro. … > > M1. Both the Introduction and the Abstract mention that “this document > > discusses > > how the f

Re: [bess] AD Review of draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree-09

On 5/12/17, 7:15 PM, "Ali Sajassi (sajassi)" mailto:saja...@cisco.com>> wrote: Ali: Hi! Sorry for the long RTT, busy days… I have two remaining comments (below). Once the registry is defined, then we can start the IESTF LC. Thanks! Alvaro. … > > > M6. Definition of the E-TREE Extended Co

Re: [bess] AD Review of draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree-09

On 6/7/17, 3:16 PM, "Ali Sajassi (sajassi)" mailto:saja...@cisco.com>> wrote: Ali: Hi! > 1) I will get a registry for them set up when there will be more than one > flag. Currently, there is only a > single flag defined and we do not anticipate any additional flags at this > point. To be cl

Re: [bess] draft-ietf-bess-evpn-overlay-08

I know it’s there. I’ve been working on the spring documents which are taking up more time than I expected. BTW, you can follow at home here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/ad/alvaro.retana/ Thanks! Alvaro. On 6/23/17, 2:10 AM, "Ali Sajassi (sajassi)" mailto:saja...@cisco.com>> wrote: O

Re: [bess] Opsdir last call review of draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree-12

Ali: Hi! So, you’re really only changing the 0x0C – 0xFA range, right? If my hex is not wrong, you’re missing some pieces below: 0x40-0x7F, and 0xC0-0xCF, which I’m assume remain Unassigned, right? Thanks! Alvaro. On 8/16/17, 5:54 PM, "Ali Sajassi (sajassi)" mailto:saja...@cisco.com>> wrote

Re: [bess] Opsdir last call review of draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree-12

Experimental[RFC7385] 0xFFReserved [RFC7385] From: Cisco Employee mailto:saja...@cisco.com>> Date: Monday, August 21, 2017 at 5:14 PM To: "Alvaro Retana (aretana)" mailto:aret...@cisco.com>>, "Carlos Pignataro (cp

Re: [bess] Opsdir last call review of draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree-12

., 0xFB is defined as experimental). Cheers, Ali From: "Alvaro Retana (aretana)" mailto:aret...@cisco.com>> Date: Monday, August 21, 2017 at 6:26 PM To: Cisco Employee mailto:saja...@cisco.com>>, "Carlos Pignataro (cpignata)" mailto:cpign...@cisco.com>>, "ops

[bess] FW: Last Call: (YANG Data Model for L3VPN Service Delivery) to Proposed Standard

FYI… Please take a look. If anyone has comments, please reply to the thread in the i...@ietf.org list. Thanks! Alvaro. On 9/13/17, 10:04 AM, "IETF-Announce on behalf of The IESG" wrote: The IESG has received a request from an individual submitter to consider the following document: - 'YAN

Re: [bess] Eric Rescorla's Discuss on draft-ietf-bess-evpn-etree-13: (with DISCUSS)

Hi! I don’t have anything in my archive either. :-( I just poked the authors… Alvaro. On 9/26/17, 5:59 AM, "Eric Rescorla" mailto:e...@rtfm.com>> wrote: I have some memory that someone responded that this wasn't a security requirement, but I can't find that now. -Ekr On Sat, Sep 9, 2017 a