From tom.taylor.stds@gmail.com Sun Mar 4 09:59:01 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 02C7821F86B0 for ; Sun, 4 Mar 2012 09:59:01 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id vpvzGkrgGudx for ; Sun, 4 Mar 2012 09:58:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-iy0-f172.google.com (mail-iy0-f172.google.com [209.85.210.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 634BA21F86B9 for ; Sun, 4 Mar 2012 09:58:59 -0800 (PST) Received: by iazz13 with SMTP id z13so5333396iaz.31 for ; Sun, 04 Mar 2012 09:58:59 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of tom.taylor.stds@gmail.com designates 10.50.216.201 as permitted sender) client-ip=10.50.216.201; Authentication-Results: mr.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of tom.taylor.stds@gmail.com designates 10.50.216.201 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=tom.taylor.stds@gmail.com; dkim=pass header.i=tom.taylor.stds@gmail.com Received: from mr.google.com ([10.50.216.201]) by 10.50.216.201 with SMTP id os9mr4437419igc.22.1330883939028 (num_hops = 1); Sun, 04 Mar 2012 09:58:59 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:x-forwarded-message-id:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:x-antivirus:x-antivirus-status; bh=HUkpazSCoC9v5N0kOLTY68cQ6VylUuVnyQ/X7HWKomY=; b=S6gVN9NL3uqpPUa/DprLZW7y2OVyHtkDMonaPkfEcyN+QZRKP8bxm8nSBJWz1SOitt 7BNaAWD1dc4aBBZLx73KxzMbu7Xg04smGVD45SGkYnv7tmjI9I3JJk/yam2AGY9e+5v5 oMcHgW2hBGRU77e2ivPlBm3GlH3QcqU7LfMpvK30uUnghsdNtr6lXe6WPkE46qCGx60B QkIZ7I0vD44yyBTeKdplH8a+zVyRDs1aaisttCUuM8jN6fya1ZUbytNP9DAcSJxPhVr0 ULLxZFF1TCglQh65oA87mLQL/B1ceYr+D/hevkjRUuf8L7uKgNSs22EMPOdgcyUK84aA fu5g== Received: by 10.50.216.201 with SMTP id os9mr3704302igc.22.1330883938973; Sun, 04 Mar 2012 09:58:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (dsl-173-206-17-221.tor.primus.ca. [173.206.17.221]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id ko6sm6031050igc.2.2012.03.04.09.58.57 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Sun, 04 Mar 2012 09:58:58 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <4F53AD62.5070308@gmail.com> Date: Sun, 04 Mar 2012 12:58:58 -0500 From: Tom Taylor User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:10.0.2) Gecko/20120216 Thunderbird/10.0.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: pim@ietf.org References: <20120304174809.6867.98719.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> In-Reply-To: <20120304174809.6867.98719.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> X-Forwarded-Message-Id: <20120304174809.6867.98719.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 120304-0, 04/03/2012), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean Cc: "Cathy Zhou\(Qian\)" Subject: [pim] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-taylor-pim-v4v6-translation-00.txt X-BeenThere: pim@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Protocol Independent Multicast List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 04 Mar 2012 17:59:01 -0000 We have submitted this document dealing with one aspect of multicast transition. Comments are welcome. Tom Taylor -------- Original Message -------- Subject: New Version Notification for draft-taylor-pim-v4v6-translation-00.txt Date: Sun, 04 Mar 2012 09:48:09 -0800 From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: tom.taylor.stds@gmail.com CC: cathy.zhou@huawei.com A new version of I-D, draft-taylor-pim-v4v6-translation-00.txt has been successfully submitted by Tom Taylor and posted to the IETF repository. Filename: draft-taylor-pim-v4v6-translation Revision: 00 Title: A Translator For Protocol Independent Multicast (PIM) Interworking Between IPv4 and IPv6 Creation date: 2012-03-04 WG ID: Individual Submission Number of pages: 7 Abstract: This document describes the requirements and methodology for a translator operating within a dual stack multicast router, allowing it to interoperate between Protocol Independent Multicast - Sparse Mode (PIM-SM, RFC 4601) with IPv4 and PIM with IPv6. The IETF Secretariat From tsenevir@cisco.com Sun Mar 4 20:01:38 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A96BF21F865B for ; Sun, 4 Mar 2012 20:01:38 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -7.972 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.972 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=2.626, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id L7I-lYx4t3Kz for ; Sun, 4 Mar 2012 20:01:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from mtv-iport-1.cisco.com (mtv-iport-1.cisco.com [173.36.130.12]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BD61621F8636 for ; Sun, 4 Mar 2012 20:01:37 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=tsenevir@cisco.com; l=5713; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1330920097; x=1332129697; h=mime-version:subject:date:message-id:from:to:cc; bh=AEcrnnuZpCIQxLL0giz9REJzBX7kOtrkipABNEzUo5E=; b=PPtVgLsfzYVrwhtFOhlm22fUqtk1y3eDLAMfB03atNgpVszXwkPNHtLV zmx9fO/3eC/O/5nCpJQpyD+m4f9LrFzb6RRyR/Q182MyRMmj+gz4ldUoI TsgyGNlFIJkVB5hDoS7N08wBfkNiDzkQ+88d+lpeFgKupMG/m9rePucaD U=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Av8EAJw5VE+rRDoH/2dsb2JhbAA5CoJSsgCBB4F/AQQSAQkRA0kSASoGGAdXAQQbGodkAaBrAZYZihIFgySCP2MEiFCdAIMEgTQ X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.73,531,1325462400"; d="scan'208,217";a="31891461" Received: from mtv-core-2.cisco.com ([171.68.58.7]) by mtv-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 05 Mar 2012 04:01:37 +0000 Received: from xbh-sjc-231.amer.cisco.com (xbh-sjc-231.cisco.com [128.107.191.100]) by mtv-core-2.cisco.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id q2541bYS000334; Mon, 5 Mar 2012 04:01:37 GMT Received: from xmb-sjc-214.amer.cisco.com ([171.70.151.145]) by xbh-sjc-231.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Sun, 4 Mar 2012 20:01:37 -0800 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01CCFA84.A95427EB" Date: Sun, 4 Mar 2012 20:01:36 -0800 Message-ID: <344037D7CFEFE84E97E9CC1F56C5F4A5B5CB4D@xmb-sjc-214.amer.cisco.com> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: ICMP based method for IP Multicast data plane failure detection Thread-Index: Acz6hKj0Xx6eJV14RZenaEPu1M4Jaw== From: "Tissa Senevirathne (tsenevir)" To: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 05 Mar 2012 04:01:37.0566 (UTC) FILETIME=[A9A483E0:01CCFA84] Cc: Donald Eastlake , "Raghava Sivaramu \(raghavas\)" , Sam Aldrin Subject: [pim] ICMP based method for IP Multicast data plane failure detection X-BeenThere: pim@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Protocol Independent Multicast List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Mar 2012 04:01:38 -0000 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------_=_NextPart_001_01CCFA84.A95427EB Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Dear All =20 ssmping and asmping are great tool to diagnose multicast data plane issues. In large data centers and hosting services, servers are not managed by network administrators. Hence may not be able to run ssmping servers, which in turn limit the ability to trouble shoot a multicast problem. In the draft-tissa-pim-mcastoam, we propose a framework that allows to utilize ICMP message to not only troubleshoot multicast data plane issues but also discover roles (DR, RP ) played by multicast routers. Please could you review and provide your comments. =20 Filename: draft-tissa-pim-mcastoam Revision: 00 Title: IP multicast data plane failure detection Creation date: 2012-03-04 WG ID: Individual Submission Number of pages: 17 =20 Abstract: ICMP Based multicast messaging infrastructure is presented in this document. Messages presented in this document is intended to be utilized for troubleshooting multicast data plane connectivity issues as well as identify multicast routers performing different roles, such as Rendezvous Point (RP), Designated Router etc. =20 =20 ------_=_NextPart_001_01CCFA84.A95427EB Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Dear = All

 

ssmping and asmping are great tool to diagnose = multicast data plane issues. In large data centers and hosting services, = servers are not managed by network administrators. Hence may not be able = to run ssmping servers, which in turn limit the ability to trouble shoot = a multicast problem. In the draft-tissa-pim-mcastoam, we propose a = framework that allows to utilize ICMP message to not only troubleshoot = multicast data plane issues but also discover roles (DR, RP ) played by = multicast routers. Please could you review and provide your = comments.

 

Filename:   = draft-tissa-pim-mcastoam

Revision:   00

Title:       &nbs= p;    IP multicast data plane failure = detection

Creation = date:    2012-03-04

WG = ID:            = Individual Submission

Number of = pages: 17

 

Abstract:

    ICMP Based multicast messaging = infrastructure is presented in this

   document. Messages presented in this = document is intended to be

   utilized for troubleshooting multicast = data plane connectivity

   issues as well as identify multicast = routers performing different

   roles, such as Rendezvous Point (RP), = Designated Router etc.

 

 

