Hi,
I support the adoption of this document.
Best regards,
Jie
发件人：Bocci, Matthew (Nokia - GB)
收件人：bess
抄 送：bess-chairs
时 间：2019-11-27 20:37:25
主题[bess] WG Adoption and IPR Poll for draft-litkowski-bess-rfc5549revision-00
Hello,
This email begins a two-weeks WG adoption poll for
draft-litko
Hi Matthew & Stephane,
I support publishing this draft as a standards track RFC.
Best regards,
Jie
From: BESS [mailto:bess-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Bocci, Matthew (Nokia -
GB)
Sent: Tuesday, December 1, 2020 1:16 AM
To: draft-ietf-bess-srv6-servi...@ietf.org; bess@ietf.org
Subject: [bess]
Hi Matthew and Stephane,
I've read this document and support its publication as a standards track RFC.
Best regards,
Jie
From: BESS [mailto:bess-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of slitkows.i...@gmail.com
Sent: Friday, December 11, 2020 11:53 PM
To: draft-ietf-bess-mvpn-evpn-aggregation-la...@ietf.or
Hi,
I support the adoption of this document, it provides useful information which
can help the transition towards IPv6.
Best regards,
Jie
From: BESS [mailto:bess-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Bocci, Matthew (Nokia -
GB)
Sent: Tuesday, April 13, 2021 5:37 PM
To: draft-mishra-bess-deployment-gu
Hi Lizhong,
Thanks a lot for your review and comment. Please see my replies inline:
Best regards,
Jie
From: BESS [mailto:bess-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Lizhong Jin
Sent: Tuesday, November 11, 2014 2:35 PM
To: '程伟强'; 'David Sinicrope'; p...@ietf.org; 'Shahram Davari'
Cc: 'Stewart Bryant'; 'A
IMO the SAFIs already defined for flowspec (SAFI 133, 134) can be reused. The
L2 AFI can ensure a separate AFI/SAFI for L2.
Best regards,
Jie
> -Original Message-
> From: BESS [mailto:bess-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Henderickx, Wim
> (Wim)
> Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2014 8:09 PM
Support the adoption. Draft provides a useful solution for FIB scalability.
Best regards,
Jie
> -Original Message-
> From: BESS [mailto:bess-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Martin Vigoureux
> Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2015 7:06 PM
> To: bess@ietf.org
> Cc: draft-xu-l3vpn-virtual-subnet-
Hi Eric,
Thanks for writing this draft, it provides useful clarifications and updates
for RFC 3107.
After reading the draft, I have some comments:
1. For NLRI encoding with single label, this draft says that "the S bit MUST be
set to one on transmission". IMO RFC 3107 does not mandate this,
+1
Thanks Thomas and welcome Stephane.
Best regards,
Jie
From: BESS [mailto:bess-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Jeff Tantsura
Sent: Saturday, December 02, 2017 6:00 AM
To: Dolganow, Andrew (Nokia - SG/Singapore)
Cc: Rabadan, Jorge (Nokia - US/Mountain View) ; Tony
Przygienda ; bess@ietf.org; A
Hi Sue and authors,
I've read the latest version of this document and have some questions,
I understand this document provides one mechanism to build P2MP Trees using the
tree SIDs and the unicast SR SIDs. While it is not quite clear to me how much
it is analogous to SR policy, and whether BGP
Hi Chairs,
I support the adoption as a coauthor. The mechanism proposed in this document
is useful for BFD provisioning and technically sound.
I'm not aware of any undisclosed IPR that is related to this draft.
Sorry for the late response.
Best regards,
Jie
From: BESS [mailto:bess-boun...@iet
Hi WG,
I support the merge of these documents. This is useful work, and hope this
would simplify both the design options and the IETF process.
Best regards,
Jie
From: Gyan Mishra
Sent: Friday, July 28, 2023 8:32 AM
To: BESS ; bess-cha...@ietf.org; Dongjie (Jimmy)
Subject: IETF 117 BESS
Hi Reshma and Ketan,
It is good to see the link-bandwidth extended community in
draft-ietf-idr-link-bandwidth is updated to support both transitive and
non-transitive use cases. The limitation with non-transitive was one of the
reasons of introducing the new extended community in
draft-li-idr
13 matches
Mail list logo
