Jeffrey presented subject draft in mboned. Given how i am
not usually tracking BESS WG mailing list and may not be around:
I would like to see subject draft to be adopted as a WG document in BESS
and become an update to RFC6514 (not to say bugfix ;-).
Feeedback detail: The draft should be amended
go to
> an AnycastRP not in the configured RP set.
>
> Hope this is clear, and let me know if I'm missing anything.
>
> -Lenny
>
> | -Original Message-
> | From: BESS [mailto:bess-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Toerless Eckert
> | Sent: Monday, Novembe
10, as these registers only go to members of the RP
> > > set. And the RP set should be configured on all the C-RPs. It wouldn't
> > > make much sense to have these registers transit the MVPN domain to go to
> > > an AnycastRP not in the configured RP set.
>
dle them.
I do not understand looping in redundant pseudowire setups well enough to have
an argument about them.
Cheers
Toerless
> Regards,
> Luc André
>
> Luc André Burdet | Cisco | laburdet.i...@gmail.com | Tel: +1 613 254 4814
>
>
> From: Toerless Eckert via Dat
Reviewer: Toerless Eckert
Review result: On the Right Track
Reviewer: Toerless Eckert
Summary:
The purpose of the document is to extend the BGP message signaling and local
router procedures for failover of "Designated Forwarders" for pseudowires using
calculated future timestamps and