------_=_NextPart_001_01CCFA84.A95427EB-- From simon.perreault@viagenie.ca Mon Mar 5 10:27:13 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC2A721F8775 for ; Mon, 5 Mar 2012 10:27:13 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.532 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.532 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.068, BAYES_00=-2.599, NO_RELAYS=-0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id kgcQxrgbdgEC for ; Mon, 5 Mar 2012 10:27:13 -0800 (PST) Received: from jazz.viagenie.ca (jazz.viagenie.ca [IPv6:2620:0:230:8000::2]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2090021F8764 for ; Mon, 5 Mar 2012 10:27:13 -0800 (PST) Received: from ringo.viagenie.ca (unknown [IPv6:2620:0:230:c000:8c46:de1b:764:c20]) by jazz.viagenie.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 32FAF21F51; Mon, 5 Mar 2012 13:27:12 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <4F55057F.6010705@viagenie.ca> Date: Mon, 05 Mar 2012 13:27:11 -0500 From: Simon Perreault User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:10.0.1) Gecko/20120216 Thunderbird/10.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Tom Taylor References: <20120304174809.6867.98719.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <4F53AD62.5070308@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <4F53AD62.5070308@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "Cathy Zhou\(Qian\)" , pim@ietf.org Subject: Re: [pim] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-taylor-pim-v4v6-translation-00.txt X-BeenThere: pim@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Protocol Independent Multicast List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Mar 2012 18:27:14 -0000 On 2012-03-04 12:58, Tom Taylor wrote: > We have submitted this document dealing with one aspect of multicast > transition. Comments are welcome. Here are some comments... 1. The abstract says: This document describes the requirements and methodology ... Shouldn't requirements be discussed in the overview/framework document instead of here? 2. Section 2 says: This specification assumes that each interface of the subject router is configured to use either IPv4 or IPv6 but not both. An exception is allowed for interfaces connecting only to other dual stack PIM routers implementing this specification. That's a big assumption. I'm not sure it will be acceptable in practice. Would it be possible instead to consider a dual-stack PIM router as being made of two logical single-stack PIM routers? We have something like this in our IGMP/MLD translation draft. http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-perreault-mboned-igmp-mld-translation-00#section-3.1 3. Section 3 says: Multicast group addresses SHOULD be mapped between IPv4 and IPv6 as described in [I-D.mboned-64-multicast-address-format]. Why SHOULD instead of MUST? 4. Section 3 says: If the IPv6 group address does not match the specified format, or if a conforming router is otherwise configured, mapping from IPv6 to IPv4 group addresses MUST use a statically-configured table. How about MAY instead of MUST? And how about allowing any other mechanism an implementation may wish to use instead of limiting to statically-configured tables? Simon -- DTN made easy, lean, and smart --> http://postellation.viagenie.ca NAT64/DNS64 open-source --> http://ecdysis.viagenie.ca STUN/TURN server --> http://numb.viagenie.ca From tom.taylor.stds@gmail.com Mon Mar 5 11:16:32 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BA61721F88C2 for ; Mon, 5 Mar 2012 11:16:32 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id AWZ9pOa8Arsq for ; Mon, 5 Mar 2012 11:16:31 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-iy0-f172.google.com (mail-iy0-f172.google.com [209.85.210.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9CDF121F8904 for ; Mon, 5 Mar 2012 11:16:31 -0800 (PST) Received: by iazz13 with SMTP id z13so6948895iaz.31 for ; Mon, 05 Mar 2012 11:16:31 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding :x-antivirus:x-antivirus-status; bh=066zZoqG/yycyYGwNUloxvLAd065/85BSRvaz/nez38=; b=aiwCBYcOgc+g6rBuvCDjaP/ksQlgmQL25OundiLejrOvCfUKMHBwBrCizFZDcV7TPo msbgMG6ZSA2IW5mowfzK9R7ozv9XSjy7TSNy7a3s2P2V65iCXwYzV5PtUcNaCUSy3lWU fQDkI8w7eRMvXONC2SAtzfz2r514M4yxWo1XtfzIHLLox9w93GqAaWjjvn9JvIv9y6iL ngrUtLoXDbAXjBmIhv5OrCoJDzHEKcXC78GgHYsG1MEqO/x5x7Sm46UsSixWLwq8+zpU H+Ql8n6Nyx9pOkG8rR/cibJFAXrxP0Bi6rkpUqybR52Sv50F/xZ9+U4aeioS9aWuc/hz zFgQ== Received: by 10.50.182.231 with SMTP id eh7mr6665138igc.29.1330974991341; Mon, 05 Mar 2012 11:16:31 -0800 (PST) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (dsl-173-206-17-221.tor.primus.ca. [173.206.17.221]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id dl10sm12269378igb.9.2012.03.05.11.16.29 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Mon, 05 Mar 2012 11:16:30 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <4F55110E.4080601@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 05 Mar 2012 14:16:30 -0500 From: Tom Taylor User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:10.0.2) Gecko/20120216 Thunderbird/10.0.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Simon Perreault References: <20120304174809.6867.98719.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <4F53AD62.5070308@gmail.com> <4F55057F.6010705@viagenie.ca> In-Reply-To: <4F55057F.6010705@viagenie.ca> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 120305-0, 05/03/2012), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean Cc: "Cathy Zhou\(Qian\)" , pim@ietf.org Subject: Re: [pim] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-taylor-pim-v4v6-translation-00.txt X-BeenThere: pim@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Protocol Independent Multicast List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Mar 2012 19:16:32 -0000 Thanks a lot for the review. On 05/03/2012 1:27 PM, Simon Perreault wrote: > On 2012-03-04 12:58, Tom Taylor wrote: >> We have submitted this document dealing with one aspect of multicast >> transition. Comments are welcome. > > Here are some comments... > > > 1. The abstract says: > > This document describes the requirements and methodology ... > > Shouldn't requirements be discussed in the overview/framework document > instead of here? > [PTT] Hard to know what to call Section 2. I think it's on a different level from the overview, but maybe I'm wrong. > > 2. Section 2 says: > > This specification assumes that > each interface of the subject router is configured to use either IPv4 > or IPv6 but not both. An exception is allowed for interfaces > connecting only to other dual stack PIM routers implementing this > specification. > > That's a big assumption. I'm not sure it will be acceptable in practice. > > Would it be possible instead to consider a dual-stack PIM router as > being made of two logical single-stack PIM routers? We have something > like this in our IGMP/MLD translation draft. > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-perreault-mboned-igmp-mld-translation-00#section-3.1 > [PTT] This is different from IGMP/MLD, because all the PIM routers on a link have to understand what the other guys are doing. When a Join is sent out, it affects state on all the routers, not just the one it is targeted to. So the assumption was as much about making PIM work in general as it was about translation. > > > 3. Section 3 says: > > Multicast group addresses SHOULD be mapped between IPv4 and IPv6 as > described in [I-D.mboned-64-multicast-address-format]. > > Why SHOULD instead of MUST? > [PTT] Because of the exception described further down. The IPv6 address might not have the right format. [PTT] Related comment: thinking about it after I submitted the document, I'm not sure it's possible for two different IPv6 addresses with the same embedded IPv4 address to refer to different sources. More likely that situation would simply be a matter of the packets arriving from the same source through different networks. The exception would be if the embedded IPv4 address was shared and happened to be shared between sources. > > 4. Section 3 says: > > If the IPv6 group > address does not match the specified format, or if a conforming > router is otherwise configured, mapping from IPv6 to IPv4 group > addresses MUST use a statically-configured table. > > How about MAY instead of MUST? And how about allowing any other > mechanism an implementation may wish to use instead of limiting to > statically-configured tables? [PTT] Thanks for a good alternative. Agreed. > > > Simon From simon.perreault@viagenie.ca Mon Mar 5 11:26:41 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E5A621F891E for ; Mon, 5 Mar 2012 11:26:41 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.538 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.538 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.062, BAYES_00=-2.599, NO_RELAYS=-0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id zxZkSh3et0gz for ; Mon, 5 Mar 2012 11:26:41 -0800 (PST) Received: from jazz.viagenie.ca (jazz.viagenie.ca [IPv6:2620:0:230:8000::2]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0803721F891D for ; Mon, 5 Mar 2012 11:26:41 -0800 (PST) Received: from ringo.viagenie.ca (unknown [IPv6:2620:0:230:c000:8c46:de1b:764:c20]) by jazz.viagenie.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6A79821CC2; Mon, 5 Mar 2012 14:26:40 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <4F55136F.40704@viagenie.ca> Date: Mon, 05 Mar 2012 14:26:39 -0500 From: Simon Perreault User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:10.0.1) Gecko/20120216 Thunderbird/10.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Tom Taylor References: <20120304174809.6867.98719.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <4F53AD62.5070308@gmail.com> <4F55057F.6010705@viagenie.ca> <4F55110E.4080601@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <4F55110E.4080601@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "Cathy Zhou\(Qian\)" , pim@ietf.org Subject: Re: [pim] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-taylor-pim-v4v6-translation-00.txt X-BeenThere: pim@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Protocol Independent Multicast List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Mar 2012 19:26:41 -0000 On 2012-03-05 14:16, Tom Taylor wrote: >> 2. Section 2 says: >> >> This specification assumes that >> each interface of the subject router is configured to use either IPv4 >> or IPv6 but not both. An exception is allowed for interfaces >> connecting only to other dual stack PIM routers implementing this >> specification. >> >> That's a big assumption. I'm not sure it will be acceptable in practice. >> >> Would it be possible instead to consider a dual-stack PIM router as >> being made of two logical single-stack PIM routers? We have something >> like this in our IGMP/MLD translation draft. >> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-perreault-mboned-igmp-mld-translation-00#section-3.1 >> > [PTT] This is different from IGMP/MLD, because all the PIM routers on a > link have to understand what the other guys are doing. When a Join is > sent out, it affects state on all the routers, not just the one it is > targeted to. So the assumption was as much about making PIM work in > general as it was about translation. Now I'm more confused. PIMv4 and PIMv6 are basically "ships in the night", aren't they? They are not required to have the same topology. Are you saying that this changes with the introduction of PIM translation? I don't know what would be the right question to ask here. I'm just very puzzled as to why this assumption is needed. >> Multicast group addresses SHOULD be mapped between IPv4 and IPv6 as >> described in [I-D.mboned-64-multicast-address-format]. >> >> Why SHOULD instead of MUST? >> > [PTT] Because of the exception described further down. The IPv6 address > might not have the right format. Ah, right. Makes sense. Simon -- DTN made easy, lean, and smart --> http://postellation.viagenie.ca NAT64/DNS64 open-source --> http://ecdysis.viagenie.ca STUN/TURN server --> http://numb.viagenie.ca From tom.taylor.stds@gmail.com Mon Mar 5 12:41:36 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7DD4321F892C for ; Mon, 5 Mar 2012 12:41:36 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id joroJzr5UNze for ; Mon, 5 Mar 2012 12:41:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-iy0-f172.google.com (mail-iy0-f172.google.com [209.85.210.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CD8DC21F891B for ; Mon, 5 Mar 2012 12:41:35 -0800 (PST) Received: by iazz13 with SMTP id z13so7048919iaz.31 for ; Mon, 05 Mar 2012 12:41:35 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of tom.taylor.stds@gmail.com designates 10.50.195.131 as permitted sender) client-ip=10.50.195.131; Authentication-Results: mr.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of tom.taylor.stds@gmail.com designates 10.50.195.131 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=tom.taylor.stds@gmail.com; dkim=pass header.i=tom.taylor.stds@gmail.com Received: from mr.google.com ([10.50.195.131]) by 10.50.195.131 with SMTP id ie3mr8090313igc.52.1330980095592 (num_hops = 1); Mon, 05 Mar 2012 12:41:35 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding :x-antivirus:x-antivirus-status; bh=9qCHgBoxpSbQswfF/uQkzHRVgrGveOsriF9biNTI6M0=; b=cyimtmSc2xnbRrEgCerT7/J3XmikNSrXjuBRYVPEofbxEglfAFt63b6eL8xHwOaoI1 JxBQc087iVQ++fQYrXMMBvd+UWjyrNILLK0uNQIdViOaTgUEezBMO9IhkO7jr7+DyQEJ ai3Nh1+rlB/EdYbc45YSb/TY09pHzpSsFODQArafARBtUCqxVsq1PJ/4UvLdoHS9txBp wVOUvF3K1EJY5lUiAeIldodbqdy2t7P7Ngwv7jwqKIITbmWweo5cuz9aWOgfdFd7azBY YzpQvEdHegYfJwsrosTI6Cunpg/BkCWZkkKPbQCrbwksxBq/IP3M07lVKcKTCbEZUS3D YAaw== Received: by 10.50.195.131 with SMTP id ie3mr6730876igc.52.1330980095533; Mon, 05 Mar 2012 12:41:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (dsl-173-206-17-221.tor.primus.ca. [173.206.17.221]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id ko6sm8525363igc.2.2012.03.05.12.41.34 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Mon, 05 Mar 2012 12:41:34 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <4F5524FE.1060302@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 05 Mar 2012 15:41:34 -0500 From: Tom Taylor User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:10.0.2) Gecko/20120216 Thunderbird/10.0.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Simon Perreault References: <20120304174809.6867.98719.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <4F53AD62.5070308@gmail.com> <4F55057F.6010705@viagenie.ca> <4F55110E.4080601@gmail.com> <4F55136F.40704@viagenie.ca> In-Reply-To: <4F55136F.40704@viagenie.ca> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 120305-0, 05/03/2012), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean Cc: "Cathy Zhou\(Qian\)" , pim@ietf.org Subject: Re: [pim] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-taylor-pim-v4v6-translation-00.txt X-BeenThere: pim@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Protocol Independent Multicast List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Mar 2012 20:41:36 -0000 Below. On 05/03/2012 2:26 PM, Simon Perreault wrote: > On 2012-03-05 14:16, Tom Taylor wrote: >>> 2. Section 2 says: >>> >>> This specification assumes that >>> each interface of the subject router is configured to use either IPv4 >>> or IPv6 but not both. An exception is allowed for interfaces >>> connecting only to other dual stack PIM routers implementing this >>> specification. >>> >>> That's a big assumption. I'm not sure it will be acceptable in practice. >>> >>> Would it be possible instead to consider a dual-stack PIM router as >>> being made of two logical single-stack PIM routers? We have something >>> like this in our IGMP/MLD translation draft. >>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-perreault-mboned-igmp-mld-translation-00#section-3.1 >>> >>> >> [PTT] This is different from IGMP/MLD, because all the PIM routers on a >> link have to understand what the other guys are doing. When a Join is >> sent out, it affects state on all the routers, not just the one it is >> targeted to. So the assumption was as much about making PIM work in >> general as it was about translation. > > Now I'm more confused. PIMv4 and PIMv6 are basically "ships in the > night", aren't they? They are not required to have the same topology. > Are you saying that this changes with the introduction of PIM translation? > > I don't know what would be the right question to ask here. I'm just very > puzzled as to why this assumption is needed. > [PTT] Hmm ... I guess you're right. I'll recycle the draft before next week. I have too much to do to do it today. Thanks again for your review. ... From mmcbride7@gmail.com Mon Mar 5 14:17:47 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BE77821F8870 for ; Mon, 5 Mar 2012 14:17:47 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.493 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.493 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.106, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id E41bS0OL2iRZ for ; Mon, 5 Mar 2012 14:17:47 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-lpp01m010-f44.google.com (mail-lpp01m010-f44.google.com [209.85.215.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F1A5D21F881F for ; Mon, 5 Mar 2012 14:17:46 -0800 (PST) Received: by lagj5 with SMTP id j5so6378618lag.31 for ; Mon, 05 Mar 2012 14:17:46 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of mmcbride7@gmail.com designates 10.152.144.39 as permitted sender) client-ip=10.152.144.39; Authentication-Results: mr.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of mmcbride7@gmail.com designates 10.152.144.39 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=mmcbride7@gmail.com; dkim=pass header.i=mmcbride7@gmail.com Received: from mr.google.com ([10.152.144.39]) by 10.152.144.39 with SMTP id sj7mr19798092lab.29.1330985866003 (num_hops = 1); Mon, 05 Mar 2012 14:17:46 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=L4mucmxvhQWsJ0GpN/YxMNs7WISti/aIobVKUhczCPE=; b=zJVdeNepUB1UEMBO7q21zApUtEJiHF5wgw8go/KFJVhx3HYsGkRBpOFZwlOXtX1yV+ SO/VESqyCUEyIDgRsjy0aYx2wLg3FpVq919zkd4CmzadIOYI89MX3lJD0YYP/EtNJW4I tlBjKGGiMqDtFCNAXvQVRliVo9QGkNZusahwjegyC39LGzMQw0d+9+OWe1FK2iiFcHk6 JPUzNqZyM3apYUMrOcqACV6gF6Kxe4GeQ3E3FowvpzAVvVoHvr70ZfjtCln20tx4S/XS n9MFbR2Hz9JcTTGxvkb7PQ5bsuLVdIhtXGQn2FPnLF5SYdSZLPAAp8U9bdu/tQ9T8d7j lSyg== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.152.144.39 with SMTP id sj7mr16234253lab.29.1330985865904; Mon, 05 Mar 2012 14:17:45 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.112.80.199 with HTTP; Mon, 5 Mar 2012 14:17:45 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2012 14:17:45 -0800 Message-ID: From: Mike McBride To: pim@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Subject: [pim] Paris agenda X-BeenThere: pim@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Protocol Independent Multicast List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Mar 2012 22:17:47 -0000 PIM is scheduled to meet 1300-1500 on Tuesday March 27th. Here is our agenda as of today: draft-ietf-pim-explicit-tracking draft-ietf-pim-rfc4601bis draft-hou-pim-drlb draft-perreault-mboned-igmp-mld-translation draft-lts-pim-hello-mtu Please let Stig and I know if you would like an agenda slot. thanks, mike From tom.taylor.stds@gmail.com Mon Mar 5 15:39:58 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BA4B821E804E for ; Mon, 5 Mar 2012 15:39:58 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.46 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.46 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.139, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id E7QAHRyFuHDD for ; Mon, 5 Mar 2012 15:39:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-tul01m020-f172.google.com (mail-tul01m020-f172.google.com [209.85.214.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0ACC621E801E for ; Mon, 5 Mar 2012 15:39:57 -0800 (PST) Received: by obbta4 with SMTP id ta4so3209177obb.31 for ; Mon, 05 Mar 2012 15:39:57 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of tom.taylor.stds@gmail.com designates 10.50.154.200 as permitted sender) client-ip=10.50.154.200; Authentication-Results: mr.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of tom.taylor.stds@gmail.com designates 10.50.154.200 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=tom.taylor.stds@gmail.com; dkim=pass header.i=tom.taylor.stds@gmail.com Received: from mr.google.com ([10.50.154.200]) by 10.50.154.200 with SMTP id vq8mr8797641igb.14.1330990797586 (num_hops = 1); Mon, 05 Mar 2012 15:39:57 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:x-antivirus :x-antivirus-status; bh=4vIsRPzrDo9VOX6fS15KXfutyiCprml7o9QCMfr2a08=; b=EhvhS31P5kh1XPBTqJnoJok2a2hlRRYZ2IYtPzkYjz1f3XpYX6Fx9axCZc2OVokleV LZE6J7mdoE1RHD4Gz3VuO3p1qr6HkDOpmtEIsmYd8iijJp+TWjLHQSrZTZqxFrn/lNMi Bvpr2ZXkp9x7juEX4A0D3R+xC6Xy63DLqTUqrabrzn7Ax2dydY6mYXE8RycdDfFNrmsD y4R9dLs3ztlixnP/cf77QCa9OVtD/cnzVJ8qe+DeXxhT8Yf8E6I/tjRJnC8H334SMfS6 ceDb0DmfhXlR43kSHTUvH1OaJDWGXCNQdS18Vp4FE5paNoGQVFTpRunmDADw20uns0tB iI/A== Received: by 10.50.154.200 with SMTP id vq8mr7291462igb.14.1330990797546; Mon, 05 Mar 2012 15:39:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (dsl-173-206-17-221.tor.primus.ca. [173.206.17.221]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id b6sm12855404igj.7.2012.03.05.15.39.56 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Mon, 05 Mar 2012 15:39:57 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <4F554ECB.2080604@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 05 Mar 2012 18:39:55 -0500 From: Tom Taylor User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:10.0.2) Gecko/20120216 Thunderbird/10.0.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: pim@ietf.org References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 120305-1, 05/03/2012), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean Subject: Re: [pim] Paris agenda X-BeenThere: pim@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Protocol Independent Multicast List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Mar 2012 23:39:58 -0000 Could we add draft-taylor-draft-taylor-pim-v4v6-translation-00.txt, Right now I find it a little mind-stretching to imagine the interaction of IPv4 and IPv6 PIM routers on a single link with a dual-stack PIM router on the same link, and I'm sure to come across some interesting issue updating the document this week. On 05/03/2012 5:17 PM, Mike McBride wrote: > PIM is scheduled to meet 1300-1500 on Tuesday March 27th. Here is our > agenda as of today: > > draft-ietf-pim-explicit-tracking > draft-ietf-pim-rfc4601bis > draft-hou-pim-drlb > draft-perreault-mboned-igmp-mld-translation > draft-lts-pim-hello-mtu > > Please let Stig and I know if you would like an agenda slot. > > thanks, > mike > _______________________________________________ > pim mailing list > pim@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pim > From stig@venaas.com Mon Mar 5 15:45:09 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 81F1121E804E for ; Mon, 5 Mar 2012 15:45:09 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ZqWFfgqhtWLz for ; Mon, 5 Mar 2012 15:45:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from ufisa.uninett.no (ufisa.uninett.no [IPv6:2001:700:1:2:158:38:152:126]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C03E721E8059 for ; Mon, 5 Mar 2012 15:45:08 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.33.12.84] (128-107-239-233.cisco.com [128.107.239.233]) by ufisa.uninett.no (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 728A27FED; Tue, 6 Mar 2012 00:45:07 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <4F555001.4050508@venaas.com> Date: Mon, 05 Mar 2012 15:45:05 -0800 From: Stig Venaas User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:10.0.2) Gecko/20120216 Thunderbird/10.0.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Tom Taylor References: <4F554ECB.2080604@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <4F554ECB.2080604@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: pim@ietf.org Subject: Re: [pim] Paris agenda X-BeenThere: pim@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Protocol Independent Multicast List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Mar 2012 23:45:09 -0000 On 3/5/2012 3:39 PM, Tom Taylor wrote: > Could we add draft-taylor-draft-taylor-pim-v4v6-translation-00.txt, > Right now I find it a little mind-stretching to imagine the interaction > of IPv4 and IPv6 PIM routers on a single link with a dual-stack PIM > router on the same link, and I'm sure to come across some interesting > issue updating the document this week. At least generally, the IPv4 and IPv6 PIM functions are completely separate. Dual-stack would normally not change anything. If you consider a PIM router doing translation where say downstream joins for an IPv6 group should be turned into an IPv4 join upstream, then the upstream state-machine would be exactly like a normal IPv4 PIM router. The only difference is how the state got created. Stig > On 05/03/2012 5:17 PM, Mike McBride wrote: >> PIM is scheduled to meet 1300-1500 on Tuesday March 27th. Here is our >> agenda as of today: >> >> draft-ietf-pim-explicit-tracking >> draft-ietf-pim-rfc4601bis >> draft-hou-pim-drlb >> draft-perreault-mboned-igmp-mld-translation >> draft-lts-pim-hello-mtu >> >> Please let Stig and I know if you would like an agenda slot. >> >> thanks, >> mike >> _______________________________________________ >> pim mailing list >> pim@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pim >> > _______________________________________________ > pim mailing list > pim@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pim From tsenevir@cisco.com Mon Mar 5 15:46:51 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2723521E803C for ; Mon, 5 Mar 2012 15:46:51 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -8.07 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.07 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=2.529, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id JYH6Hamo4ipE for ; Mon, 5 Mar 2012 15:46:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from mtv-iport-4.cisco.com (mtv-iport-4.cisco.com [173.36.130.15]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6948D21F879B for ; Mon, 5 Mar 2012 15:46:50 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=tsenevir@cisco.com; l=1091; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1330991210; x=1332200810; h=mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:subject:date: message-id:in-reply-to:references:from:to; bh=y0CsdvK/wvW5cQ0ytsq+Ne1LWpaNTPXiaHpUMTlKwBk=; b=emEgKuM224/zrz01kY6UIw9IiA62JRLONhjakhFECuyknhuNTSCG7uLT UP8vs3WAACUVnmsl1RGLHHJHX0IGIaDSYf//GXk/TmNmBA9YOluVM2wFR GdoCv9g4qS2V2Xvf+Mbq4pX4Lp3wSDbtrdw3x56c6JjCsdP8jBQkiH1m2 4=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Av8EAHZPVU+rRDoJ/2dsb2JhbAA5CrRogQeBfQEBAQQBAQEPAR0KNBcEAgEIEQQBAQsGFwEGASYfCQgBAQQBEggah2QBC5lUAY0skT8EihKFWmMEiFCdAIME X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.73,537,1325462400"; d="scan'208";a="34550793" Received: from mtv-core-4.cisco.com ([171.68.58.9]) by mtv-iport-4.cisco.com with ESMTP; 05 Mar 2012 23:46:50 +0000 Received: from xbh-sjc-231.amer.cisco.com (xbh-sjc-231.cisco.com [128.107.191.100]) by mtv-core-4.cisco.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id q25NkoMu006358; Mon, 5 Mar 2012 23:46:50 GMT Received: from xmb-sjc-214.amer.cisco.com ([171.70.151.145]) by xbh-sjc-231.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Mon, 5 Mar 2012 15:46:50 -0800 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2012 15:46:49 -0800 Message-ID: <344037D7CFEFE84E97E9CC1F56C5F4A5B5CE65@xmb-sjc-214.amer.cisco.com> In-Reply-To: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [pim] Paris agenda Thread-Index: Acz7Hc7Jp7NWOSHzR8OiUF5IAdfepAADD36g References: From: "Tissa Senevirathne (tsenevir)" To: "Mike McBride" , X-OriginalArrivalTime: 05 Mar 2012 23:46:50.0306 (UTC) FILETIME=[3C238220:01CCFB2A] Subject: Re: [pim] Paris agenda X-BeenThere: pim@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Protocol Independent Multicast List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Mar 2012 23:46:51 -0000 Hi Mike Can I get a presentation slot for=20 draft-tissa-pim-mcast-oam-00. Abstract: ICMP Based multicast messaging infrastructure is presented in this document. Messages presented in this document is intended to be utilized for troubleshooting multicast data plane connectivity issues as well as identify multicast routers performing different roles, such as Rendezvous Point (RP), Designated Router etc. -----Original Message----- From: pim-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:pim-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Mike McBride Sent: Monday, March 05, 2012 2:18 PM To: pim@ietf.org Subject: [pim] Paris agenda PIM is scheduled to meet 1300-1500 on Tuesday March 27th. Here is our agenda as of today: draft-ietf-pim-explicit-tracking draft-ietf-pim-rfc4601bis draft-hou-pim-drlb draft-perreault-mboned-igmp-mld-translation draft-lts-pim-hello-mtu Please let Stig and I know if you would like an agenda slot. thanks, mike _______________________________________________ pim mailing list pim@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pim From vero.zheng@huawei.com Mon Mar 5 18:43:50 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DCD6D21E8039 for ; Mon, 5 Mar 2012 18:43:50 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.598 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id m6fAkCjVDgfH for ; Mon, 5 Mar 2012 18:43:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from szxga01-in.huawei.com (szxga01-in.huawei.com [119.145.14.64]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5962721E8018 for ; Mon, 5 Mar 2012 18:43:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from huawei.com (szxga05-in [172.24.2.49]) by szxga05-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTP id <0M0F0017VZL07A@szxga05-in.huawei.com> for pim@ietf.org; Tue, 06 Mar 2012 10:43:48 +0800 (CST) Received: from szxrg01-dlp.huawei.com ([172.24.2.119]) by szxga05-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTP id <0M0F00LYMZKZGV@szxga05-in.huawei.com> for pim@ietf.org; Tue, 06 Mar 2012 10:43:48 +0800 (CST) Received: from szxeml212-edg.china.huawei.com ([172.24.2.119]) by szxrg01-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.1.9-GA) with ESMTP id AHG34594; Tue, 06 Mar 2012 10:43:45 +0800 Received: from SZXEML414-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.82.67.153) by szxeml212-edg.china.huawei.com (172.24.2.181) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.3; Tue, 06 Mar 2012 10:43:28 +0800 Received: from SZXEML520-MBX.china.huawei.com ([169.254.1.139]) by SZXEML414-HUB.china.huawei.com ([10.82.67.153]) with mapi id 14.01.0323.003; Tue, 06 Mar 2012 10:43:39 +0800 Date: Tue, 06 Mar 2012 02:43:39 +0000 From: Vero Zheng X-Originating-IP: [10.108.4.53] To: "pim@ietf.org" Message-id: <2EEA459CD95CCB4988BFAFC0F2287B5C259E109E@SZXEML520-MBX.china.huawei.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: multipart/mixed; boundary="Boundary_(ID_+88GRMGIKWDf3JkeCY7Gfg)" Content-language: zh-CN Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US Thread-topic: [pim] Collect Comments on RFC4601 Implementations and Deployments Survey Questionnaire Revision Thread-index: Acz7Qu8mS8mWaR/YSWq8Djbfi4pb0Q== X-MS-Has-Attach: yes X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Cc: "Rishabh Parekh \(riparekh\)" , "Stig Venaas \(svenaas\)" , Mike McBride , Marshall Eubanks Subject: [pim] Collect Comments on RFC4601 Implementations and Deployments Survey Questionnaire Revision X-BeenThere: pim@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Protocol Independent Multicast List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 06 Mar 2012 02:43:51 -0000 --Boundary_(ID_+88GRMGIKWDf3JkeCY7Gfg) Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Boundary_(ID_11/RHN4kqoVYsx2ANlzy+Q)" --Boundary_(ID_11/RHN4kqoVYsx2ANlzy+Q) Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Dear WG, We have revised the RFC4601 Implementations and Deployments Survey Questionnaire per discussion during Taipei meeting. Also Marshall Eubanks has agreed to anonymize the response to this Questionnaire. Attached is the revision of the Questionnaire, please provide your comments. BR, Vero ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Questionnaire Introduction: PIM-SM was first published as RFC 2117 in 1997 and then again as RFC 2362 in 1998. The protocol was classified as Experimental in both of these documents. The PIM-SM protocol specification was then rewritten in whole and advanced to Proposed Standard as RFC4601 in 2006. Considering the multiple independent implementations developed and the successful operational experience gained, the IETF has decided to advance the PIM-SM routing protocol to Draft Standard. This survey intends to provide supporting documentation to advance the Protocol Independent Multicast - Sparse Mode (PIM-SM) routing protocol from IETF Proposed Standard to Draft Standard. (Due to RFC 6410, we are now trying to progress it to Internet Standard. Draft Standard is not used anymore.) This survey is issued on behalf of the IETF PIM Working Group. The responses will be collected by neutral third-party and kept strictly confidential; only the final combined results will be published. Marshall Eubanks has agreed to anonymize the response to this Questionnaire. Marshall has a long experience with Multicast but has no direct financial interest in this matter, nor ties to any of the vendors involved. He is also a member of the IAOC, Chair of the IETF Trust and co-chair of the IETF Layer 3 VPN Working Group. Please send Questionnaire responses to his email address, marshall.eubanks@gmail.com. He requests that such responses include the string "RFC 4601 bis Questionnaire" in the subject field. Questions for operators: 1 Have you deployed PIM-SM in your network? 2 How long have you had PIM-SM deployed in your network? Do you know if your deployment is based on the most recent RFC4601? 3 Have you deployed PIM-SM for IPv6 in your network? 4 Are you using equipment with different (multi-vendor) PIM-SM implementations for your deployment? 5 Have you encountered any inter-operability or backward-compatibility issues amongst differing implementations? If yes, what are your concerns about these issues? 6 Have you deployed both dense mode and sparse mode in your network? If yes, do you route between these modes using features such as *,*,RP or PMBR? 7 To what extent have you deployed PIM functionality, like e.g. BSR, SSM, and Explicit Tracking? 8 Do you have any other comments on PIM-SM deployment in your network? Questions for implementors: 1 Have you implemented PIM-SM? 2 Is the PIM-SM implementation based on RFC 2632 or RFC 4601? 3 Have you implemented (*,*, RP) state of RFC 4601? What is the rationale behind implementing or omitting (*,*,RP)? 4 Have you implemented the PMBR as specified in RFC 4601 and RFC 2715? What is the rationale behind implementing or omitting PMBR? 5 Have you implemented other features and functions of RFC 4601, e.g. - SSM - Join Suppression - Explicit tracking - Register mechanism - SPT switchover at last-hop router - Assert mechanism - Hashing of group to RP mappings, 6 Does your PIM-SM implementation support IPv6? 7 Have you encountered any inter-operability issues with other PIM implementations in trials or in the field? 8 Do you have any other comments or concerns about PIM-SM as specified in RFC4601? --Boundary_(ID_11/RHN4kqoVYsx2ANlzy+Q) Content-type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT

Dear WG,

 

We have revised the RFC4601 Implementations and Deployments Survey Questionnaire per discussion during Taipei meeting. Also Marshall Eubanks has agreed to anonymize the response to this Questionnaire.

Attached is the revision of the Questionnaire, please provide your comments.

 

BR,

Vero

 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Questionnaire

 

Introduction:

PIM-SM was first published as RFC 2117 in 1997 and then again as RFC 2362 in 1998. The protocol was classified as Experimental in both of these documents. The PIM-SM protocol specification was then rewritten in whole and advanced to Proposed Standard as RFC4601 in 2006. Considering the multiple independent implementations developed and the successful operational experience gained, the IETF has decided to advance the PIM-SM routing protocol to Draft Standard. This survey intends to provide supporting documentation to advance the Protocol Independent Multicast - Sparse Mode (PIM-SM) routing protocol from IETF Proposed Standard to Draft Standard. (Due to RFC 6410, we are now trying to progress it to Internet Standard. Draft Standard is not used anymore.) This survey is issued on behalf of the IETF PIM Working Group.

 

The responses will be collected by neutral third-party and kept strictly confidential; only the final combined results will be published. Marshall Eubanks has agreed to anonymize the response to this Questionnaire. Marshall has a long experience with Multicast but has no direct financial interest in this matter, nor ties to any of the vendors involved. He is also a member of the IAOC, Chair of the IETF Trust and co-chair of the IETF Layer 3 VPN Working Group. Please send Questionnaire responses to his email address, marshall.eubanks@gmail.com. He requests that such responses include the string "RFC 4601 bis Questionnaire" in the subject field.

 

Questions for operators:

1      Have you deployed PIM-SM in your network?

2      How long have you had PIM-SM deployed in your network? Do you know if your deployment is based on the most recent RFC4601?

3      Have you deployed PIM-SM for IPv6 in your network?

4       Are you using equipment with different (multi-vendor) PIM-SM implementations for your deployment?

5       Have you encountered any inter-operability or backward-compatibility issues amongst differing implementations? If yes, what are your concerns about these issues?

6       Have you deployed both dense mode and sparse mode in your network? If yes, do you route between these modes using features such as *,*,RP or PMBR?

7       To what extent have you deployed PIM functionality, like e.g. BSR, SSM, and Explicit Tracking?

8       Do you have any other comments on PIM-SM deployment in your network?

 

Questions for implementors:

1       Have you implemented PIM-SM?

2       Is the PIM-SM implementation based on RFC 2632 or RFC 4601?

3       Have you implemented (*,*, RP) state of RFC 4601? What is the rationale behind implementing or omitting (*,*,RP)?

4       Have you implemented the PMBR as specified in RFC 4601 and RFC 2715? What is the rationale behind implementing or omitting PMBR?

5       Have you implemented other features and functions of RFC 4601, e.g.

                  - SSM                 

                   - Join Suppression

                   - Explicit tracking

                   - Register mechanism

                   - SPT switchover at last-hop router

                   - Assert mechanism 

                   - Hashing of group to RP mappings,

                           

6       Does your PIM-SM implementation support IPv6?

7       Have you encountered any inter-operability issues with other PIM implementations in trials or in the field?

8       Do you have any other comments or concerns about PIM-SM as specified in RFC4601?

--Boundary_(ID_11/RHN4kqoVYsx2ANlzy+Q)-- --Boundary_(ID_+88GRMGIKWDf3JkeCY7Gfg) Content-type: text/plain; name=RFC4601_Questionnaire_Revision_v3.txt Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-disposition: attachment; filename=RFC4601_Questionnaire_Revision_v3.txt; size=3235; creation-date="Tue, 06 Mar 2012 01:41:54 GMT"; modification-date="Tue, 06 Mar 2012 01:54:07 GMT" Content-description: RFC4601_Questionnaire_Revision_v3.txt Questionnaire Introduction: PIM-SM was first published as RFC 2117 in 1997 and then again as RFC 2362 in 1998. The protocol was classified as Experimental in both of these documents. The PIM-SM protocol specification was then rewritten in whole and advanced to Proposed Standard as RFC4601 in 2006. Considering the multiple independent implementations developed and the successful operational experience gained, the IETF has decided to advance the PIM-SM routing protocol to Draft Standard. This survey intends to provide supporting documentation to advance the Protocol Independent Multicast - Sparse Mode (PIM-SM) routing protocol from IETF Proposed Standard to Draft Standard. (Due to RFC 6410, we are now trying to progress it to Internet Standard.Draft Standard is not used anymore.) This survey is issued on behalf of the IETF PIM Working Group. The responses will be collected by neutral third-party and kept strictly confidential; only the final combined results will be published. Marshall Eubanks has agreed to anonymize the response to this Questionnaire. Marshall has a long experience with Multicast but has no direct financial interest in this matter, nor ties to any of the vendors involved. He is also a member of the IAOC, Chair of the IETF Trust and co-chair of the IETF Layer 3 VPN Working Group. Please send Questionnaire responses to his email address, marshall.eubanks@gmail.com. He requests that such responses include the string "RFC 4601 bis Questionnaire" in the subject field. Questions for operators: 1 Have you deployed PIM-SM in your network? 2 How long have you had PIM-SM deployed in your network? Do you know if your deployment is based on the most recent RFC4601? 3 Have you deployed PIM-SM for IPv6 in your network? 4 Are you using equipment with different (multi-vendor) PIM-SM implementations for your deployment? 5 Have you encountered any inter-operability or backward-compatibility issues amongst differing implementations? If yes, what are your concerns about these issues? 6 Have you deployed both dense mode and sparse mode in your network? If yes, do you route between these modes using features such as *,*,RP or PMBR? 7 To what extent have you deployed PIM functionality, like e.g. BSR, SSM, and Explicit Tracking? 8 Do you have any other comments on PIM-SM deployment in your network? Questions for implementors: 1 Have you implemented PIM-SM? 2 Is the PIM-SM implementation based on RFC 2632 or RFC 4601? 3 Have you implemented (*,*, RP) state of RFC 4601? What is the rationale behind implementing or omitting (*,*,RP)? 4 Have you implemented the PMBR as specified in RFC 4601 and RFC 2715? What is the rationale behind implementing or omitting PMBR? 5 Have you implemented other features and functions of RFC 4601, e.g. - SSM - Join Suppression - Explicit tracking - Register mechanism - SPT switchover at last-hop router - Assert mechanism - Hashing of group to RP mappings, 6 Does your PIM-SM implementation support IPv6? 7 Have you encountered any inter-operability issues with other PIM implementations in trials or in the field? 8 Do you have any other comments or concerns about PIM-SM as specified in RFC4601? --Boundary_(ID_+88GRMGIKWDf3JkeCY7Gfg)-- From internet-drafts@ietf.org Tue Mar 6 10:48:17 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 12E8521E808B; Tue, 6 Mar 2012 10:48:17 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.58 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.58 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.019, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id pu9WvGXoXYLR; Tue, 6 Mar 2012 10:48:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 93AAE21E800C; Tue, 6 Mar 2012 10:48:16 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: i-d-announce@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 4.00 Message-ID: <20120306184816.17720.32685.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Tue, 06 Mar 2012 10:48:16 -0800 Cc: pim@ietf.org Subject: [pim] I-D Action: draft-ietf-pim-drlb-00.txt X-BeenThere: pim@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Protocol Independent Multicast List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 06 Mar 2012 18:48:17 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts director= ies. This draft is a work item of the Protocol Independent Multicast Workin= g Group of the IETF. Title : Protocol Independent Multicast DR Load Balancing Author(s) : Yiqun Cai Sri Vallepalli Heidi Ou Andy Green Filename : draft-ietf-pim-drlb-00.txt Pages : 13 Date : 2012-03-05 On a multi-access network such as an Ethernet, one of the PIM routers is elected as a Designated Routers (DR). The PIM DR has two roles in the PIM protocol. On the first hop network, the PIM DR is responsible for registering an active source to the RP if the group is operated in PIM SM. On the last hop network, the PIM DR is responsible for tracking local multicast listeners and forwarding traffic to these listeners if the group is operated in PIM SM/SSM/DM. In this document, we propose a modification to the PIM protocol that allows multiple of these last hop routers to be selected so that the forwarding load can be distributed to and handled among these routers. A router responsible for forwarding for a particular group is called a Group Designated Router (GDR). A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-pim-drlb-00.txt Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ This Internet-Draft can be retrieved at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-pim-drlb-00.txt From stig@venaas.com Wed Mar 7 13:32:19 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 614C211E80A5 for ; Wed, 7 Mar 2012 13:32:19 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Xws16gTwmUH9 for ; Wed, 7 Mar 2012 13:32:18 -0800 (PST) Received: from ufisa.uninett.no (ufisa.uninett.no [IPv6:2001:700:1:2:158:38:152:126]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 47A3511E80A1 for ; Wed, 7 Mar 2012 13:32:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.33.12.84] (128-107-239-233.cisco.com [128.107.239.233]) by ufisa.uninett.no (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3673D7FC8; Wed, 7 Mar 2012 22:31:59 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <4F57D3CD.8090709@venaas.com> Date: Wed, 07 Mar 2012 13:31:57 -0800 From: Stig Venaas User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:10.0.2) Gecko/20120216 Thunderbird/10.0.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Vero Zheng References: <2EEA459CD95CCB4988BFAFC0F2287B5C259E109E@SZXEML520-MBX.china.huawei.com> In-Reply-To: <2EEA459CD95CCB4988BFAFC0F2287B5C259E109E@SZXEML520-MBX.china.huawei.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "Rishabh Parekh \(riparekh\)" , Marshall Eubanks , Mike McBride , "pim@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [pim] Collect Comments on RFC4601 Implementations and Deployments Survey Questionnaire Revision X-BeenThere: pim@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Protocol Independent Multicast List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 07 Mar 2012 21:32:19 -0000 Please read carefully what Vero posted and see if anything should be changed. If no comments are received by March 22nd, the current survey text will be sent out to implementers/vendors and operators to get their information. It is important that we get the information we want, so if you have any thoughts on this survey, please provide your input before March 22nd. Stig From marshall.eubanks@gmail.com Wed Mar 7 13:47:15 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 94F9A21F8471 for ; Wed, 7 Mar 2012 13:47:15 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -103.52 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.52 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.079, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 18GX16B+xOVM for ; Wed, 7 Mar 2012 13:47:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-lpp01m010-f44.google.com (mail-lpp01m010-f44.google.com [209.85.215.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C97FC21F841E for ; Wed, 7 Mar 2012 13:47:14 -0800 (PST) Received: by lagj5 with SMTP id j5so9467870lag.31 for ; Wed, 07 Mar 2012 13:47:13 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=ew/uz2WzmEDcg3hDIMiKaOgwQnz40SNkXe5tbMAhtp0=; b=jM6pbB0LdYB5IkjEMmLlABZlcoW93CeF2GDUteBiTRDZ2WChSC/dOzLy4t3fQ/W2O7 zf1qX3ZB6D94g9sOzpQH9ScIrMexKqY43Lcob+20Z8ulqezNAAcM0GJpyxK9Ay2W35ze eOBtiP+kFA2JV4NJGJ5rXwd3RTJvEU+AXn1mmbGDM38mgUPK19AINgPfj94BaJjkSX6u izUfZAUc6uVTvYMGtuKe03FvCMiyeaFHkZZ3PSKbYsAB/2e9jaVM6rVYcncS129uJT/J u+ZNuKHjBh8BYNT3xPl6gKzZisw0Ir+SYkFOVcLgTXSxMk0VIv3VKLiWls2Mgodb0SaX 73aw== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.112.86.67 with SMTP id n3mr1396076lbz.29.1331156833821; Wed, 07 Mar 2012 13:47:13 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.112.115.98 with HTTP; Wed, 7 Mar 2012 13:47:13 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <4F57D3CD.8090709@venaas.com> References: <2EEA459CD95CCB4988BFAFC0F2287B5C259E109E@SZXEML520-MBX.china.huawei.com> <4F57D3CD.8090709@venaas.com> Date: Wed, 7 Mar 2012 16:47:13 -0500 Message-ID: From: Marshall Eubanks To: Stig Venaas Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: Mike McBride , "Rishabh Parekh \(riparekh\)" , "pim@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [pim] Collect Comments on RFC4601 Implementations and Deployments Survey Questionnaire Revision X-BeenThere: pim@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Protocol Independent Multicast List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 07 Mar 2012 21:47:15 -0000 Just to be clear, this is a 2 week last call ? Marshall On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 4:31 PM, Stig Venaas wrote: > Please read carefully what Vero posted and see if anything should be > changed. If no comments are received by March 22nd, the current survey > text will be sent out to implementers/vendors and operators to get > their information. > > It is important that we get the information we want, so if you have any > thoughts on this survey, please provide your input before March 22nd. > > Stig From stig@venaas.com Wed Mar 7 13:55:11 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E1AB611E80AE for ; Wed, 7 Mar 2012 13:55:11 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id hSTpvHA+q4vI for ; Wed, 7 Mar 2012 13:55:11 -0800 (PST) Received: from ufisa.uninett.no (ufisa.uninett.no [IPv6:2001:700:1:2:158:38:152:126]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ECED721F8528 for ; Wed, 7 Mar 2012 13:55:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.33.12.84] (128-107-239-233.cisco.com [128.107.239.233]) by ufisa.uninett.no (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 03A787FC9; Wed, 7 Mar 2012 22:55:07 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <4F57D939.6090503@venaas.com> Date: Wed, 07 Mar 2012 13:55:05 -0800 From: Stig Venaas User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:10.0.2) Gecko/20120216 Thunderbird/10.0.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Marshall Eubanks References: <2EEA459CD95CCB4988BFAFC0F2287B5C259E109E@SZXEML520-MBX.china.huawei.com> <4F57D3CD.8090709@venaas.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Mike McBride , "Rishabh Parekh \(riparekh\)" , "pim@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [pim] Collect Comments on RFC4601 Implementations and Deployments Survey Questionnaire Revision X-BeenThere: pim@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Protocol Independent Multicast List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 07 Mar 2012 21:55:12 -0000 On 3/7/2012 1:47 PM, Marshall Eubanks wrote: > Just to be clear, this is a 2 week last call ? This isn't a draft, so not a working group last call. But I guess it sort of is, since I'm giving people 2 weeks to respond. But not anything formal. Or am I missing something? Stig > Marshall > > On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 4:31 PM, Stig Venaas wrote: >> Please read carefully what Vero posted and see if anything should be >> changed. If no comments are received by March 22nd, the current survey >> text will be sent out to implementers/vendors and operators to get >> their information. >> >> It is important that we get the information we want, so if you have any >> thoughts on this survey, please provide your input before March 22nd. >> >> Stig From adrian@olddog.co.uk Thu Mar 8 01:05:04 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 854D821F8552 for ; Thu, 8 Mar 2012 01:05:04 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.359 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.359 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.240, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ISNQlrFczT22 for ; Thu, 8 Mar 2012 01:05:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from asmtp2.iomartmail.com (asmtp2.iomartmail.com [62.128.201.249]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E0D821F848F for ; Thu, 8 Mar 2012 01:05:01 -0800 (PST) Received: from asmtp2.iomartmail.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by asmtp2.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q2894xIU015149; Thu, 8 Mar 2012 09:04:59 GMT Received: from 950129200 ([90.84.144.97]) (authenticated bits=0) by asmtp2.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q2894uOI015133 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Thu, 8 Mar 2012 09:04:57 GMT From: "Adrian Farrel" To: References: <20120306155411.24195.54070.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> In-Reply-To: <20120306155411.24195.54070.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2012 09:04:57 -0000 Message-ID: <083e01ccfd0a$8accce40$a0666ac0$@olddog.co.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0 Thread-Index: AQDTW66LLY2PcQ8xPgXSkpc3F30xMJhSlqUw Content-Language: en-gb Cc: multimob-ads@tools.itef.org, multimob-chairs@tools.ietf.org Subject: [pim] FW: Last Call: (Tuning the Behavior of IGMP and MLD for Routers in Mobile and Wireless Networks) to Informational RFC X-BeenThere: pim@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: adrian@olddog.co.uk List-Id: Protocol Independent Multicast List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2012 09:05:04 -0000 Heads up on this IETF last call. > -----Original Message----- > From: ietf-announce-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:ietf-announce- > bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of The IESG > Sent: 06 March 2012 15:54 > To: IETF-Announce > Cc: multimob@ietf.org > Subject: Last Call: (Tuning the > Behavior of IGMP and MLD for Routers in Mobile and Wireless Networks) to > Informational RFC > > > The IESG has received a request from the Multicast Mobility WG (multimob) > to consider the following document: > - 'Tuning the Behavior of IGMP and MLD for Routers in Mobile and Wireless > Networks' > as an Informational RFC > > The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits > final comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the > ietf@ietf.org mailing lists by 2012-03-20. Exceptionally, comments may be > sent to iesg@ietf.org instead. In either case, please retain the > beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting. > > Abstract > > > IGMP and MLD are the protocols used by hosts and multicast routers to > exchange their IP multicast group memberships with each other. This > document describes the ways of IGMPv3 and MLDv2 protocol optimization > for mobility, and aims to become a guideline for tuning of IGMPv3/ > MLDv2 Queries and timer and counter values. > > > > > The file can be obtained via > http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-multimob-igmp-mld-tuning/ > > IESG discussion can be tracked via > http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-multimob-igmp-mld-tuning/ballot/ > > > No IPR declarations have been submitted directly on this I-D. > > > _______________________________________________ > IETF-Announce mailing list > IETF-Announce@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce From adrian@olddog.co.uk Thu Mar 8 02:58:51 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6D9DB21F86BD for ; Thu, 8 Mar 2012 02:58:51 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.119 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.119 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.120, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_13=0.6] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id D9Qy6ODw2qbt for ; Thu, 8 Mar 2012 02:58:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from asmtp2.iomartmail.com (asmtp2.iomartmail.com [62.128.201.249]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8D39221F86C5 for ; Thu, 8 Mar 2012 02:58:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from asmtp2.iomartmail.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by asmtp2.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q28Awk00019656; Thu, 8 Mar 2012 10:58:46 GMT Received: from 950129200 ([90.84.144.143]) (authenticated bits=0) by asmtp2.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q28Awcbj019625 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Thu, 8 Mar 2012 10:58:44 GMT From: "Adrian Farrel" To: , Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2012 10:58:38 -0000 Message-ID: <099001ccfd1a$6efa0d80$4cee2880$@olddog.co.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0 Thread-Index: Acz9GDVHgm0DiIi/RSmG0b1TLGIZ8g== Content-Language: en-gb Cc: draft-gs-l3vpn-scaling@tools.ietf.org Subject: [pim] Help Needed with draft-gs-l3vpn-scaling X-BeenThere: pim@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: adrian@olddog.co.uk List-Id: Protocol Independent Multicast List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2012 10:58:51 -0000 Hi PIM chairs and working group, The authors of this draft would like to plead for some assistance in fleshing out a couple of sections of the document that they think are important but where they don't have the depth and breadth of knowledge to cover well e.g. multicast. The document has been discussed on the L3VPN list, but input from the multicast community would be a great help. Responses to the authors direct or to the L3VPN list. Cheers, Adrian From adrian@olddog.co.uk Thu Mar 8 03:03:49 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C7E7321F865C for ; Thu, 8 Mar 2012 03:03:49 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.11 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.11 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.111, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_13=0.6] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id LqTjT1BtAApX for ; Thu, 8 Mar 2012 03:03:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from asmtp1.iomartmail.com (asmtp1.iomartmail.com [62.128.201.248]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 28E3821F8659 for ; Thu, 8 Mar 2012 03:03:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from asmtp1.iomartmail.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by asmtp1.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q28B3jN7000726; Thu, 8 Mar 2012 11:03:45 GMT Received: from 950129200 ([90.84.144.143]) (authenticated bits=0) by asmtp1.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q28B3htt000694 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Thu, 8 Mar 2012 11:03:44 GMT From: "Adrian Farrel" To: , Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2012 11:03:43 -0000 Message-ID: <099f01ccfd1b$21ade2d0$6509a870$@olddog.co.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0 Thread-Index: Acz9Gx1k5KI5Pv/aSXyC9R3R2v7axA== Content-Language: en-gb Cc: draft-gs-vpn-scaling@tools.ietf.org Subject: Re: [pim] Help Needed with draft-gs-vpn-scaling X-BeenThere: pim@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: adrian@olddog.co.uk List-Id: Protocol Independent Multicast List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2012 11:03:49 -0000 Sending again with correct I-D name draft-gs-vpn-scaling > -----Original Message----- > From: Adrian Farrel [mailto:adrian@olddog.co.uk] > Sent: 08 March 2012 10:59 > To: 'pim-chairs@tools.ietf.org'; pim@ietf.org > Cc: draft-gs-l3vpn-scaling@tools.ietf.org; stbryant@cisco.com > Subject: Help Needed with draft-gs-l3vpn-scaling > > Hi PIM chairs and working group, > > The authors of this draft would like to plead for some assistance in fleshing out a > couple of sections of the document that they think are important but where they > don't have the depth and breadth of knowledge to cover well e.g. multicast. > > The document has been discussed on the L3VPN list, but input from the multicast > community would be a great help. > > Responses to the authors direct or to the L3VPN list. > > Cheers, > Adrian From varunr@ipinfusion.com Thu Mar 8 06:08:28 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A4EC021F8716 for ; Thu, 8 Mar 2012 06:08:28 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 1.382 X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.382 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_40=-0.185, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_28=1.561, HTML_IMAGE_RATIO_02=0.383, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 59buuwqDIPRQ for ; Thu, 8 Mar 2012 06:08:28 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-qy0-f172.google.com (mail-qy0-f172.google.com [209.85.216.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D79FF21F8715 for ; Thu, 8 Mar 2012 06:08:27 -0800 (PST) Received: by qcsq13 with SMTP id q13so439471qcs.31 for ; Thu, 08 Mar 2012 06:08:27 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.224.73.12 with SMTP id o12mr3720981qaj.98.1331215706851; Thu, 08 Mar 2012 06:08:26 -0800 (PST) From: Varun Kumar MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0 Thread-Index: Acz9MthlDMXSLdeGR92XnlxLFU6/cg== Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2012 19:38:18 +0530 Message-ID: To: pim@ietf.org Content-Type: multipart/related; boundary=20cf3074b5a253879f04babbcf4f X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQniQk4MN5mkEg2kV8FOS0CrK8LTArYNAuF5SckliUJ8w2et36vXevBViLtbAN2O1+/dUJDh Subject: [pim] Regards PIM-MBR X-BeenThere: pim@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Protocol Independent Multicast List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2012 14:11:44 -0000 --20cf3074b5a253879f04babbcf4f Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=20cf3074b5a253879c04babbcf4e --20cf3074b5a253879c04babbcf4e Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Hi At present I am working on Mcast testing (PIM-MBR). I have observed the following issue, could any give suggestion on it. Find the issue below. Multicast traffic from PIM-SM domain not reaches receiver in PIM-DM domain via PIM-MBR. Heard from developers that data traffic from PIM-SM never forward to PIM-DM. Only the data traffic from PIM-DM will reach receiver in PIM-SM domain via PIM-MBR. I have given below the topology. I would be thankful, if anyone confirm it and let me know the proper RFC or material to check it out With regards Varun Kumar R --20cf3074b5a253879c04babbcf4e Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi

=A0

At present I am working on Mcast testing (PI= M-MBR). I have observed the following issue, could any give suggestion on i= t.

Find the issue below.=A0

= =A0

=A0

Multicast traff= ic from PIM-SM domain not reaches receiver in PIM-DM domain via PIM-MBR.

Heard from developers that data traffic from PIM-SM never forward to PIM-DM= . Only the data traffic from PIM-DM will reach receiver in PIM-SM domain vi= a PIM-MBR.

I have given below the topology.

=A0

I would be thankful, i= f anyone confirm it and let me know the proper RFC or material to check it = out

=A0

=A0

=A0

With regards

Varun Kumar R

--20cf3074b5a253879c04babbcf4e-- --20cf3074b5a253879f04babbcf4f Content-Type: image/png; name="image001.png" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-ID: X-Attachment-Id: 735887e6c9491323_0.1 iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAABNoAAAG3CAIAAADtu68+AAAAAXNSR0IArs4c6QAAAAlwSFlzAAAO xAAADsQBlSsOGwAAZF5JREFUeF7t3bt200rbwHHluxZ77wULLiDZV+C8FKlSQueUOAUdVNBRxJRx B2UqCrZ9BTu5AFiwwL6XfHPQYUaH0dEeyfqred8dSXP4zVj48Rx08vj4GHAggAACCCCAAAIIIIAA AgggcFiB/ztsduSGAAIIIIAAAggggAACCCCAgBQgHKUfIIAAAggggAACCCCAAAIIeBAgHPWATpYI IIAAAggggAACCCCAAAKEo/QBBBBAAAEEEEAAAQQQQAABDwKEox7QyRIBBBBAAAEEEEAAAQQQQIBw lD6AAAIIIIAAAggggAACCCDgQYBw1AM6WSKAAAIIIIAAAggggAACCBCO0gcQQAABBBBAAAEEEEAA AQQ8CBCOekAnSwQQQAABBBBAAAEEEEAAAcJR+gACCCCAAAIIIIAAAggggIAHAcJRD+hkiQACCCCA AAIIIIAAAgggQDhKH0AAAQQQQAABBBBAAAEEEPAgQDjqAZ0sEUAAAQQQQAABBBBAAAEECEfpAwgg gAACCCCAAAIIIIAAAh4ECEc9oJMlAggggAACCCCAAAIIIIAA4Sh9AAEEEEAAAQQQQAABBBBAwIMA 4agHdLJEAAEEEEAAAQQQQAABBBAgHKUPIIAAAggggAACCCCAAAIIeBAgHPWATpYIIIAAAggggAAC CCCAAAKEo/QBBBBAAAEEEEAAAQQQQAABDwKEox7QyRIBBBBAAAEEEEAAAQQQQIBwlD6AAAIIIIAA AggggAACCCDgQYBw1AM6WSKAAAIIIIAAAggggAACCBCO0gcQQAABBBBAAAEEEEAAAQQ8CBCOekAn SwQQQAABBBBAAAEEEEAAAcJR+gACCCCAAAIIIIAAAggggIAHAcJRD+hkiQACCCCAAAIIIIAAAggg QDhKH0AAAQQQQAABBBBAAAEEEPAgQDjqAZ0sEUAAAQQQQAABBBBAAAEECEfpAwgggAACCCCAAAII IIAAAh4ECEc9oJMlAggggAACCCCAAAIIIIAA4Sh9AAEEEEAAAQQQQAABBBBAwIMA4agHdLJEAAEE EEAAAQQQQAABBBAgHKUPIIAAAggggAACCCCAAAIIeBAgHPWATpYIIIAAAggggAACCCCAAAKEo/QB BBBAAAEEEEAAAQQQQAABDwKEox7QyRIBBBBAAAEEEEAAAQQQQIBwlD6AAAIIIIAAAggggAACCCDg QYBw1AM6WSKAAAIIIIAAAggggAACCBCO0gcQQAABBBBAAAEEEEAAAQQ8CBCOekAnSwQQQAABBBBA AAEEEEAAAcJR+gACCCCAAAIIIIAAAggggIAHAcJRD+hkiQACCCCAAAIIIIAAAgggQDhKH0AAAQQQ QAABBBBAAAEEEPAgQDjqAZ0sEUAAAQQQQAABBBBAAAEECEfpAwgggAACCCCAAAIIIIAAAh4ECEc9 oJMlAggggAACCCCAAAIIIIAA4Sh9AAEEEEAAAQQQQAABBBBAwIMA4agHdLJEAAEEEEAAAQQQQAAB BBAgHKUPIIAAAggggAACCCCAAAIIeBAgHPWATpYIIIAAAggggAACCCCAAAKEo/QBBBBAAAEEEEAA AQQQQAABDwKEox7QybJLgc3ViXlcbazE3WfjS3ef/hGJpO6tVEp1Z5MbReq+7q1UMS5CAAEEEEAA AQQQQGDfAoSj+xYm/b0LzNeP4bFdnq3OU8Gh+6wu3Obj4r5eMXX8Ko5p3TvDKNTDvfVqyNUIIIAA AggggAACCOxbgHB038KkX1UgjvCiwc5qY46z29tZlMXk9eflWbD68GkX/cV9NgxGr86DpbivzjF5 /Z8OgUUEXOc+ea2ve+uWk+sRQAABBBBAAAEEENivAOHofn1JvZqAnFM7XQTLbTTOKeO8p9XubXnV 5ur8x/LN/1qmwu0IIIAAAggggAACCCBQV4BwtK4Y13cvICLCVSAm1f73epIkPnn9Oh71rJ7l9qeY dfvsLyMd897sWZn1/K2Zb/W8uBIBBBBAAAEEEEAAAQTaCBCOttHj3i4Edp8+rIKz5ZsGwWc6e3dS 2bMqGF0nk327qA5pIIAAAggggAACCCCAQDUBwtFqTly1PwH3gGaNfHefXi3u52trjDW5PXtWhqfd hME1CsmlCCCAAAIIIIAAAgggEAoQjtIVeiaQvJrln3BHotTLWtROR5ltjsRGSNO7y+1j/lBnzlkd njJPt2fNT3EQQAABBBBAAAEERiRAODqixu5pVadPxd60P/5Em+HObuV2Rut5Ulr9F/uwo04ZbS6e FY+L5p1Vg7LitTDG+1rkf0UxcE+xKBYCCCCAAAIIIIAAAscjQDh6PG051JpMXr+dB/eLV8nbWWrW ZHOlNuUtWAJadNYOctX7WuQrSgum+tYsEpcjgAACCCCAAAIIIIBAqQDhaCkRF+xdYHYrBkPvF9Ps FNwKWetteYsm3brPlicfvgy10Zipr3vLa8UVCCCAAAIIIIAAAgj0QYBwtA+tQBnkUKUYoIznzp6I ELPasfkqr0xulHNvk+DRfbZaDrlXhaGmfFuqOee3Utjq694W1eVWBBBAAAEEEEAAAQT2IHAiVuTt IVmSRAABBBBAAAEEEEAAAQQQQMAlwOgo/QMBBBBAAAEEEEAAAQQQQMCDAOGoB3SyRAABBBBAAAEE EEAAAQQQIBylDyCAAAIIIIAAAggggAACCHgQIBz1gE6WCCCAAAIIIIAAAggggAAChKP0AQQQQAAB BBBAAAEEEEAAAQ8ChKMe0MkSAQQQQAABBBBAAAEEEECAcJQ+gAACCCCAAAIIIIAAAggg4EGAcNQD OlkigAACCCCAAAIIIIAAAggQjtIHEEAAAQQQQAABBBBAAAEEPAgQjnpAJ0sEEEAAAQQQQAABBBBA AAHCUfoAAggggAACCCCAAAIIIICABwHCUQ/oZIkAAggggAACCCCAAAIIIEA4Sh9AAAEEEEAAAQQQ QAABBBDwIEA46gGdLBFAAAEEEEAAAQQQQAABBAhH6QMIIIAAAggggAACCCCAAAIeBAhHPaCTJQII IIAAAggggAACCCCAAOEofQABBBBAAAEEEEAAAQQQQMCDAOGoB3SyRAABBBBAAAEEEEAAAQQQIByl DyCAAAIIIIAAAggggAACCHgQIBz1gE6WCCCAAAIIIIAAAggggAAChKP0AQQQQAABBBBAAAEEEEAA AQ8ChKMe0MkSAQQQQAABBBBAAAEEEECAcJQ+gAACCCCAAAIIIIAAAggg4EGAcNQDOlkigAACCCCA AAIIIIAAAggQjtIHEEAAAQQQQAABBBBAAAEEPAgQjnpAJ0sEEEAAAQQQQAABBBBAAAHCUfoAAggg gAACCCCAAAIIIICABwHCUQ/oZIkAAggggAACCCCAAAIIIEA4Sh9AAAEEEEAAAQQQQAABBBDwIEA4 6gGdLBFAAAEEEEAAAQQQQAABBAhH6QMIIIAAAggggAACCCCAAAIeBAhHPaCTJQIIIIAAAggggAAC CCCAAOEofQABBBBAAAEEEEAAAQQQQMCDAOGoB3SyRAABBBBAAAEEEEAAAQQQIBylDyCAAAIIIIAA AggggAACCHgQIBz1gE6WJQKbqxNxXG3sy+Rf//m061AvP58OMyhLavfpn5yKlt3FeQQQQAABBBBA AAEEjkOAcPQ42vFoaqECtPMfy+3j4+3MrtX06Vnw7K9Jh1Wd3T4+bpc/zrsOczssIkkhgAACCCCA AAIIIHC8AoSjg2tbPaRnHcY4Ys7ZKNjSp6zxxbrDg3o0L5N3BymrZhDJTxeBCEX/e51EnTpPXeyz p1OVV81B0kyxDbDJ6/9ESBospjXT1MU1KeonEMjMs3H34LokBUYAAQQQQAABBBBAoJEA4WgjNu83 zdcijNHHeh6szuOZrXLATx7b5ZmI3uQgozjM6O7+7t94vuvm66pGTVSw+CzJWGfzNE6hecphEpuP i/uz5WcjFJUnRMgmKnO/+Lh9/d/n4NX5KpivzQqV1ECGrzrGjQ+z0OruyevPKofU7OAyGx1MRo1Q djXnEUAAAQQQQAABBBBAwBYgHB18j5i9kZHnjz9VFlWezednSdQoolH5h4oCu3/vRLD4xp5BO3n9 Wv+hTcq6ALtPH0Sk+TYVjIbh4n+P6+DDp932p4wr07N4HRXYXKnw1QrIRfQZFjq5cfL6rYjqRQ4V MapcZg1UW0On9rBqalRV3SaHb82r0utoq+R/uGtEkRsMDR+ufOSEAAIIIIAAAggg0FMBwtGeNsye ivX04jKOR2U0enmRjG6WZDn561lwv5gWBUYtUtYZb3/ey8m4uaUQ8Y4IK4OtOFlcguydKsLNhND5 9ZQrU+9/yhw6OVSJo9FpPRs42ZspGVYVQ9v5x59P/7wKPhvj330OSMWQ/Nuf0/qTqDuRJhEEEEAA AQQQQACB4QoQjg637XTJN1fTxX3BqGJO3aZiGFCPj6po9H/54V8uSrLxT96+t0GLlGV2uz8/gqKd ijZ/fpzJWbyz2a0cxPxadVKtjHCr7n4ko+2KY8zlXSaMg+N5x2o2cJ3R19Vd8DmekTy7EEFrteHv 8qLt6Qo9SVwHpZk9kfeUJ8kigAACCCCAAAIIDF2AcHSYLShWi4bH+UquI60xf1UENzIe1dFoap/a vI2QrGG5cFxPLObUJbBOulJuxTx7/d9/YXAmw54albWyTWq356mlcl5zYOtO/ncpRl+NdbtukPxJ yxUQ3S24v7O6aDooXQeqb+wZuQIGlyCAAAIIIIAAAgj0XIBwtOcNVFA8Yyuj2tGZihpffVjlhDzR RkjJtj/5wZ+KSuVuSatzMyB1pFzK3OnoZJibnIBrDCuGwVL+/FjX6Gxp4ftzgbsF93c2R0DM7CYi 7U/PoCQIIIAAAggggEAfBQhH+9gqey6TjBrv7+cXqfd61s1VDfjZR5uUO168KQumNii6X7yqskOR a+lqqYyKZZMjZyg0Z8C0NNXhXaBHX8+DaPvlGjsgD6+ylBgBBBBAAAEEEECgtQDhaGvCASagBsnq TnkVoYY1NXf36ZVctGoHtY1S1oLtNrcNt6FND8fNbsVmQWKYrmw5o2Nb36L23XyKo9xMrJmOg0Or 3G2DB9h/coqsA9EPT9X7dOp2reMgoBYIIIAAAggggAACtQUIR2uT9fuGaHWg3N9IxWFdruJLVqyK VPU7SLuMPOQrayqOZVZvBL0BU7jUVY3dZd+1qqLFijvwJjn/DHXD95raI4EiW72drjr0i0+7tKoO cIArRafTgSijoQfQJgsEEEAAAQQQQOCIBE7Ed8gjqg5VGbqAGOUUkbR4Q0r9yEbeendZ98YWGQ7d mvIjgAACCCCAAAIIIOBXgNFRv/7knhJQmyStn8lhxZpv2pQzZrN7BTuB5VCyHuStH/zScggggAAC CCCAAAIIINBSgNHRloDc3g+BZkOj/Sg7pUAAAQQQQAABBBBAYJwChKPjbHdqjQACCCCAAAIIIIAA Agh4FmCyrucGIHsEEEAAAQQQQAABBBBAYJwChKPjbHdqjQACCCCAAAIIIIAAAgh4FiAc9dwAZI8A AggggAACCCCAAAIIjFOAcHSc7U6tEUAAAQQQQAABBBBAAAHPAoSjnhuA7BFAAAEEEEAAAQQQQACB cQoQjo6z3ak1AggggAACCCCAAAIIIOBZgHDUcwOQPQIIIIAAAggggAACCCAwTgHC0XG2O7VGAAEE EEAAAQQQQAABBDwLEI56bgCyRwABBBBAAAEEEEAAAQTGKUA4Os52p9YIIIAAAggggAACCCCAgGcB wlHPDUD2CCCAAAIIIIAAAggggMA4BQhHx9nu1BoBBBBAAAEEEEAAAQQQ8CxAOOq5AcgeAQQQQAAB BBBAAAEEEBinAOHoONudWiOAAAIIIIAAAggggAACngUIRz03ANkjgAACCCCAAAIIIIAAAuMUIBwd Z7tTawQQQAABBBBAAAEEEEDAswDhqOcGIHsEEEAAgSEKbK5OjONqY9fBfXb36R9xb/qeISpEZXbX t981U63RsDHa3Juv0qe+oVq1XKZ7hH53GEqHAAIdCxCOdgxKcggggAACRy8gvoCfr86W28fouJ0Z dXafPT6csdX3+FqwUY104CyO6eK+UQLchAACCCgBwlE6AgIIIIBAkYAe9Prn0y65QP+pfMikG9Q2 Ay9t7nWXfvfv3X0wf/t6knuZ+6y8ZfL6PxHHWiFsN1yNU2ljVV7fxsUa4Y0++kaz1tclFcd2eTbC hqLKCCDQmQDhaGeUJIQAAggcqcD93b9xPLr5ujrSWlItBBBAAAEEEDi4AOHowcnJEAEERicgBx8O NZzYOe7ZfH6WxKMiGpV/SOVirxw0x07jCX3ROkvbIX2jMQ6rT6l5gKvzeJWmNVBbWNfSe+PhoKR8 ScEcZQ5PpUsVjh+7zwaBnXBuVYolSxvWTP1qIxOycrAyN1qh1Ko447L6yjutCqWqXNQKhYN1yQep pF8521eUyrj9n0/bTA2LrNSFJfcWcGXaI8bRbVHSN0rqW6tzmM+iiq1v963S3LgAAQQQqCNAOFpH i2sRQACBegLht72fb3s1M7NeHZ5eXMbxqIxGLy+emgnIb6r2OsrH7ZtpcsXlOl5g+biei9AyDoUy Sw4fH/9L5r/ObuN5gPMkCeMCRy0q3vvn0z+vgs85sw0LyxzOT1SzE41SheV2n43m6MpqCYjsUSbp ajZx73QRRItZt08/nJuD2DLl6d1ltNR1PRcBftQMFa3yMi+rr4xFja6xXQaLafZ3mWwrTP53eRb8 +KNG5HUgFBZ2+/P+7GnYt4r7VVzUgva1rT4HH6yljy4rVRzDOX2vq0u+WRq/6ugL5UyD+VrP2Y5n vub3jSCoUN+C7Nu2fsyoO67xCa73IOFqBBBAIF+AcJSegQACCOxBIBxOOA9UJNWnVYL1Kzt9/Xau x0dVNPo/I9YUf/oovszP11aYOJnEiyonr18bm/xMn/ZpkdnqLvicF956KnOJpLPd9L3xYtbJ68/m cj559mz5OQ71ZxciGl59TW0GXL9jlNyx+/RhFRj56lKtPpgrkUU5clph8tez4P6nHLUU61KDsyg2 3f35ETz7S/WtKm1U0L5trNz3Oj0m8lO0+Gigq2j0wtwDqziBKvUtuLtt61uMquuEvxR03mFIEAEE RipAODrShqfaCCCwLwEdiE4Xz3ID0fRkTHtbIF9nyyzEl1AZj+po1Nq/R0YIJd+pjYl+9hac8gt6 cC8GzFLTSstK09V5M3z7z/7JoLDMXeWdTaeCZGHm7nvVWe0cHtbQ6b6qpHY4svuLGvY0VyKLvHNb Qf5uIYMemcazt9GvIebgqDW9NX9r1/z2bWPVpo2CYCYGSJMfAWSwfrZ8Uy0alW3UsE+2bv3CLbv2 1XFIFwEExiZAODq2Fqe+CCCwTwE1l8/11gM9NdI+krFTX2dLSVQ8+urDqu5XUzVPMIzMcybFhvXV szh9RaXpypeUudTKwwUiTnPkqs6aU4t19+vzkH00PCqKLsYPs7+GtGijNlbue0sbXkbj0eCwDLSr f5ra1ndYrV8KyQUIIHBcAoSjx9We1AYBBPwKGO8++KH23xnsDkYpRxkR3MvQIPV3GTcUz/sM55+W BT6h2lpMZnxlz+T00JoVy9x5ydyS7uzUJOjCKZQHmpubLmLOUGjOgGlBxfTw6KevK9XlxH/d//w3 marbpo2yVmaQ6bZy31veJdSEXTXtXU5Crj402qa+nlq/HIMrEEAAgVCAcJSugAACCOxBIIqwgmMJ StVAZk5cKWcgyq1vrbh7t9MvhlFf3+P5ibtPr+TIcRQ27T5dmbGnWmkYLQ2MW6RNkNbsXmeZ99BT 4iSdku6Mw2nP0cJEMZb26s64I0zZ3td2t9kYb5NtZlWpVPEvDLr9qw0JquHRxUJHo4EaVlyIBbDh PkZt2khHyfEiTrXbUlWrknsr9A7RFIHIW8SXQWrau+vmNvVVc4TFJ/TQrV8Bg0sQQAABLZCdNsZf EEAAAQQ6FZAbsWany3WaxZ4SExtpnkXbtcZZZKujdpo1DuMeYw9Z+dfwSuP/Jrdlc1JZ2rvQ1nMs ujezNa7lV1zm8DL37e6zcZ1yq+uQLGli406RcrYM6ZQzDdvY2VlfK9tUlZ03quLEN9j/ZfeKVL+S TiVNYBRK9Kd6VmX3ln0Sw/uL+7GsarZvlPZJd77NWl9lapfUKF0mTf1RLvgYl7lwHgEExitwIqpO ZF5fIP17av0UuAMBBIYoIL6alc08HWK1KPOxCahFzGI3LXrrsbUs9UEAAQSOTYBw9NhalPoggAAC CIxOQEy9DWazaNPj6O2Y1d7SOjosKowAAggg0CMB1o72qDEoCgIIIIAAAo0E/nwwXuSiBkaJRRtB chMCCCCAwGEFGB09rDe5IYAAAggggAACCCCAAAIIKAFGRyt1hN3y7Ghe11CpwlyEAAIVBHgyVEDi EgQQQAABBBBAoFCAcJTOgQACCCCAAAIIIIAAAggg4EGAcNQDOlkigAACCCCAAAIIIIAAAggQjtIH EEAAAQQQQAABBBBAAAEEPAgQjnpAJ0sEEEAAAQQQQAABBBBAAAHCUfoAAggggAACCCCAAAIIIICA BwHCUQ/oZIkAAggggAACCCCAAAIIIEA4Sh9AAAEEEEAAAQQQQAABBBDwIEA46gGdLBFAAAEEEEAA AQQQQAABBAhH6QMIIIAAAggggAACCCCAAAIeBAhHPaCTJQIIIIAAAggggAACCCCAAOEofQABBBBA AAEEEEAAAQQQQMCDAOGoB3SyRAABBBBAAAEEEEAAAQQQIBylDyCAAAIIIIAAAggggAACCHgQOHl8 fPSQLVkigAACCCCAAAIIIIAAAgiMW4DR0XG3P7VHAAEEEEAAAQQQQAABBDwJHEE4urk6OTm52pQB 7pZnVS7LT0beXJ5FWRE4jwACxyXQ9ZOh86eZSPBsuTsudGqDAAIIIIAAAkckcAThqLs1VBQqj+n1 wxG1G1VBAIHRCdR+mm2uzr/ffFlMRidFhRFAAAEEEEBgKAIDCkebDW9OFvdieaw4tjenQ2kUyokA AsctcJCn2W75fjV/FwajatzVPowJHzlnT8JhVX3KGmLVf6o+XyQOo5P85c0dpHzcvYTaIYAAAggg MAaBAYWjY2gO6ogAAgh0I7D5eB3cvJmZic3X+sc5caznweo8Dilnt8avdqc3W/Vf98aw6sPdt3jK 7+brqkYJRSw6vX6eZKx/HHwSp9A85RqF4FIEEEAAAQQQ6KtAr8JR6zf0zC/3arat+AIVHZkVUebt 1X+472vLUC4EEBiwgO+nmTU0muM4eyPni3z/XWVd6el8fppEjSIalX+o2Da7b3cPp6moOJgsFjpM bpNyxQJwGQIIIIAAAgj0WqA34aj88ja9u9S/ysuf7jO/3KvZtsav++ZP90Hwe3n2Mvhi/O5PQNrr jkfhEDheAf9Ps93yZWZotIX3k4vLOB6V0ejlRTK6WZLs5O/nwcP1tOh53CLlFvXhVgQQQAABBBDo jUBfwlExr0z8hJ7suTG7mIuh0K+l++VGkKu74Escn6qbq/3s35uGoCAIIHAkAv6fZmqernMLo82V nG4Srywtk58u3s31+KiKRl9My25Izst5wNub7+G8lkxY2iLl6mXgSgQQQAABBBDorUBPwtHd7++B /Ak92enivM7qJDFqGm3Y0VtpCoYAAqMQ8P40K56nmyx2OF/JmSa31spSZ+uIH/lkPKqj0dRWvXkb IVlxZ7ijnJjhoktgnXSlPIoOQyURQAABBBAYtUBPwtHtL7Eu1JiIG07ZrfFladStSOURQKA3Ar6f ZjlbGEU25jO27tNVRY0vjb167QHQeI8kx8NbRaVy1cXq3AxIHSn3plEpCAIIIIAAAgjsSaAn4Wjd ubl70iBZBBBAoKWA36dZ2RZGzSsno8aHh/lF9RHV3LwmLy7T2yB1lHLzqnEnAggggAACCHgT6Ek4 GqhtHlfn9m65u83G2PZRbolRZzmpN1MyRgCBMQt4fJrJLYyer+sOfFZsLPU2mLppi4m81tRcWUKx aNUOahulXLHUXIYAAggggAACvRboSzgqdv6/F7O4AnP56Mn0/W8Tb3arX5UXHZX2zo1ft2C/Jybz lphetxKFQwCBAQl4e5o55um6+aLVn+oxGa3i7+opaTy0T070O0jrBrUDanyKigACCCCAAAK1BE7E z921bhjnxfJN7r/e8R1qnK1PrREoEujVk6FXhaHPIIAAAggggAACVQR6MzpapbBcgwACCCCQK9Dx q0ZRRgABBBBAAAEEDiHA6OghlMkDAQQQQAABBBBAAAEEEEAgJcDoKF0CAQQQQAABBBBAAAEEEEDA gwDhqAd0suxSINqEJdzhKrXBlftsXA6941WlzbFSZVd3NrlRpOPr3i75SQsBBBBAAAEEEEAAgcYC hKON6bixLwJzsVOnPrY3p2IXTzs4dJ/VdRAbkooNResc9o7Nde4Mo1AZPattTOsdbfKtlxNXI4AA AggggAACCCCwbwHC0X0Lk35VgTjSqvUmn2B2m7w0YrL4It9f+34Zv6/WfTYMRq/OgxtxX51Dvsoj ioDr3Cev9XVv3XJyPQIIIIAAAggggAAC+xUgHN2vL6lXE5BzaqfXwc02GueUI51Pqt3b8qrN1fn3 mzcvWqbC7QgggAACCCCAAAIIIFBXgHC0rhjXdy8gIsJVICbV3i8mSeKTxWJWP6vtLzH/9fnfRjpm GtmzMuv5OzPf+nlyBwIIIIAAAggggAACCDQRIBxtosY9XQrslu9XwenNmwbBZ7oY7qSyZ1Uwuk4m +3ZZLdJCAAEEEEAAAQQQQAABtwDhKD3Et4B7QLNG6XbLl9cP87U1xprcnj0rw9NuwuAaheRSBBBA AAEEEEAAAQQQCAV6E46mXsihdrNJdkgd29kx98+krc/CHYncrR9aiY2QpneX28f8oc6cszo8ZZ7u sPva2J4MlT4Lw25SSo8AAggggAACoxI4EVvHjKrCVLZ3AjJUlLsYWaOa4mu32GHI/ltxyVUSz9eO WDR7VuawyiZ5WjlTfa87aze2r3t71wUoEAIIIIAAAggggMA4BXozOjpOfmotBCaLd/Pg4fpl8naW miybKxXOFiwBLTo7u0128VVvLA3kbkr2dko1C8LlCCCAAAIIIIAAAgggUEOAcLQGFpfuSWB2u5YB 6dSYnl09J70tb9GkW/fZ8lzCl6FG84bLbzCu8HVvrUJyMQIIIIAAAggggAAC3gQIR73Rk7EhIIcq xQDl6lwtGhZH3jzaXLHNVznjNrlR3pwEj+6zLZogDDXl21LFm2Xi7CuFrb7ubVFdbkUAAQQQQAAB BBBAYA8CrB3dAypJIoAAAggggAACCCCAAAIIlAkwOlomxHkEEEAAAQQQQAABBBBAAIE9CBCO7gGV JBFAAAEEEEAAAQQQQAABBMoECEfLhDiPAAIIIIAAAggggAACCCCwBwEP4eju0z+NdlDdQ+17nyRW vW+iQLy/1DiuNnaJ3Wdl+57waajUyHwWKjGpi7CqbsWVCCCAAAIIIOBXwEM46rfC5I5AhwLie//5 6my5jV9har381H22w2KQFAIIIIAAAggggAACQxQgHB1iqx2+zHqQ759PuyRr/af0aOC+iqbGERtm 1uZed312/97dB/O3rye5l7nPylsmr/8TgawVwu4LkHQRQAABBBBAAAEEEOidAOFo75qkxwW6v/s3 jkf1Gz05EEAAAQQQQAABBBBAAIGGAoSjDeHGd9vZfH6WxKMiGpV/SDHYKyXN4Uy9SrJwkWX6RmMc Vp+aLu6DYHUeJ2AN1BY2Rum98cBpUr5kCNZR5vBUulTh+LH7rF7alxy5VSmW3FPPExlWM91T/iSL AAIIIIAAAgggMEIBwtERNnrDKj+9uIzjURmNXl48NVOSMZa9jvJx+2aaXHG5jhdYPq7nIrSM477M EsvHx/+S+a+zW3nfdilC33mShHGBozoV7/3z6Z9XwecoFyO9wjLrWbaZUoXldp+N5ujKBARE9iiT bNh+7tsE1duf0/SM7L1kRaIIIIAAAggggAACCGgBwlF6QmWB6eu3cz0+qqLR/xmxpvjTRzF+OV9b YeJkEi+qnLx+PUsymj5Nj6tWLsQeLlzdBZ/zwltPZS6R3ANAmKQO3nVQ2nSd7v5KR8oIIIAAAggg gAACxydAOHp8bbrHGs0uVDyqo1Fr/57dnx9i9PLCCDkzxTCmqKpJrvExEWFucL/wNjSX7EUkhzXT e+NGs2rtMu8PuYKkI/P0JF87snSf1cnqoHQdqInRzN/dX0OTMgIIIIAAAggggACjo/SBWgIqHn31 YVW4m2xBajIUnS6eRZNt1dRb49AhkJj7GqigtB9RUEmZa7kd7OJQMpkXbe3c6z6bU0jxIwER6cEa j4wQQAABBBBAAIHRCTA6Oromb1dhGY/e32eHQSd/PRNbDX3d5Kcezj8te6NJuOZyPb9fvDLfKdOu yA3vrljmhqkX3+aW7Dy7TIJ6BPU8iH46qLZKd//lIgcEEEAAAQQQQACB4xMgHD2+Nt1vjdQAW05c OXsjRjzF1rfWu0F3O/1iGLVWNA5Wd59eycm6P/7ok7tPV2bsufv0QbxC5tlf9rs82wRpze51lnmf xk7JfWasA9EPT7dybLXsp4N9FoS0EUAAAQQQQAABBEYiQDg6kobefzXl0KaYhGu8jOXk5NW/Ol9x Tm2mq9dhyl1sxZVytaieCfpDT9HVx3QRLLfZaGh2a6RQc6udRveWlHmPoC7JvWUrYlEdiDIaujdj EkYAAQQQQAABBBBICZyI758HRhFL8qY/3zL6UoUdqypKXDMGAT4L1VsZq+pWXIkAAggggAACfgUY HfXrT+4IIIAAAggggAACCCCAwEgFPIyOjlSaaiOAAAIIIIAAAggggAACCBgCjI7SHRBAAAEEEEAA AQQQQAABBDwIeAhH5escre1XW1Zb7QfaZYIty9Pl7V1bdVk20kLgkAK9/yyIB1Ff3tHae6tDdhzy QgABBBBAAIFeC3gIR3vtQeEQQACB+gKbq/Mfy8+v7dcT1U+GOxBAAAEEEEAAgXEJDCIc1e9DtI6a o6FytOBYR1DH1WGpLQJVBbLPDfOxkZ1VET8l1P8pOnJHQOXLcudvZTCqM7Uu0n+K8q5QKjPrvgy4 VkXnOgQQQAABBBBAoJbAIMJRVaP5WryTRh/6BZQ1I9JaLFyMAAJHIZA8N8KX4lZ4bsgXv0aHuCsI zsSbcKMj772sm4/iZblvZgnY/d2/8oW66th8XWUkU6VKxZzxWf12XiLSo+iJVAIBBBBAAAEEcgWG E44axZ+9kV8Rf/yJv/BZVQtHH8Jvnfq/pov7QIaw0VHjC545UnK1kclZN1sDKcY33Xjsxb6fbogA An4ERJApY8vVh0/5D47GpUqGRnUSZ/P5WRKPimhU/qEo9cn/Ls+C+5/b3POT12/nQeHZxgXmRgQQ QAABBBBAoDcCgwxHHXoiCjxfqcGFWz1WMbuVoxpqiMMYX80b4chLVb5OXox7hEMj26cfzs2BDhlp Tu8uo4GT9TwzZvvn0z+vgs/GmG6FoZne9A0KgsCRCejYzxi57KB+u0+vUkOjwdOLyzgeldHo5cXT oozk3fdn1siqeenuzw8R3j6ddlBOkkAAAQQQQAABBPooMMRwdHMlBzv1Si3rq5uIDsV2ItsoEm3v LebgmRlNXn+WYW10yLNnxu4lswsxkrH6ukmuWN0Fn+PIV50uGtJtX1ZSQACBMoHJX886Hm1U83TT WxhNxaimjnpVNPq/TDgZz9RQv1YV/TpW9KQrqyXnEUAAAQQQQACBwQgMJxxNptrq4c9w9DOS/nql ByqrjntWaSE1NDG/MJaEWdGvPCtWdiX7jlhDp/LSbMhcJVuuQQCBYQik5+nGpRY/Psl4VEej2e12 45kab3/KB0hq8UD0rMt90g0DhlIigAACCCCAAALVBIYTjhpTbXOGP8Uc2rmIDV91uixs+1OsOC08 1FmzVHpObipMrtYMXIUAAgcQKJ38Wm9ibGYLo6QKKh59Fe23W1g1sZhA7MyWenKpp4paYND9QtcD IJMFAggggAACCCBQXWA44ai7TvOLW/m9Tg5Wdrc8c/rUsWNSkJ2bW52dKxFA4PACu3/v7oNwuDL7 6Xb//JQtbeHQqLpUxqP394WTK5LkVEGyh955iY11D99LyBEBBBBAAAEEDilwLOGo/gKoRhry3gGj loxZyzqrIKt9Le8XH8PVoGLnold3xn1qg9/VuT3RbrfZdLxvZ5WScg0CCJQIqH3JktXeqU93IIPL OtPr5SZEz9aOyRBqF7XyyRIqRA6e/ZWd0RuIiFQNnU67+4mNXoIAAggggAACCPRL4KjCUTMiTQ2S zm51oBodFb/fzW7DlxXK+8SuI58vRR7xN0f5esLtMjCXj55MP/zpVwtTGgTGLJB86PUe2cbicvXz VXx+KoLLCtFjZOmYp1uB23gUiRBZTM4tClvVE0g+uWq8m6pC/lyCAAIIIIAAAgj0ROBE/IB/4KLI QYqfb2t88Ttw+VzZqQGWWt9a2xU+Y6VeZNMuTe5GYCACVpjWq+dGrwqTbc1OnxuOYHkg/YhiIoAA AggggECPBY5tdLRjanvqbck7AjvOOzc5/RpVDgTGIFA+0/UQn7m8aC/zqlE/Bamca5vnRl9boXLl uRABBBBAAAEE+izgYXS0zxzpsunlZslfGSgYUutRVgQQQAABBBBAAAEEEOizAOFon1uHsiGAAAII IIAAAggggAACRyvgYbLubnnW4ctYjrZlVMW6thJLT09c+Op8clTc8Om426D72nXeCiLBs+Wxb+jc 9Weh+3btT4r7s+o65bLPQlD3kTSKz0J/eholQQABBBBAoL2Ah3C0faFJYX8CYjpyeGxvTvPembO/ rEk5FqjVCpur8+83XxY5LwpBFIHBC1zET6TH8kcSn4XBtzcVQAABBBAYnwDh6FG2uRzDaDIEPbtN 9i2ZLL7cnAar90c/7La3HnCQVtgt36/m78JgNDWUJMe5jRHunLMn4bCqPmUNseo/VR8gV7W1D3lz BynvrYFI+GACTT8LwWw2iws5eXF5GgTffxdNBOjFZyH7KYs/Q3wWDtbfyAgBBBBAYEgChKNDai3K ikBKYPPxOrh5k3xjF6eToVXxWk35ysro63C0vaoYZAqC05utGga/N4ZVH+6+xd/0N1/rvFBIRBvT 6+fJOJZMeXvzJC5s85RpcQRsged/F0wE6MlnQZY2Pb3B/FmHzwI9GgEEEEAAAUuAcHSgHcIai8qM gE2vHwIZiERHZmWheXvhANj2l0il8MvfQOE6LbbvVrCGg3JqNnsjI8/i4STzltP5/DT5piyiUfmH ilq7b3cPp6moOJgsFjpMbpNyxQJwmXeB/X8WNlfiuTZfF7x4pi+fhVRDTBb38uefaJYJnwXvHZUC IIAAAgj0ToBwtHdNUl4g+cVvenepR7cexRBYZgRMjX8Zo2TmEFgQ/F6evQy+RDeLsDU3IJVf78QY mj3yVl640VzhvxV2y5eZodEW/E8uLuN4VEajlxfJ6GZJspO/nwcP19OiHzZapNyiPtx6MIH9fhai 6a/nq+IXbfXns5BFV3OMo196+CwcrFeSEQIIIIDAUAQIR4fSUkk5xZw0MRSV7F0zu5iLodCvYp1e tWN1F3yJ41N1c87wmfx6J0Yi7Di2WvrjuMp/K6i5ic4tjNRwUhCvLC1rmOni3Vx/a1bR6Itp2Q3J eTkPeHvzPRyPz4SlLVKuXgau9CWw589CMslcdrDcPaT79FnIiUfFrzXBw6+tOsNnwVc3JV8EEEAA gb4KEI72tWUKy7X7/V18t7meJrvGnNdZ5SdGTaONb4qzECsB5ehrwbS4wZHtocDeW6F4bmIySVsN J9VpRfHjhIxHdTSaWqGXtxGSFXeKaYl6yajckTm9C5Ir5T00D0keUOAAnwVVG9HBxGLoh+uP6V/e +vdZcOrzWThg5yQrBBBAAIEBCBCODqCR7CKqFZ3GRNxwym5noWO4Kw3jos6e4bsVcrZticpr9o26 vUJ9U35p7NWbIERjVNGLgOT/5iWvolK1XM6aBO5IeXAfQQpsCez7s2BkNn2Ssxa6v5+FsOQqXj99 Es824LPAJwgBBBBAAAFDgHB0cN2h7tzcehWU8zuDm23dMKZeJkdwtd9WKNu2pTmw/Kb88DC/sPbq rZ+cfiWHdXSUcv2ycMeeBfb7WchGvvbuar3/LARyo6/Amm7AZ2HPXZLkEUAAAQQGJUA4OqjmUoVV 26Wuzu01VLvNxngbn9xaps5y0ghBvEV+VWEy7/DMui+xx1aQ63qfF20w2ramahC07q8RYiKvNW9X rTwOUkFto5TbVof7DyCwx8/Cbmc81tTjyd5drX+fhZS3mmxirfVXz/Amn7IDtCRZIIAAAggg4EGA cNQDetss5XTI7U1gLh89mb7/bSY7u9WvnIyOwpe5WGXR75o0bhO35+4c0rYGx3C/t1ZwzE10u0ar P9VrgKLVx121r9Vr9DtI6wa1x9ArxlmHvX0WguDbS3ORvJiIbq0i6OdnwXyGqskmdqHH2UeoNQII IIAAAkUCJ2Io5MA68ufiX+/4rlqFHasqSqO6ZrRdYrQVb9C992e1v5R7Vc0GheEWBBBAAAEEEGgm wOhoMzfuQsCHQMevV/RRBfJEoBMBPgudMJIIAggggAACvgU8jI76rjL5I4AAAggggAACCCCAAAII +BdgdNR/G1ACBBBAAAEEEEAAAQQQQGCEAoSjI2x0qowAAgg0ERBrR+1NlJskwj0IIIAAAggggEAs QDhKZ0AAAQQQQAABBBBAAAEEEPAgQDjqAZ0sEUAAAQQQQAABBBBAAAEECEfpAwgggAACCCCAAAII IIAAAh4ECEc9oJMlAggggAACCCCAAAIIIIAA4Sh9AAEEEEAAAQQQQAABBBBAwIMA4agHdLJEAAEE EEAAAQQQQAABBBDoTTi6uTrJHFebqIHGdpaOiQACVQTG9mRw17eKGNcggAACCCCAAAJ9Ejh5fHzs U3koCwIIIIBATwXEe0env9493s56Wj6KhQACCCCAAAJDE+jN6OjQ4CgvAggggAACCCCAAAIIIIBA GwHC0TZ63IsAAggggAACCCCAAAIIINBQgHC0IRy3IYAAAggggAACCCCAAAIItBEgHG2jx70IIIAA AggggAACCCCAAAINBQhHG8JxGwIIIIAAAggggAACCCCAQBsBdtZto8e9CCCAAAIIIIAAAggggAAC DQUYHW0Ix20IIIAAAggggAACCCCAAAJtBAhH2+hxLwIIIDAiAfHe0ZOrzSArvLk6EcdAC99WXFV+ pHWvbSc7uXEUsenLQK3iqz980ZE2c589Pmd3fat4+rtGtUannf742rd+65Q+n+0u020D1C/unu4g HN0TLMkigAACCPRBQH3hOf9+s318vJ31oUCUoc8Ck8X9oz62N6d9LuhAyiY+fuerU/npCw/rQ+g+ O5Aq1ijm2Opbg4ZLiwUu1vHHRzyVVufHGJESjvIJQAABBBA4VgHx9W96HYgvw/eLySDq2Gb8oc29 g8DpUSF11Jr3+4avVmiTb5t73Y2y+3b3EMzfFXz63GdlysXOvjpDG6vy+vqqla98u27f1EBiagZD dhwybs3UrAhzPP/k5Gy56wCocc+ZzZLfUScvLsWvZN9/d1GgDurUXRKEo91ZkhICCCCAQK8ENh+v H05vvgwkFO0VHYVBAAEEhigwjwcT9VhilcHEZFZEOC/CHNHv3Y+Zz/8exq+rNXoP4WgNLC5FAAEE EBiOwG75fuUYmTEXCRrrofTv6+bv4eov4R+i39eNH9Mza6msH9ozZ9O/30cX6L9Prx+CQH6DCo9q v8tXvNcsWKpc7jI72jxdHavAmSGHJFd5SlxraGfhg0alKkk5PUKi8qjGHNgFSt9VpRWKWj+ddGZh qsO5Sr5FLVh6b87wkd2I1jhS5lS6P4dmYcMWnC1x1nUplix9QtmfA5lQca/NPBkafULL6pupUKpD FrVC4YCbPKGL7vgMxqfllcl11qPBuP1suS2lDS/ImMYVzCtU5tNXUuaqpVCD63LO/ep9J8ObpfkW Pa9KP2U6ZcfzOcp6cyX633x9jMtO4vnI/B8EEEAAAQQcAvIf9uSH5/5TredBYP7GnZRYLQtMTskL zZqp/47+YKeiTyU3p1LSCw4LU9bLEa0ybbfJsrpowWJDZJV6zr26ejc3p3HGdoVLNEp6RAFxuPzy Jln19GjlGq7MlMVVwqen4v+aNWhcqpKU042dbkFzlVYup76gsHMVtUK0GLWo9bc3hVbpXpXbIsX5 ln9SHffqU3HnsZ8BrjIbC3AL+3OFMuc6l3+Oiutst3fYWeJGKe91FcpcmHnxvapX2qUwP8qFrSBP hLfpqoTWIr34z8X9Kn7gFLav+TQzPlilXcooV3StrGK2JxS0r7PMjtzTn+6ohhojeza3RQofCa5q N+85Zc/n6HGj/+Vp+I9DaYv5voDR0dJfO7gAAQQQQGCAArvf34Mgd1ZTeg7v7EJ8U1p9jTcNnt3K 7xar87PlRm/EkpruK74RRNO3Jot38+Dh+mN4rztleVZ8nbCmfk0mh5l2tboLvsQZqwpH64/KNFo0 /WSxMHaPmj5J7w1k/Mx/+UX84j/5+3k8DJCaZ51uo5JSOVJuUZ9Wt5a0fplVq7xb3mx1HiMtT2Vu 8znS98aLWSeLL+aOVXv8LLiaQM3jMB4zulTpMb28VpCfmIdfctRSrEsVP+qEn2r57AsffVXaqKB9 3VbOPiWfi8ljUV66+SqmqlxU20yuSpkrd2n1UNFGezza9pzi57Mq9Ow2+nnnu5g6U3Uyxx7r23nS hKOdk5IgAggggECfBVSc+nA9TaYZnq9S5RWTvMRv1g/X53JmlHvlkBlkuVNWZ6t+I+sasHg7mXKN wrKEwbiULPqGZExAU9MczeP0ybQo6Qpt5BJypNw1bNX0KrR+oVUF56rFaHSdGb7d2xs4udq3UV7l N1WQLEzEfW/LXlde9Pwr1A5Hp5cvjB+m1I41D3ffzB1rcltBPn7kD0syjefvRAyo7tn+ejA+AqVt lN++bZxFAPVGrNuMf+KTAffpzZtq0ahUKi1zU+z93Ne65xQ+n+3yRv8wRb9/7qc2PlIlHPWhTp4I IIAAAvsWUL+K521BKL6r5c15stfjqO8X8ijbxFClFh6VUt53vWum367M4a/225tAh/eZRXjT6+fR fN1wsl+l8rUrVaUs+nWR/PrtsHI6+6pJSZl9FcuVr/lpzV43wF4XDY+KootfusQcAhmPipHIKLpt 0UZuq9LWlRF1NMArg+WKAVcYijZ8buSUSj3JXb9PdfHb1QF7jvr9s+xfpdLW6d0FhKO9axIKhAAC CCDQhYD8dztvklaFeZ+75Us5LioXG4lhVNeL360vO+6UVXxszAnuoo7t06igUZ5JuC/lWkzQexnv GhLOqWy07UYnpSovt5rjmBqzrXJXg2vcrV/RKte5QWE6uaVimTvJy0ykzefI/V3+YL3ONskZCs0Z MC1w1MOjy68rNe9C/NfDr2/JVN02bZS1qhegqgm7arBWTiSuPjTapsxZJFOybY2Ku/IBe45qhOPb WpdwtPMHJQkigAACCPRBQE1xzNtUUc4jU0tDzalwu80m+k+5faF4WamIo6JVpHZAujqP/luFrcZS NHfK4Vn7vQO7nVmKNl+1G95bplHclLvllUmoVsAZX5TUl784/NZUlX/Wb16qkq5nfiUVQ0dTseKu 085a2ArO1ndalTjr4jds/Rb3tmrfNuYVPkdFyafWeosO8PLOuLZCr2vjXFKq+Jec9GPFhaWGR6+v dTQaqCHJa/F6q3AefJs20lFysi7+6iSzqKGkFQVnIO4X8WVgTUV239amzKmU5QfceNdXqvXFjGDX 3uu1uugee471L8TmSjRCrWnPtarh8WLfeymRPwIIIIDAMATsXTUHUWbHHomZqaN680Vrf8pkE9Vo 28twb8Zog93crXsLUg7B0mcze/8macvvBvU2Usy9N2e3ycx+lu4yF7R1+U1GeWQ9jX1Mja03jcKk dt8szyCnZKUpG6lGu/nmbcDs3kK1eNvmcAPP+Iud1YKO1ndbWd8T8/eL1huH5udb+mkturdcIcww 1b5mb+98Z12ZeOnnyL2/rS61KHS2gqW9rrGzE9PKNtXCzhvtXXnt/4q2k42ra34GY8bih0zOZ6XW E6l0N978z1HxZ6GkI9tNo1s4dYt1SW5lGu2sm9cnM7k3ej6n+mMt/9LPfW8uOBEl8RgMkzUCCCCA wFAE5E/Nv97ZO5n0v+zRD+TbTt5lLt4gd74SXwgazUDtPxYlRGBkAur5INY384keWcNT3V4JMFm3 V81BYRBAAAEEuhVQy+3Wz+VOO641oN1mSmoIINBLAWNSviifmhZ7lHMfe4lPoRAoECAcpWsggAAC CFQSkIHdQMcQ9MakAy18pcbhIgQQqCLw+73xiic1MNrJvIkqWXMNAgjkCzBZl56BAAIIIIAAAggg gAACCCDgQYDRUQ/oZIkAAggMUUC+wo75rvtvOf0G+GOXFqtwB1zJzttIcRx9o+//w0MOCCAwQAHC 0QE2GkVGAAEEEEAAgSMSkNPJtzffz09O7PcPHVEVqQoCCCCQL0A4Ss9AAAEEEEAgFtDDVOZRd5xS jZzVvcloAbX5Uu5C17Yp76eZ+1mq/dQ1SrW4jVrkKxPdijc1TolIWyhyKwIIDE6AcHRwTUaBEUAA AQT2LJC820289G11TniwZ2+ST+LcLzenD9cfN5AggAACYxEgHB1LS1NPBBBAAIH6ApMXl6fBw69t eGd6xaMaGYyjVT2yOr1+CIKVmHYZHhWDWb0cseCm0pTTg7oVMw2CuEZm/vbYrpW2mXBpqap4F+Rr c9jrKqMyG9cYJXaf1UWyUs+517ogOV/eRvLaYkn7jCxotp0mi3fzYPV+uauCxzUIIIDA8AUIR4ff htQAAQQQQGBPAvXeS6jfJyMGVIMgGV+t+h4JPf9THut5pjbulEWUc746vdmG98v/qfnyit/Ls5fB lzj71XkcgomYyUhbzSWNZyK3qq+qY3G+QXC5TuojSIwyqVtFwB8VOWcI23FWxoTTu8tIaz0X19rx d2GpnG2kG624RiLf6XUQtdL2yfvzVX6vnT4xfwHZU88mWQQQQKAvAoSjfWkJyoEAAggg0BeBeGxT BTw1Q7u+VKJGOVZ3wZe4lrMLEQ5//61G53bL96vg9ObLYqJTmyzEXNLuxu4K85U5LWZJDWSEljpE wB8VWQ0o2jNci89uPl4/GDUKVHVXX43ZsY5SlZoW3yvzDebvbMnc9CZ/P48boDRDLkAAAQSGLkA4 OvQWpPwIIIAAAl0LxGOb735NxTzRyjNfuy5HxfTCcKx5UZMoyc5x9+3uITi9fBEGoyogVbOX7751 Mpe0KF9dCmNqq5oA7ThywlXjavPs7vf3QISu0io8MoOU7lK526TwXpXv/MIIsSs2LpchgAACRy5A OHrkDUz1EEAAAQSaC4jpqGKe6MP1y54v5dPTZvW+rDLK6nsAXdoiakbt9fNovq6aAO04tr9c4ap5 Vv1/Yyp1OCH4dt9xoruEVtVU5Pr8b+M3gFIuLkAAAQSGK0A4Oty2o+QIIIAAAvsXcA28qdHDHh3h 2sb1vKMAOmcoNGfAdA8AembrumqQqAK40yfT/JJYZ7Nzc/dQ/JwkVTcKp0CX5Cgj18LKHKa05IIA AggcToBw9HDW5IQAAgggMDgBHXFGY1VmUCG3prkLsqN2aumftRixq0oXpLxbXpmDt2q9Z0eja+E0 4HhwWG3tZKyAlDXbR32Vc2yoc00Fc8nWRnmFKj47eyNXv6Ze3rPbbDqZfVzc0qn1raLzvLzLvVo1 X5v5wl31NtJBAAEEDiNAOHoYZ3JBAAEEEBiOgPGaFrFqUUztjIbp1FY+4crD6a93j18ucyo1u1Ub wcaLE+1tW9soFKX83VwLqbdvrTqwWFYcMQ04ngIsX2KTk/Ye6iuGeQ1DuaGUmK4r3ZNZyPP1xVdN nFcox1k5hGxUSSfx/ncZROvzs1u1A7Aus6iS6jvpObn1tnJuXSYSQAABBPwLnIhVE/5LQQkQQAAB BHovIEcDRQTWVZzT+/pSwL4KqJfPGD8S2OV0n+1PndSLX8Tq2PgDpf4gdv3dHv9Wzv1pBUqCAAL+ BRgd9d8GlAABBBBAAAEEjlzAnhCcGgYVMXS4dROx6JH3A6qHAAJpAcJR+gQCCCCAQCUBOcmRodFK VFyEQFbg93vj9TJqYDQJPfXWyHy86DcIIDBCASbrjrDRqTICCCCAAAIIIIAAAggg4F+A0VH/bUAJ EEAAgUEIyFdBdrcrzyCqTCERQAABBBBAYK8ChKN75SVxBBBAAAEEEEAAAQQQQACBfAHCUXoGAggg gAACCCCAAAIIIICABwHCUQ/oZIkAAggggAACCCCAAAIIIEA4Sh9AAAEEEEAAAQQQQAABBBDwIEA4 6gGdLBFAAAEEEEAAAQQQQAABBAhH6QMIIIAAAggggAACCCCAAAIeBAhHPaCTJQIIIIAAAggggAAC CCCAAOEofQABBBBAAAEEEEAAAQQQQMCDAOGoB3SyRAABBBBAAAEEEEAAAQQQIBylDyCAAAIIIIAA AggggAACCHgQIBz1gE6WCCCAAAIIIIAAAggggAAChKP0AQQQQAABBBBAAAEEEEAAAQ8ChKMe0MkS AQQQQAABBBBAAAEEEEDg5PHxEQUEEEAAAQQQQAABBBBAAAEEDizA6OiBwckOAQQQQAABBBBAAAEE EEBAChCO0g8QQAABBCoJ7JZnJ1ebSpdWumhzdXLiSlCdT47yrMUNZ8tdpby5CAEEEEAAAQT6IEA4 2odWoAwIIIAAAjkC87VYUKKO7c3p6twdDG+uzr/ffFlMkEQAAQQQQACBwQgQjg6mqSgoAgggMEwB OaraZFh1dns7i2o8WXy5OQ1W7wsHP3fL96v5uzAYTY2ryhFWY2w15+xJOKyqT1lDrPpP5UOzsqTZ lOP7WqY8zJan1AgggAACCJQJEI6WCXEeAQQQQKD3ApuP18HNmzh6leVNhlYf1/PAGFud3cYjrkFw erNV/3VvDKs+3H2Lp/xuvq5qVj49pGuGsu1SrlkQLkcAAQQQQKD/AoSj/W8jSogAAgj0XECNf0ZH Zhxyev0QyHAwOjLrO83bC4cht79EKs//zp2Law2N5ljN3oih1eD77yrrSk/n89MkahTRqPxDM//J 4l5MMo7HdDtMuVl5uAsBBBBAAIHeCRCO9q5JKBACCCAwJAEZS07vLvUY46MYiMyMQ8qQzByrNAci g+D38uxl8CW6WYStuQGpDDjFSKY9/hky7ZYvM0OjLQSfXFzG8aiMRi8vnjRPbfLi8jSIottOU25e Ju5EAAEEEECgPwKEo/1pC0qCAAIIDE9AzJJ9ODV2EJpdzMVQ6NfKG/Cu7oIvcXyqbs4ZxJQB58N8 bcexkZWap+vcwmhzJQdo45WlZcjTxbu5jiBVNPpiWnaD6/zk7+dB8PBrq67pNOU2peJeBBBAAAEE eiJAONqThqAYCCCAwBAFdr+/i2jreprM1T2vt9ayPEgUw69q9DXZ18iEKp6nm0wPPl/J9Zz59+ei i7BYxqM6Gk1ND87bCKnaRkcyK1fKQ2x/yowAAggggEA7AcLRdn7cjQACCIxaQK3oNDYNCqfs1gj9 3HwyFr1+XjAuKm7N2cIoStAsVd3yqKjxpbFXb1LKaCOk6BU08n8dyat4/fRJPMLqSHnUHYnKI4AA AgiMVIBwdKQNT7URQACBLgTqzs2tl6ecZRvcbAujvbItjOrlZl4to8aHh/mFtVdvg+R23+4eAmuI tauUGxSGWxBAAAEEEOidAOFo75qEAiGAAAIDElCb1q7O7d1yd5uNsYmtWj5ZYzlpVPvNlZj465jM K1eUPl/XHfisaKsGQVumrYZ2rZW1MvMuUq5YCS5DAAEEEECg7wKEo31vIcqHAAII9FpAvM3kcXsT mMtHT6bvf5tlnt3qF3/mvArGUTX9xk/jNnG7GfU65um6waLVn+oFNNG618zbZxqjJyVWQ7vWG00b J8qNCCCAAAIIHKfAifj59zhrRq0QQAABBDoVkIN9v961HTLsqEi9KkxHdSIZBBBAAAEERifA6Ojo mpwKI4AAAoMX6PhVo4P3oAIIIIAAAggMVIDR0YE2HMVGAAEEEEAAAQQQQAABBIYtwOjosNuP0iOA AAIIIIAAAggggAACAxUgHB1ow1FsBBBAAAEEEEAAAQQQQGDYAoSjw24/So8AAggggAACCCCAAAII DFSAcHSgDUexEUAAAQQQQAABBBBAAIFhCxCODrv9KD0CCCCAAAIIIIAAAgggMFABwtGBNhzFRgAB BBBAAAEEEEAAAQSGLUA4Ouz2o/QIIIAAAggggAACCCCAwEAFCEcH2nAUGwEEEEAAAQQQQAABBBAY tgDh6LDbj9IjgMBRCWyuTjLH1Saq4tjOHlXTUhkERiYwtueVu74ja3yqi0AtgZPHx8daN3AxAggg gAACCCCAAAIIIIAAAu0FGB1tb0gKCCCAAAIIIIAAAggggAACtQUIR2uTcQMCCCCAAAIIIIAAAggg gEB7AcLR9oakgAACCCCAAAIIIIAAAgggUFuAcLQ2GTcggAACCCCAAAIIIIAAAgi0FyAcbW9ICggg gAACCCCAAAIIIIAAArUFCEdrk3EDAggggAACCCCAAAIIIIBAewHC0faGpIAAAggggAACCCCAAAII IFBbgHC0Nhk3IIAAAu0Fdsuzk6tN+3TGkAJWY2jlIdRxc3Vy4vrYqvPJUf4BFzecLXdDqLqzjHxC qzdh11ZlfTIsmcy22r84R9Inq7cIV/ZBgHC0D61AGRBAAAEEEEBg8ALz9WN4bG9OV+fuAGBzdf79 5stiMvhaU4G+CqgoVB7T64dKZaRPVmLioq4FCEe7FiU9BBBAAAEEEBiwQPWhJLuSs9vbWfSXyeLL zWmwel84+Llbvl/N34XBaGpcVQYQxthqztmTcFhVn7KGWPWfyodmZUmzKcf3tUx5wM3fy6I365OT xb3+eUT8OlKhWmV9MtXTRIpxvBtNChD9p7TnuHt7hXJyydEJEI4eXZNSIQQQQAABBBDot8Dm43Vw 8yaOXmVhk6HVx/U8MMZWZ7dGTHF6s1X/dW8Mqz7cfYun/G6+rmrWPD2ka4ay7VKuWRAu9ytg98nS Xiejyqnoxbo/hlHvk6gKZT2nsLf7NSB3PwKEo37cyRUBBBBAAAEEPAlYgzqZcUg1s1GEg9GRWd9p 3l44DLn9JVJ5/nfuXFxrGCrHYPZGjmZ9/11lXenpfH6afPcX0aj8QzNXMZgmh9GiMd0OU25WnlHd dYg+6QIt65Ope8W03pX8BcX8WSSYLBbqF5Z6PadObx9VlxhRZQlHR9TYVBUBBBBAAIGxC8iv/dO7 y2hMZz3PjEOqmY3G6I31jTv4vTx7GXzRo0FqFDM3IJVf7oPT1PhnSL9bvswMjbZolScXl3E8KqPR y4t4iKp+qpMXl6dBFN12mnL9soznjsP0SXcwWqtPurq3zIaeM57O20lNCUc7YSQRBBBAAAEEEBiA gJiR+HBq7CA0u5iLodCvlbe5Xt0FX+L4VN2cM4gpA86H+dqOYyMcNSfSuYXR5koO0MYrS8tUp4t3 cx1Bqmj0xbTsBtf5yd/Pg+Dh11Zd02nKbUp13PcepE86Ccv7pH27a+i/bs+p2duPuyuMtXaEo2Nt eeqNAAIIIIDA6AR2v7+LaOt6mryPRcw5rHOUB4liqEuNvib7GpnpF8+JTKYHn6/k2Gz+/bllFWGx jEd1NJqaHpy3EVK1jY5kVq6U67BxbbHAAfqkm7/mPN1sYkkfSya2l/ScFr2dvnR8AoSjx9em1AgB BBBAAAEEcgXUsI4xETfcg6VG6Ff2zf5sev28YFxU3JqzhVGUoFmquuVR3/1fGnv1JqWMtqRJNpxx RroqNjp9Eo+wOlKmi3UjsO8+WVZKR58sunX6xFrbrPuYmLpuHu6e06a3l1WI84MTIBwdXJNRYAQQ QAABBBBoJlB3bm69XOS8Q7HVaGEw2XoYqrA48rv/w8P8wtqrt17h1dW7b3cPgTXE2lXKDQozklv2 2yfLEBv1yYmYHy4mGbwsfI+RzJWeU2bP+UiAcJS+gAACCCCAAAJjEVDbeK7O7d1yd5uNsYmtWj5Z YzlpRKc3G43eJZoFlStKn6/rDnxWbBg1QNUybTnN2F5Zq6KKDlKuWImRXrbHPlkm2rhPzm7FYKic 9e6Y+E3PKePnfChAOEpXQAABBBBAAIHRCIi3mTxubwJz+ejJ9P1vs/7qq7bxppdqSy31Gz+N28T6 VDPqbTAnUhcqWpmnXkATrXvNvH2mcQMmJdZvkczfgKlx8txYLrCvPhm/PMZ+d1HSdxx9srTXyWBT bEJtLgItrylXIJAncCJ+TEMGAQQQQODAAnIY4te7toMZBy60p+yw8gRPtl0KHHE3PuKqddkDVFq9 supVYTqnJsEBCTA6OqDGoqgIIIAAAgggMECBjl81OkABitw3Afpk31pkxOVhdHTEjU/VEUAAAQQQ QAABBBBAAAF/AoyO+rMnZwQQQAABBBBAAAEEEEBgxAKEoyNufKqOAAL+BOQWE9X2R/FXxlTOalcM H2UeoFVvGo2CILB/gX59QqMteMRGUvLw8chykPfLav99gxwQqCJAOFpFiWsQQACB0QrYezOOloGK I4DAQATma7FNpzr0xq89i0gHokgxETicAOHo4azJCQEEEOilQGo0wX45RSBfQRB9s+tl8SkUAgiM SMD9vJKvSU3evjpZfJFvmX2/NN4qOyIqqorAQAQIRwfSUBQTAQQQ2KtAPKAgxhPEmw27e6nhXktN 4gggMEYBnldjbHXqfLQChKNH27RUDAEEEGgiMFm8mwfBw69tk5u5BwEEEDigQNnzavvrIQie/z05 YJHICgEEagoQjtYE43IEEEDgyAV2v78HwemT6ZFXk+ohgMARCDifV7vl+1VwevNmdgQVpQoIHK8A 4ejxti01QwABBOoLbK6m1w/B/N2C4YT6eNyBAAIHFXA+r3bLl9cP8/U9D7ODtgmZIVBbgHC0Nhk3 IIAAAkcoIPafVMf5Sq7KSvYCOcKqUiUEEBi4QPnzSmwJPr273PIsG3hLU/xRCBCOjqKZqSQCCCBQ IqC2BhHbGAVsQ0lfQQCBnguUPK9kLHr9nHHRnrcixUMgFCAcpSsggAACCIQC4qUubKxLb0AAgUEI FD2v5Aze4GbLHI9BtCKFRCAICEfpBQgggAACiYD4hreeB+JVL7w6nm6BAAI9F8h5Xm2uzlesfu95 u1E8BCwBwlE6BAIIIICAJTC7lZN2xeIs9fJRMe1NryqVWxzJv+qDF5PSaxBAoAcC9vMq2HxdiULF DyqeVj1oIoqAQInAiVgsBBICCCCAwIEF5NqmX+/YZqMKe8ZqcyV2XKpyJ9cggMBeBMTazWQuLE+z 6sY8zapbdXql1WM7TZnEOhBgdLQDRJJAAAEEEDigwOxW/JLKgQAC3gRYl9nVA4+n2WE6MT22qx67 l3QYHd0LK4kigAACCCCAAAIIIIAAAgi4BRgdpYcggAACCCCAAAIIIIAAAgh4ECAc9YBOlggggIDc IIi9a6v1g66txNLTkwr4ag+nSm0kEmRnp2ptyVXHKND1J/QYjaI6VbJSj6hqD59DWOnt7Co9Cw9R HE956EaJjxSH+2xc5OaU1f89yvp0f2/nPZRw1FO3JlsEEEAAgT4K2DsJVyiheK/E95svi0mFS7kE AQQQcAmo5494omwf2eiubz1F7IYUHmLvebF3sx2Rus/qumw+yv3p6xy1/z0yEt/jvXLF8/bmu9ho v6NfYglH6/QKrkUAAQQQGIxAs5+ExYsM9VcO+bab8mO3fL+avwuD0dQv5KkRjpyz0T/m+pT1D3ud n5+zKcdflFqmXA7AFQgg0JGA3Hb3OhCh6H3Nn7eaPet0qcvv1c/Ese8FNLtNBCaLL/JlaO/lq9D0 4T4bBqNX58FNpX9Wkv5U898jqyPu+V6Z/PYmuJ52EZESjnb0DCEZBBBAAIHxCYhfu4ObNzOz4smP 5I/ruXz/YRQaRltoqjj3VA5/iMP83vlw9y3+dqPfnljnSP84b/523y7lOqXgWgQQaCggx85OmWnR UK/vt6lpNG9e9L2Y9cqn4vKH64+berdlryYcbSvI/QgggAACngTiyUi545BTOS9KhIPRkfkN17y9 0cIoa2g0x2D2Rkae33/HQabD6XQ+P02iRhGNyj80cxW/WsuQN/rtvsOUm5WHuxBAoFRAPk2CeKaF dXl6+oPxKNOnip911jOy3nPSvjV3CCxdsBqPUfvpKxNKcogHbJOLrJStbM2CpfcFUPfHF0Rnjaxr FNhuwO0v8a/L878L1mhkz4pgNJlGU9oXBnTBZPFO/OpqjBM3KzvhaDM37kIAAQQQ8Cogv1JM7y71 GOOjGIjMjEOqUUhjrNKeAPd7efYy+BLdLMLW2l9MdsuXmaHRFiRPLi7jeFRGo5cXT5qnNnlxeRpE 0W2nKTcvE3cigECxgAxhTp9MMxeIJ935KppNoR9YxqNMz7lwPesu4xWP8jFpPulK7o3nesrbsod8 AqcKtn2TLX5uheNZyXpdxJP35zmTQeJHtL1uQgSVRrZqtmidbZbEvxPRg1+tAG0001T9dHCamhcT 1zR7VgWj6yOd7jx9Iv6t+bVt99kmHG3nx90IIIAAAj4E0vPaZhfiG9Pqa+U5Q6u74Ev8pU7dXG0Q M6mrmqfr3MJocyUHLfLHO3LMpuJnZh1Bqmj0RcVvdvn6k7+fB/F3hE5T9tHa5InAsQvsfn93DLc1 rv1ksTDWEsjIoaND7cozX1s/8k0m1XZ00/dGS+4DvRIzfViP6HSoFz94s6s4S+onfqCMyqwG9hrM NJU/RD6kqp7kmj0rw9PC2LWj5vCYjPq3pu4/n+nyEo56bEGyRgABBBBoJqC+uz2In8XjI+/ndUfa lYPEgjSK5+km04PlD+K1dgARYbGMR3U0mvpil7cRUvUBXVfKzVqAuxBA4BACYdAkn3WNRvL0XkX6 UJN6OznUE3h+YS2br5pwtXvNcPU+2khp9+1OjCFbT0drJkjVIoTXNQjP5cCunJWTP9SZc1aHp3Hs XbOEY7mccHQsLU09EUAAgSMSUGtzjIm44ZTdg82GytnCKNI1S1W3PCpqfGns1Zs0WbQRUvSqAfm/ juTVNz5j6p8j5SPqFlQFgaEKOMaYws++npdaLypVaxqun0fzdattF75vQvX07sVRtyRqkvFze0g4 qUj+WZVH/CNlvMq32U8LvVBLFaKTcX3C0T42LWVCAAEEEHAK1J2b2y1n2RZGzXOTUePDQ8NBByPb 7CBCVyk3rxt3IoBAsUDpErxwLed6/nD9MnnDiJM0nFFb92exCs2koucaqyPMJNWYZLPZnTlDoTkD plFm6pTjSP9oV1JvufpCvIanQLPorP1DYrzKt+67fCq0iadLihY91yoO4WgtLi5GAAEEEOiFgNq0 Nr0PxW6zMTaxbfOFyfkdRky+er6vbSnUd5eW3x7Vj/SZN0Z0kXIvmp5CIHCMAgVblO6WV2bsqbbJ yWzpWvSsU4FfHDSqaaOZQLDhczJ8Atu7CO12VXYRT63ZFM+rl3dVWzS8N47HdZ2iubBmoKvmzQaZ NanJpnX2raUFkNsRFe8E4D5bmng0o7rRmGk4G/vg96paOTaELq91cgXhaB0trkUAAQQQ6IlA/A7u ZPnoyfT9b7N0s1v94s/oqLTUMl5oZb87Ifmn3jFP100Trf5UCUfrXht9hcjNJ6mo+gnfeqNpT9qM YiCAQLGAjPByRj6/m2vk9Yc784NVwbNOPCWNZ6DcUVaMzslnj/ncafScDMQGRPcyNeMBe3Ly8lu1 9p3dGneKYn25FPcVvjbFTlP8rhZPW5arYU2P8DWYakrz9Ne7R5WufczXF1+jhbS5lAU10G+Ctmpr KLrPVkPJvar03yNH2ge4V4X0XWzTdCJ+hm3BxK0IIIAAAk0E5C+34l/LlsNgTXIe3j29supVYYbX lpT4GAX4UFRv1TKraGrD9ngmc1bACVdd7vkfRPWKGLG2n392KzRJ+SWddlVGR8vBuQIBBBBAAAEp 0PGrRkFFAAEETAG1QHT9XA6IVprNMUw9e1lFZ0Nsw8QYYqnlVB+9RVZHP5swOjrEbkCZEUAAAQQQ QAABBBAYoIAeWEsKfpghS0ZH+9tVCEf72zaUDAEEEEAAAQQQQAABBBA4YgEm6x5x41I1BBBAAAEE DiEQbdOk9whJzzJ0n9UbbhzxzMRDNAB5IIAAAoMVIBwdbNNRcAQQQAABBHogIOLJ89Wp2O8zOqyt Qtxne1B8ioAAAggg4FOAcNSnPnkjgAACCAxHQA/yWa9m0X861MieGkdsmFmbe91NpN41H734L3Op +6y8XG3ewm6Xw/kcUFIEEECgUwHC0U45SQwBBBBA4MgFHu6+xa9612+b40AAAQQQQACBhgKEow3h uA0BBBBAYHwCp/P5aRKPimhU/iHFYK+UNIcz49eS6yWW6ZHO9I3GOKw+pTajNF7Ebg3UFjZG6b3x wGlSvmQI1lHm8FS6VOH4sfusfGmOXDIaHblVKZb00vNEcaqJeykdmSKAAAIDFSAcHWjDUWwEEEAA AQ8CTy4u43hURqOXF0/MUsgYy15H+bh9M02uuBQvaouO9VyElnHcl1liab3RbXYr79reiNBXvBMh Oqq98q3ivb+XZy+DL1EuRqUKy6xn2WZKFb6Jzn02mqMrExAQ2aNM0kPbC8h3v8T7IAlKPeCTJQII HK8A4ejxti01QwABBBDoXGC6eDfX46MqGn1hxJriTx/F+OV8bYWJk8kkKsRksZglBZo+SY+rdl7Y Ggmu7oIveeGtpzKXSNaoWKeX6tBeB6VNV/F2WiASQwABBAYvQDg6+CakAgggcDwC6cmJ9nfesZ3t a7vOLlQ8qqPRONSUpd39/i5GLy+MkDNTB2OKqvUeeLGhz7t58HDtbfAt2YtIDmum98aN5tTaZd5f C1WQdGS+v0+KzlQHpevgPLO11f5Ehpfy/lphiCkPr/0oMQIHFEimDfH/EEAAAQQQQKBQQEwq1a8z kf/n9FRPm5UTaKP5s+nJtKmU1Olksm3B1foqcZivTtEplaTvbDrHva5kK5TZXaoKZZaTdVOVrXCX 946azDHOtpT3wlEABBBAYDACjI4eMPQnKwQQQACBYxCQ46MPD9lh0Mnfz8VWQ183+XUM559aA485 V4ZrLtfzh+uXy3gPX09sFcvceenckp1nVzNBPTp3HkSreKut4a2ZCZcjgAACIxEgHB1JQ1NNBBBA AIHOBNRszZy4cvZGDG2KrW+td4PudjqoVGtF42B1t3wp98n9/luf3C2vzNhzt3wvXiHz/G9rLnDQ Jkhrdq+zzJ1x5iTklNxnxu60dSD6/okcI+dVqf7agZwRQOCYBAhHj6k1qQsCCCCAgFcBObQpJpoa L2M5OXn5TRdJnFOb6ep1mHIXW3GlXC2q3x7yXa0bDY/pdSCmBWcC3tmtkULNzXQa3VtS5j1auyT3 mK0raRGL6kCU0VBPLUC2CCBwlAIn4rl6lBWjUggggAACCCCAAAIIIIAAAn0WYHS0z61D2RBAAAEE EEAAAQQQQACBoxUgHD3apqViCCCAAAIIIIAAAggggECfBQhH+9w6lA0BBBBAAAEEEEAAAQQQOFoB wtGjbVoqhgACCCBQSUBvl2rthivv2336p+ZuQZVyG+hFGik60ljus0h21ej7l1Q5RM1b8Mnoqjak gwACCEgBwlH6AQIIIIDAaAXUl+/zH0uxX2rZ+0BHa6Qj8/PVmVQKDwvLfXbMbkOvu3yh0Xb5Q2wG /c8n36/AHbol5UcAgUIBwlE6BwIIIIDAOAVEGDVdBCLI+u+1/X5PzTF5/d+gXi5pjWt12qK7f+/u g/nbXCURqzrP9lNyf1adwmcS89AnZZbbZbCYEpHut21JHYHxChCOjrftqTkCCCAwaoHNx8X92fJz QZA1ahoqj4ApMHn9eXl2v/i4gQUBBBDoXoBwtHtTUkQAAQQQ6L3A7tOHVe6In16eFx3ZISF7mWR6 GqPjrDplLLpUGaXStzLPrGYtQtWZThf3QbASEyvDw0g6HgxM0k8StytslTE8lU45LLX7bLT4tlhS VCfNVa3KsaRZdPtWK2ETudTK3XOdkvJWdwu661t4r6tPyiQzvTS3rxUt/DVS/+fTNr/+k9dv58Hq A1N2e/9go4AIDFCAcHSAjUaREUAAAQTaCmx/3gdnT6fZZPR8SHms55mzmWWSj+ZMX/fZshLLqGB6 dxkt0FzPRWhZLTyTS/zkIr+zIJiv4/WdmSnIfz798yr4HF1pFOcyuUlWenUeZRtapFMO6+w+G812 LpDUgZu9IvVx+yanQYrc4uropkpKLYNcI2E10zSWrGjlbqwCSXcLuuvrvNfVJ2dvxMDl3b/W0s7N V/FTyzpc4FtaKj1jXR2fgw/yR428Y/r0LLj/WRCtlvVtziOAAALFAoSj9A4EEEAAgfEJ7P78CIJn f+WtGfWEkZ47PLsQ0fDqa3fzI1d3wee8VbKT169nSZ1l1HGQQ9ZXxExWiSaT6g1iVUdh/fijYjI1 7m3MwlYzTTsd2SuQdLegu74tWl8OXNoTaVU0ehE2apVSxcuCtVXuMfnrWUx8kA5CJgggMBYBwtGx tDT1RAABBBBoLaDmLN6LwbbcvUbdZ92Zq/hYpxwe56vWxbUSSPYikoNt6b1xo1zVxNwDHKq+cczU IMOirZXUzkpnl/8zAtvJ/y7FyF5qBLFBltEt+ZLuFnTXt13rywHS5IcLGY6fLd+E0WibUrUg4lYE EECgsgDhaGUqLkQAAQQQOBqBxmM9erKn3mtUhnD2sj33WZeenDxsTrXNe6PKXvTVXM7Fs2i+rpqY y9FAoE0LtrlXFFXG29HCThmOG6G6O2V1ttrRv/kE1crNVQgg0HsBwtHeNxEFRAABBBDoXqDlUrhw Nd9aTJN8ld3fxX1WV0aN4iVH53NzK5KFc0gP/tZV9XtAl3ORo/rmDIXmDJhW1KlzmbsF3fVt2/pq wq4a/hV1DeKhUVF8d8pqanY4yVnXtTBALVxsXceIaxFAAIGsAOEovQIBBBBAYIQCjbYK3X26MmNP tUoxWYHqPhuYX/3lK0/vAmscUs64FPvx2KOtu83G2qPG1VDNAjxVqjgs3H16JSfrWgHKnjpHWF97 t6bdrnJ1C4sVTpmOfyXQdbLn9jazKpFwt6C7vq1bXyQQiDexiF8XAmuicuBMWcfu8Rtc1B5QubUs 3Ih6T72DZBFAYEQChKMjamyqigACCCCQCKgtSfPGNl1IP8zVnXpLUmNg0Xk2fHmjmuI7/fn28fOl nZEcUo3nAIdLOacf/lRvstmt2mA2XnxaaVtekatxl9x5V0zXlWtYs6+4qV6SSlfq+p4ZBT45efVv pVvL4sJbEzLTSvLuRlZlZXO3oLu+rVtfTdg9P19l1tQ6UxYnjTb4eqH3Z04fKqJP1qOWOXAeAQQQ qCNwIlan1LmeaxFAAAEEEDgaATlKKb9ob/O2nD2aWlIRBBoL8BFpTMeNCCBQTYDR0WpOXIUAAggg cIQCapHn+pkc8qw0lniEBFQJgSIBMXk33OaKn2voJQggsDcBRkf3RkvCCCCAAAIIIIAAAggggAAC xQKMjtI7EEAAAQQQQAABBBBAAAEEPAgQjnpAJ0sEEEAAAQQQQAABBBBAAAHCUfoAAggggAACCCCA AAIIIICABwHCUQ/oZIkAAggggAACCCCAAAIIIEA4Sh9AAAEEEEAAAQQQQAABBBDwIEA46gGdLBFA AAEEEEAAAQQQQAABBAhH6QMIIIAAAggggAACCCCAAAIeBAhHPaCTJQIIIIAAAggggAACCCCAAOEo fQABBBBAAAEEEEAAAQQQQMCDAOGoB3SyRAABBBBAAAEEEEAAAQQQIBylDyCAAAIIIIAAAggggAAC CHgQIBz1gE6WCCCAAAIIIIAAAggggAAChKP0AQQQQAABBBBAAAEEEEAAAQ8ChKMe0MkSAQQQQAAB BBBAAAEEEECAcJQ+gAACCCCAAAIIIIAAAggg4EGAcNQDOlkigAACCCCAAAIIIIAAAggQjtIHEEAA AQQQQAABBBBAAAEEPAgQjnpAJ0sEEEAAAQQQQAABBBBAAAHCUfoAAggggAACCCCAAAIIIICAB4H/ B+cyKKbOCqM3AAAAAElFTkSuQmCC --20cf3074b5a253879f04babbcf4f-- From stig@venaas.com Fri Mar 9 15:12:34 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B38221E8047 for ; Fri, 9 Mar 2012 15:12:34 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.299 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.299 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.300, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_13=0.6, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 8K4N2+Tf7xvZ for ; Fri, 9 Mar 2012 15:12:33 -0800 (PST) Received: from ufisa.uninett.no (ufisa.uninett.no [IPv6:2001:700:1:2:158:38:152:126]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 84A2E21E8028 for ; Fri, 9 Mar 2012 15:12:33 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.33.12.84] (128-107-239-233.cisco.com [128.107.239.233]) by ufisa.uninett.no (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 629888011; Sat, 10 Mar 2012 00:12:31 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <4F5A8E58.3050008@venaas.com> Date: Fri, 09 Mar 2012 15:12:24 -0800 From: Stig Venaas User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:10.0.2) Gecko/20120216 Thunderbird/10.0.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: adrian@olddog.co.uk References: <099001ccfd1a$6efa0d80$4cee2880$@olddog.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <099001ccfd1a$6efa0d80$4cee2880$@olddog.co.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: draft-gs-l3vpn-scaling@tools.ietf.org, pim@ietf.org, pim-chairs@tools.ietf.org Subject: Re: [pim] Help Needed with draft-gs-l3vpn-scaling X-BeenThere: pim@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Protocol Independent Multicast List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 09 Mar 2012 23:12:34 -0000 Hi On 3/8/2012 2:58 AM, Adrian Farrel wrote: > Hi PIM chairs and working group, > > The authors of this draft would like to plead for some assistance in fleshing > out a couple of sections of the document that they think are important but where > they don't have the depth and breadth of knowledge to cover well e.g. multicast. Is this the correct name? I can't find it anywhere, at least not when searching at tools.ietf.org. Stig > > The document has been discussed on the L3VPN list, but input from the multicast > community would be a great help. > > Responses to the authors direct or to the L3VPN list. > > Cheers, > Adrian From marshall.eubanks@gmail.com Fri Mar 9 15:19:54 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 291B821E8036 for ; Fri, 9 Mar 2012 15:19:54 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -103.222 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.222 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.223, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_13=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ELUbT2+xYA-N for ; Fri, 9 Mar 2012 15:19:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-lpp01m010-f44.google.com (mail-lpp01m010-f44.google.com [209.85.215.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6206B21E8019 for ; Fri, 9 Mar 2012 15:19:53 -0800 (PST) Received: by lagj5 with SMTP id j5so2556503lag.31 for ; Fri, 09 Mar 2012 15:19:52 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=A9WfOkVVDC1W3M4bqVgoxPFZlW7hgvicOEY0VDNflzE=; b=u0FTI/eATujOaDqQ/lg1CT9q0m2aA/eCAbHFOH1PguZQnS0K/LkCk57NeffX5IZg7C y4Yci50u65Py5wWaKQ6K4c00Wt9xehq36Zgc07sn4tlV+abUU2IKUS/dC4/deWNxkGvk VungmvHEFvCfbQK/F2AFJSx3oYwBJvUTw8Q4cE49e34bUq3hpHvMSP/SDLYX7Dlnp+t+ T8G8p3YyDKNTM5h7L+seiS/u/yQ4Kz8h4/hx81CoCk9ha6MZgdCbwdiOO+D1j/aSa+bv yL0Tc4JxAv7O5dAixYNpaaY3eNUJZXf5MTFRt1NpGHCWiyL+Na6RfcRQZkuRaYnrA3Hj hYZQ== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.152.128.163 with SMTP id np3mr2976162lab.51.1331335192116; Fri, 09 Mar 2012 15:19:52 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.112.115.98 with HTTP; Fri, 9 Mar 2012 15:19:52 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <4F5A8E58.3050008@venaas.com> References: <099001ccfd1a$6efa0d80$4cee2880$@olddog.co.uk> <4F5A8E58.3050008@venaas.com> Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2012 18:19:52 -0500 Message-ID: From: Marshall Eubanks To: Stig Venaas Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: draft-gs-l3vpn-scaling@tools.ietf.org, pim@ietf.org, pim-chairs@tools.ietf.org Subject: Re: [pim] Help Needed with draft-gs-l3vpn-scaling X-BeenThere: pim@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Protocol Independent Multicast List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 09 Mar 2012 23:19:54 -0000 http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-gs-vpn-scaling-01 On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 6:12 PM, Stig Venaas wrote: > Hi > > > On 3/8/2012 2:58 AM, Adrian Farrel wrote: >> >> Hi PIM chairs and working group, >> >> The authors of this draft would like to plead for some assistance in >> fleshing >> out a couple of sections of the document that they think are important but >> where >> they don't have the depth and breadth of knowledge to cover well e.g. >> multicast. > > > Is this the correct name? I can't find it anywhere, at least not when > searching at tools.ietf.org. > > Stig > > >> >> The document has been discussed on the L3VPN list, but input from the >> multicast >> community would be a great help. >> >> Responses to the authors direct or to the L3VPN list. >> >> Cheers, >> Adrian > > > _______________________________________________ > pim mailing list > pim@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pim From marshall.eubanks@gmail.com Fri Mar 9 15:21:54 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7182E21E8028 for ; Fri, 9 Mar 2012 15:21:54 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -103.221 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.221 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.222, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_13=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id NCdZKk38ypsa for ; Fri, 9 Mar 2012 15:21:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-lpp01m010-f44.google.com (mail-lpp01m010-f44.google.com [209.85.215.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A361521E8019 for ; Fri, 9 Mar 2012 15:21:53 -0800 (PST) Received: by lagj5 with SMTP id j5so2557756lag.31 for ; Fri, 09 Mar 2012 15:21:52 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=y6nBwL0Etof5PQ4dRAAFB1/YGHZJC9GWbkDRuIHjhKA=; b=TXKpAGIRRLRktpFGmp7P8BYKJBKGF+Hjfw53FJrSwp/CsdhsCnogvUcDHRGUTbVN0E KRyYco88aHwnp1v7FszTP27+7d2WEWgSL1eAofS2Hv5v4NEjFSmGzIkPyg1Ff53OHCk4 W0W9o6wdzhp0IzIiz51i3AE9ENm6sxC8Z13YTxrY6JWbtCMP3loGLt4emS17q7JmLHeO /lDNfTFZ12GLMJ0pJfW8JyRC9S22TJbwQW1QIiZWpunew21YEJSyE3+bYcG4yzCDDNON nuxtF3xEVHUxU65lIHvRhI/Ihi1jKQX0tv4lakwgEOIUlkmqlUlcH7saBmcDGh+2MBLa LNcQ== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.152.132.130 with SMTP id ou2mr3000807lab.44.1331335312631; Fri, 09 Mar 2012 15:21:52 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.112.115.98 with HTTP; Fri, 9 Mar 2012 15:21:52 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <4F5A8E58.3050008@venaas.com> References: <099001ccfd1a$6efa0d80$4cee2880$@olddog.co.uk> <4F5A8E58.3050008@venaas.com> Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2012 18:21:52 -0500 Message-ID: From: Marshall Eubanks To: Stig Venaas Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: draft-gs-vpn-scaling@tools.ietf.org, pim@ietf.org, pim-chairs@tools.ietf.org Subject: Re: [pim] Help Needed with draft-gs-l3vpn-scaling X-BeenThere: pim@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Protocol Independent Multicast List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 09 Mar 2012 23:21:54 -0000 Try to stick to this cc list for responses. http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-gs-vpn-scaling-01 Marshall On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 6:12 PM, Stig Venaas wrote: > Hi > > > On 3/8/2012 2:58 AM, Adrian Farrel wrote: >> >> Hi PIM chairs and working group, >> >> The authors of this draft would like to plead for some assistance in >> fleshing >> out a couple of sections of the document that they think are important but >> where >> they don't have the depth and breadth of knowledge to cover well e.g. >> multicast. > > > Is this the correct name? I can't find it anywhere, at least not when > searching at tools.ietf.org. > > Stig > > >> >> The document has been discussed on the L3VPN list, but input from the >> multicast >> community would be a great help. >> >> Responses to the authors direct or to the L3VPN list. >> >> Cheers, >> Adrian > > > _______________________________________________ > pim mailing list > pim@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pim From tom.taylor.stds@gmail.com Mon Mar 12 15:55:15 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2AD1C21F8A6A; Mon, 12 Mar 2012 15:55:15 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.509 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.509 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.090, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id At8Vy0cLfous; Mon, 12 Mar 2012 15:55:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pz0-f44.google.com (mail-pz0-f44.google.com [209.85.210.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0525621F8A62; Mon, 12 Mar 2012 15:55:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: by dakl33 with SMTP id l33so6198306dak.31 for ; Mon, 12 Mar 2012 15:55:05 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references :in-reply-to:x-forwarded-message-id:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:x-antivirus:x-antivirus-status; bh=TlsFu3ePCL70taNQxa9tVj9BDqqzxUjtV6PP4eYptwE=; b=GOseL329b+b4RbNibRQDyqwbgBwhS2NbFmgwDkGeETlItu13dTT856ElafElGf9sVj QjpJhyDC5+dh51jm+DjqzSBMWN9WAeigH3XuAb1/MveoJGYZ+cT/QUvxPFrC3DrYTKwW M7oz+7ARQB8xbiZ+K3P0lzofZfwEqEV8tHnFZ22mIYOAKxqvVYHc28Awon36+r+r6NRL EtLZayJkDyhpTZhdEXVzpocbu5OPvlmlmj+pOECNlYtj3HwLltdFiwwtlSxW/JQk62rf BWm5Yt+rHv/ZNEXPfB81y7gXQoZiP7MysWSg6YwxVVmUho8cOOG0BkXxVn8W98ijwdIB A4ZQ== Received: by 10.68.189.170 with SMTP id gj10mr3285026pbc.121.1331592905802; Mon, 12 Mar 2012 15:55:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (dsl-173-206-65-140.tor.primus.ca. [173.206.65.140]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id p9sm10671392pbb.9.2012.03.12.15.55.04 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Mon, 12 Mar 2012 15:55:05 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4F5E7EC6.6080003@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2012 18:55:02 -0400 From: Tom Taylor User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:10.0.2) Gecko/20120216 Thunderbird/10.0.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: pim@ietf.org, pim-chairs@ietf.org References: <20120312222641.16555.59916.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> In-Reply-To: <20120312222641.16555.59916.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> X-Forwarded-Message-Id: <20120312222641.16555.59916.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 120312-1, 12/03/2012), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean Subject: [pim] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-taylor-pim-v4v6-translation-01.txt X-BeenThere: pim@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Protocol Independent Multicast List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2012 22:55:15 -0000 I did run into one or two interesting points while updating this draft. Could I have 10 minutes to present the points and have them verified in Paris? -------- Original Message -------- Subject: New Version Notification for draft-taylor-pim-v4v6-translation-01.txt Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2012 15:26:41 -0700 From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: tom.taylor.stds@gmail.com CC: cathy.zhou@huawei.com, sunqiong@ctbri.com.cn A new version of I-D, draft-taylor-pim-v4v6-translation-01.txt has been successfully submitted by Tom Taylor and posted to the IETF repository. Filename: draft-taylor-pim-v4v6-translation Revision: 01 Title: A Translator For Protocol Independent Multicast (PIM) Interworking Between IPv4 and IPv6 Creation date: 2012-03-12 WG ID: Individual Submission Number of pages: 8 Abstract: This document characterizes the requirements and describes the methodology for a translator operating within a dual stack multicast router, allowing it to interoperate between Protocol Independent Multicast - Sparse Mode (PIM-SM, RFC 4601) with IPv4 and with IPv6. The IETF Secretariat From helen.liu@huawei.com Tue Mar 13 00:38:11 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 03EC321F8870 for ; Tue, 13 Mar 2012 00:38:11 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.489 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.489 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.111, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id PuPF2UwEN4GA for ; Tue, 13 Mar 2012 00:38:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from szxga04-in.huawei.com (szxga04-in.huawei.com [119.145.14.67]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 43C5021F886F for ; Tue, 13 Mar 2012 00:38:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from huawei.com (szxga04-in [172.24.2.12]) by szxga04-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTP id <0M0T0088BBSEZF@szxga04-in.huawei.com> for pim@ietf.org; Tue, 13 Mar 2012 15:36:14 +0800 (CST) Received: from szxrg02-dlp.huawei.com ([172.24.2.119]) by szxga04-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTP id <0M0T00JDQBRJP5@szxga04-in.huawei.com> for pim@ietf.org; Tue, 13 Mar 2012 15:36:14 +0800 (CST) Received: from szxeml211-edg.china.huawei.com ([172.24.2.119]) by szxrg02-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.1.9-GA) with ESMTP id AHU47140; Tue, 13 Mar 2012 15:36:14 +0800 Received: from SZXEML421-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.82.67.160) by szxeml211-edg.china.huawei.com (172.24.2.182) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.3; Tue, 13 Mar 2012 15:35:22 +0800 Received: from SZXEML501-MBS.china.huawei.com ([169.254.5.17]) by szxeml421-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.82.67.160]) with mapi id 14.01.0323.003; Tue, 13 Mar 2012 15:36:12 +0800 Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2012 07:36:12 +0000 From: Liu Hui X-Originating-IP: [10.108.4.72] To: "pim@ietf.org" Message-id: <0521328FA8CCCE4089CA3C9261A28DD932205015@SZXEML501-MBS.china.huawei.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-language: zh-CN Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Accept-Language: en-US, zh-CN Thread-topic: New Version Notification for draft-lts-pim-hello-mtu-00.txt Thread-index: AQHM9sZlD9w4l8XGykaqjgQUHADUs5Zn6Csw X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Subject: [pim] FW: New Version Notification for draft-lts-pim-hello-mtu-00.txt X-BeenThere: pim@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Protocol Independent Multicast List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2012 07:38:11 -0000 Hi WG, We have posted a new draft about PIM Hello MTU option: http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-lts-pim-hello-mtu-00.txt. You are welcome to post your comments on it. Thanks, Helen and Tina -----Original Message----- From: internet-drafts@ietf.org [mailto:internet-drafts@ietf.org] Sent: Wednesday, February 29, 2012 5:38 PM Subject: New Version Notification for draft-lts-pim-hello-mtu-00.txt Filename: draft-lts-pim-hello-mtu Revision: 00 Title: PIM MTU Hello Option for PIM Message Encapsulation Creation date: 2012-02-29 Abstract: This memo introduces a new PIM Hello MTU Option which is carried in PIM Hello messages. The MTU option enables interface MTU information to be exchanged among PIM neighbors, and PIM messages to be encapsulated in an efficient and consistent way. From ietf-ipr@ietf.org Mon Mar 12 14:07:41 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0ADAD11E8137; Mon, 12 Mar 2012 14:07:40 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.406 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.406 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.193, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id A13b+leMzRGR; Mon, 12 Mar 2012 14:07:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6287311E812D; Mon, 12 Mar 2012 14:07:38 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: IETF Secretariat To: ycai@cisco.com, svallepa@cisco.com, hou@cisco.com, andy.da.green@bt.com X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 4.00 Message-ID: <20120312210738.7613.48135.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2012 14:07:38 -0700 X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 14 Mar 2012 09:47:33 -0700 Cc: mmcbride7@gmail.com, pim@ietf.org, ipr-announce@ietf.org Subject: [pim] IPR Disclosure: Cisco Systems' Statement about IPR related to draft-ietf-pim-drlb-00 X-BeenThere: pim@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Protocol Independent Multicast List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2012 21:07:41 -0000 Dear Yiqun Cai, Sri Vallepalli, Heidi Ou, Andy Green: An IPR disclosure that pertains to your Internet-Draft entitled "Protocol Independent Multicast DR Load Balancing" (draft-ietf-pim-drlb) was submitte= d to the IETF Secretariat on 2012-03-12 and has been posted on the "IETF Page of Intellectual Property Rights Disclosures" (https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/1713/). The title of the IPR disclosure is "Cisco Systems' Statement about IPR related to draft-ietf-pim-drlb-00.""); The IETF Secretariat From lenny@juniper.net Wed Mar 14 19:10:06 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8325611E8096 for ; Wed, 14 Mar 2012 19:10:06 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Rbn9BkOQDdbj for ; Wed, 14 Mar 2012 19:10:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from exprod7og120.obsmtp.com (exprod7og120.obsmtp.com [64.18.2.18]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 249AA11E8079 for ; Wed, 14 Mar 2012 19:09:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from P-EMHUB01-HQ.jnpr.net ([66.129.224.36]) (using TLSv1) by exprod7ob120.postini.com ([64.18.6.12]) with SMTP ID DSNKT2FPbmBJwQnBh9g5dHJvXfxtdI5pw4JH@postini.com; Wed, 14 Mar 2012 19:10:05 PDT Received: from magenta.juniper.net (172.17.27.123) by P-EMHUB01-HQ.jnpr.net (172.24.192.33) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.3.213.0; Wed, 14 Mar 2012 19:09:13 -0700 Received: from eng-mail01.juniper.net (eng-mail01.juniper.net [172.17.28.114]) by magenta.juniper.net (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id q2F29C147543; Wed, 14 Mar 2012 19:09:12 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from lenny@juniper.net) Received: by eng-mail01.juniper.net (Postfix, from userid 1709) id 4D8FE11454; Wed, 14 Mar 2012 19:09:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by eng-mail01.juniper.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4318811446; Wed, 14 Mar 2012 19:09:12 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2012 19:09:12 -0700 From: Leonard Giuliano To: Stig Venaas In-Reply-To: <4F57D3CD.8090709@venaas.com> Message-ID: <20120314190305.S2181@eng-mail01.juniper.net> References: <2EEA459CD95CCB4988BFAFC0F2287B5C259E109E@SZXEML520-MBX.china.huawei.com> <4F57D3CD.8090709@venaas.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" X-EXCLAIMER-MD-CONFIG: e4081efb-6d29-443c-8708-750833aec629 Cc: Mike McBride , "pim@ietf.org" , "Rishabh Parekh \(riparekh\)" , Marshall Eubanks Subject: Re: [pim] Collect Comments on RFC4601 Implementations and Deployments Survey Questionnaire Revision X-BeenThere: pim@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Protocol Independent Multicast List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2012 02:10:06 -0000 I'd be interested in the following questions for operators: -Which RP mapping mechanism do you use: Static, AutoRP, or BSR? -How many RPs do you have deployed in your network? Do you use Anycast-RP? If so, is it Anycast-RP using MSDP (RFC 3446) or Anycast-RP using PIM (RFC 4610)? On Wed, 7 Mar 2012, Stig Venaas wrote: -) Please read carefully what Vero posted and see if anything should be -) changed. If no comments are received by March 22nd, the current survey -) text will be sent out to implementers/vendors and operators to get -) their information. -) -) It is important that we get the information we want, so if you have any -) thoughts on this survey, please provide your input before March 22nd. -) -) Stig -) _______________________________________________ -) pim mailing list -) pim@ietf.org -) https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pim -) From adrian@olddog.co.uk Sat Mar 17 07:19:21 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6617F21F8565 for ; Sat, 17 Mar 2012 07:19:21 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.426 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.426 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.173, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id C8pzh1eHCtVq for ; Sat, 17 Mar 2012 07:19:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from asmtp1.iomartmail.com (asmtp1.iomartmail.com [62.128.201.248]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E26021F864E for ; Sat, 17 Mar 2012 07:19:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from asmtp1.iomartmail.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by asmtp1.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q2HEJElo032478; Sat, 17 Mar 2012 14:19:14 GMT Received: from 950129200 ([90.84.144.207]) (authenticated bits=0) by asmtp1.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q2HEJ2nA032423 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Sat, 17 Mar 2012 14:19:10 GMT From: "Adrian Farrel" To: Date: Sat, 17 Mar 2012 14:19:05 -0000 Message-ID: <029f01cd0448$eed89460$cc89bd20$@olddog.co.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0 Thread-Index: Ac0ER6MuVc8XXvcGSZGbzp0f7PZoPw== Content-Language: en-gb Cc: draft-ietf-pim-pop-count@tools.ietf.org, pim@ietf.org Subject: [pim] Publication request for draft-ietf-pim-pop-count X-BeenThere: pim@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: adrian@olddog.co.uk List-Id: Protocol Independent Multicast List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 17 Mar 2012 14:19:21 -0000 Forwarding a publication request on behalf of the PIM WG for an Experimental RFC. > PROTO Writeup for draft-ietf-pim-pop-count-05 > ================================================= > > http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-pim-pop-count-05.txt > > (1.a) Who is the Document Shepherd for this document? Has the > Document Shepherd personally reviewed this version of the document > and, in particular, does he or she believe this version is ready > for forwarding to the IESG for publication? > > Mike McBride is the document shepherd. I have personally reviewed the > document, and believe it is ready for publication as an Experimental RFC. > > (1.b) Has the document had adequate review both from key members of > the interested community and others? Does the Document Shepherd > have any concerns about the depth or breadth of the reviews that > have been performed? > > The document has undergone thorough review within IETF's Multicast > community. > > (1.c) Does the Document Shepherd have concerns that the document > needs more review from a particular or broader perspective, e.g., > security, operational complexity, someone familiar with AAA, > internationalization or XML? > > No > > (1.d) Does the Document Shepherd have any specific concerns or > issues with this document that the Responsible Area Director > and/or the IESG should be aware of? For example, perhaps he or > she is uncomfortable with certain parts of the document, or has > concerns whether there really is a need for it. In any event, if > the interested community has discussed those issues and has > indicated that it still wishes to advance the document, detail > those concerns here. > > I have no concerns. > > (1.e) How solid is the consensus of the interested community behind > this document? Does it represent the strong concurrence of a few > individuals, with others being silent, or does the interested > community as a whole understand and agree with it? > > There is consensus within the PIM WG to publish the document. The document > has > been actively discussed on the wg list and in wg meetings. > > > (1.f) Has anyone threatened an appeal or otherwise indicated extreme > discontent? If so, please summarise the areas of conflict in > separate email messages to the Responsible Area Director. (It > should be in a separate email because this questionnaire is > entered into the ID Tracker.) > > No. > > (1.g) Has the Document Shepherd personally verified that the > document satisfies all ID nits? (See > http://www.ietf.org/ID-Checklist.html and > http://tools.ietf.org/tools/idnits/). Boilerplate checks are not > enough; this check needs to be thorough. Has the document met all > formal review criteria it needs to, such as the MIB Doctor, media > type and URI type reviews? > > Yes. Just two changes may be made if necessary. per idnits: > > == Outdated reference: A later version (-12) exists of > draft-ietf-mboned-auto-multicast-11 > > -- Duplicate reference: RFC4601, mentioned in 'HELLO', was also mentioned > in 'RFC4601'. > > > (1.h) Has the document split its references into normative and > informative? Are there normative references to documents that are > not ready for advancement or are otherwise in an unclear state > If such normative references exist, what is the strategy for their > completion? Are there normative references that are downward > references, as described in [RFC3967]? If so, list these downward > references to support the Area Director in the Last Call procedure > for them [RFC3967]. > > Yes. Normative references are all stable documents published as RFCs. > > > (1.i) Has the Document Shepherd verified that the document IANA > consideration section exists and is consistent with the body of > the document? If the document specifies protocol extensions, are > reservations requested in appropriate IANA registries? Are the > IANA registries clearly identified? If the document creates a new > registry, does it define the proposed initial contents of the > registry and an allocation procedure for future registrations? > Does it suggested a reasonable name for the new registry? See > [I-D.narten-iana-considerations-rfc2434bis]. If the document > describes an Expert Review process has Shepherd conferred with the > Responsible Area Director so that the IESG can appoint the needed > Expert during the IESG Evaluation? > > > The IANA Considerations section exists. A new PIM Hello Option type, 29, > has been assigned. A new PIM Join Attribute type needs to be assigned. > 2 is proposed in this draft. > > > > (1.j) Has the Document Shepherd verified that sections of the > document that are written in a formal language, such as XML code, > BNF rules, MIB definitions, etc., validate correctly in an > automated checker? > > > Not applicable. > > > (1.k) The IESG approval announcement includes a Document > Announcement Write-Up. Please provide such a Document > Announcement Writeup. Recent examples can be found in the > "Action" announcements for approved documents. > > > This specification defines a method for providing multicast > distribution-tree accounting data. Simple extensions to the PIM > protocol allow a rough approximation of tree-based data in a scalable > fashion. From adrian@olddog.co.uk Sat Mar 17 08:00:21 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 258BD21F8622 for ; Sat, 17 Mar 2012 08:00:21 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.431 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.431 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.168, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id bsbv1EJZuVVE for ; Sat, 17 Mar 2012 08:00:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from asmtp1.iomartmail.com (asmtp1.iomartmail.com [62.128.201.248]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BC5BB21F868A for ; Sat, 17 Mar 2012 08:00:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from asmtp1.iomartmail.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by asmtp1.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q2HEJMs3032512; Sat, 17 Mar 2012 14:19:22 GMT Received: from 950129200 ([90.84.144.207]) (authenticated bits=0) by asmtp1.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q2HEJ2nB032423 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Sat, 17 Mar 2012 14:19:14 GMT From: "Adrian Farrel" To: Date: Sat, 17 Mar 2012 14:19:05 -0000 Message-ID: <02a001cd0448$f1de3340$d59a99c0$@olddog.co.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0 Thread-Index: Ac0ERyADD6GoZQr6Td6hbyEAKEsExw== Content-Language: en-gb Cc: draft-ietf-pim-ecmp@tools.ietf.org, pim@ietf.org Subject: [pim] Publication request for draft-ietf-pim-ecmp X-BeenThere: pim@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: adrian@olddog.co.uk List-Id: Protocol Independent Multicast List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 17 Mar 2012 15:00:21 -0000 Forwarding a publication request on behalf of the PIM WG for an Experimental RFC. > PROTO Writeup for draft-ietf-pim-ecmp-02 > ================================================= > > http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-pim-ecmp-02.txt > > (1.a) Who is the Document Shepherd for this document? Has the > Document Shepherd personally reviewed this version of the document > and, in particular, does he or she believe this version is ready > for forwarding to the IESG for publication? > > Mike McBride is the document shepherd. I have personally reviewed the > document, and believe it is ready for publication as an Experimental RFC. > > (1.b) Has the document had adequate review both from key members of > the interested community and others? Does the Document Shepherd > have any concerns about the depth or breadth of the reviews that > have been performed? > > The document has undergone thorough review within IETF's Multicast > community. > > (1.c) Does the Document Shepherd have concerns that the document > needs more review from a particular or broader perspective, e.g., > security, operational complexity, someone familiar with AAA, > internationalization or XML? > > No > > (1.d) Does the Document Shepherd have any specific concerns or > issues with this document that the Responsible Area Director > and/or the IESG should be aware of? For example, perhaps he or > she is uncomfortable with certain parts of the document, or has > concerns whether there really is a need for it. In any event, if > the interested community has discussed those issues and has > indicated that it still wishes to advance the document, detail > those concerns here. > > I have no concerns. > > (1.e) How solid is the consensus of the interested community behind > this document? Does it represent the strong concurrence of a few > individuals, with others being silent, or does the interested > community as a whole understand and agree with it? > > There is consensus within the PIM WG to publish the document. The document > has > been actively discussed on the wg list and in wg meetings. > > > (1.f) Has anyone threatened an appeal or otherwise indicated extreme > discontent? If so, please summarise the areas of conflict in > separate email messages to the Responsible Area Director. (It > should be in a separate email because this questionnaire is > entered into the ID Tracker.) > > No. > > (1.g) Has the Document Shepherd personally verified that the > document satisfies all ID nits? (See > http://www.ietf.org/ID-Checklist.html and > http://tools.ietf.org/tools/idnits/). Boilerplate checks are not > enough; this check needs to be thorough. Has the document met all > formal review criteria it needs to, such as the MIB Doctor, media > type and URI type reviews? > > Yes. We may need to have one update for Miscellaneous warnings if necessary: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > == Using lowercase 'not' together with uppercase 'MUST', 'SHALL', 'SHOULD', > or 'RECOMMENDED' is not an accepted usage according to RFC 2119. Please > use uppercase 'NOT' together with RFC 2119 keywords (if that is what you > mean). > > Found 'MUST not' in this paragraph: > > If a PIM router supports this specification, it MUST send the Hello > option ECMP-Redirect-Supported TLV in its PIM Hello messages. A PIM > router sends ECMP Redirects on an interface only when it detects that all > neighbors have sent this Hello option. If a PIM router detects that any > of its neighbor does not support this Hello option, it MUST not send ECMP > Redirects, however, it SHOULD still process any ECMP Redirects received. > > > (1.h) Has the document split its references into normative and > informative? Are there normative references to documents that are > not ready for advancement or are otherwise in an unclear state > If such normative references exist, what is the strategy for their > completion? Are there normative references that are downward > references, as described in [RFC3967]? If so, list these downward > references to support the Area Director in the Last Call procedure > for them [RFC3967]. > > Yes. Normative references are all stable documents published as RFCs. > > > (1.i) Has the Document Shepherd verified that the document IANA > consideration section exists and is consistent with the body of > the document? If the document specifies protocol extensions, are > reservations requested in appropriate IANA registries? Are the > IANA registries clearly identified? If the document creates a new > registry, does it define the proposed initial contents of the > registry and an allocation procedure for future registrations? > Does it suggested a reasonable name for the new registry? See > [I-D.narten-iana-considerations-rfc2434bis]. If the document > describes an Expert Review process has Shepherd conferred with the > Responsible Area Director so that the IESG can appoint the needed > Expert during the IESG Evaluation? > > > The IANA Considerations section exists. A PIM Hello Option Type is > requested to be assigned to the PIM ECMP Redirect Hello Option. This > document recommends 32 (0x20) as the "PIM ECMP Redirect Hello Option Type. > > A PIM Message Type is requested to be assigned to the ECMP Redirect > message. The next available Type value is 11(0xB). > > > > (1.j) Has the Document Shepherd verified that sections of the > document that are written in a formal language, such as XML code, > BNF rules, MIB definitions, etc., validate correctly in an > automated checker? > > > Not applicable. > > > (1.k) The IESG approval announcement includes a Document > Announcement Write-Up. Please provide such a Document > Announcement Writeup. Recent examples can be found in the > "Action" announcements for approved documents. > > > This document introduces the ECMP Redirect, a mechanism to improve > the RPF procedure over ECMPs. It allows ECMP path selection to be > based on administratively selected metrics, such as data transmission > delays, path preferences and routing metrics. From Michael.McBride@huawei.com Sat Mar 17 23:07:41 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B6F2711E8074 for ; Sat, 17 Mar 2012 23:07:41 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id v6Q3U1lq6Tjo for ; Sat, 17 Mar 2012 23:07:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dfwrgout.huawei.com (dfwrgout.huawei.com [206.16.17.72]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A077711E8072 for ; Sat, 17 Mar 2012 23:07:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 172.18.9.243 (EHLO dfweml202-edg.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.9.243]) by dfwrg02-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.2.3-GA FastPath) with ESMTP id AEE21532; Sun, 18 Mar 2012 02:07:40 -0400 (EDT) Received: from DFWEML406-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.193.5.131) by dfweml202-edg.china.huawei.com (172.18.9.108) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.3; Sat, 17 Mar 2012 23:04:18 -0700 Received: from SZXEML433-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.72.61.61) by dfweml406-hub.china.huawei.com (10.193.5.131) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.3; Sat, 17 Mar 2012 23:04:16 -0700 Received: from SZXEML536-MBX.china.huawei.com ([169.254.4.202]) by szxeml433-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.72.61.61]) with mapi id 14.01.0323.003; Sun, 18 Mar 2012 14:04:13 +0800 From: Michael McBride To: "adrian@olddog.co.uk" , "iesg-secretary@iesg.org" Thread-Topic: [pim] Publication request for draft-ietf-pim-ecmp Thread-Index: Ac0ERyADD6GoZQr6Td6hbyEAKEsExwAhMsEg Date: Sun, 18 Mar 2012 06:04:13 +0000 Message-ID: References: <02a001cd0448$f1de3340$d59a99c0$@olddog.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <02a001cd0448$f1de3340$d59a99c0$@olddog.co.uk> Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.212.245.177] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Cc: "draft-ietf-pim-ecmp@tools.ietf.org" , "pim@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [pim] Publication request for draft-ietf-pim-ecmp X-BeenThere: pim@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Protocol Independent Multicast List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 18 Mar 2012 06:07:41 -0000 Thanks Adrian, One correction for 1.a. Please change to: "Mike McBride is the document shepherd. I have personally reviewed the document, and believe it is ready for publication as a Standards Track RFC.= " Standards track instead of Experimental. Thanks, mike > -----Original Message----- > From: pim-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:pim-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of > Adrian Farrel > Sent: Saturday, March 17, 2012 7:19 AM > To: iesg-secretary@iesg.org > Cc: draft-ietf-pim-ecmp@tools.ietf.org; pim@ietf.org > Subject: [pim] Publication request for draft-ietf-pim-ecmp >=20 > Forwarding a publication request on behalf of the PIM WG for an > Experimental > RFC. >=20 > > PROTO Writeup for draft-ietf-pim-ecmp-02 > > =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D > > > > http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-pim-ecmp-02.txt > > > > (1.a) Who is the Document Shepherd for this document? Has the > > Document Shepherd personally reviewed this version of the > document > > and, in particular, does he or she believe this version is > ready > > for forwarding to the IESG for publication? > > > > Mike McBride is the document shepherd. I have personally reviewed > the > > document, and believe it is ready for publication as an Experimental > RFC. > > > > (1.b) Has the document had adequate review both from key members > of > > the interested community and others? Does the Document > Shepherd > > have any concerns about the depth or breadth of the reviews > that > > have been performed? > > > > The document has undergone thorough review within IETF's Multicast > > community. > > > > (1.c) Does the Document Shepherd have concerns that the document > > needs more review from a particular or broader perspective, > e.g., > > security, operational complexity, someone familiar with AAA, > > internationalization or XML? > > > > No > > > > (1.d) Does the Document Shepherd have any specific concerns or > > issues with this document that the Responsible Area Director > > and/or the IESG should be aware of? For example, perhaps he or > > she is uncomfortable with certain parts of the document, or has > > concerns whether there really is a need for it. In any event, > if > > the interested community has discussed those issues and has > > indicated that it still wishes to advance the document, detail > > those concerns here. > > > > I have no concerns. > > > > (1.e) How solid is the consensus of the interested community > behind > > this document? Does it represent the strong concurrence of a > few > > individuals, with others being silent, or does the interested > > community as a whole understand and agree with it? > > > > There is consensus within the PIM WG to publish the document. The > document > > has > > been actively discussed on the wg list and in wg meetings. > > > > > > (1.f) Has anyone threatened an appeal or otherwise indicated > extreme > > discontent? If so, please summarise the areas of conflict in > > separate email messages to the Responsible Area Director. (It > > should be in a separate email because this questionnaire is > > entered into the ID Tracker.) > > > > No. > > > > (1.g) Has the Document Shepherd personally verified that the > > document satisfies all ID nits? (See > > http://www.ietf.org/ID-Checklist.html and > > http://tools.ietf.org/tools/idnits/). Boilerplate checks are > not > > enough; this check needs to be thorough. Has the document met > all > > formal review criteria it needs to, such as the MIB Doctor, > media > > type and URI type reviews? > > > > Yes. We may need to have one update for Miscellaneous warnings if > necessary: > > ------------------------------------------------------------------- > --------- > > > > =3D=3D Using lowercase 'not' together with uppercase 'MUST', 'SHALL', > 'SHOULD', > > or 'RECOMMENDED' is not an accepted usage according to RFC 2119. > Please > > use uppercase 'NOT' together with RFC 2119 keywords (if that is > what you > > mean). > > > > Found 'MUST not' in this paragraph: > > > > If a PIM router supports this specification, it MUST send the > Hello > > option ECMP-Redirect-Supported TLV in its PIM Hello messages. A > PIM > > router sends ECMP Redirects on an interface only when it detects > that all > > neighbors have sent this Hello option. If a PIM router detects > that any > > of its neighbor does not support this Hello option, it MUST not > send ECMP > > Redirects, however, it SHOULD still process any ECMP Redirects > received. > > > > > > (1.h) Has the document split its references into normative and > > informative? Are there normative references to documents that > are > > not ready for advancement or are otherwise in an unclear state > > If such normative references exist, what is the strategy for > their > > completion? Are there normative references that are downward > > references, as described in [RFC3967]? If so, list these > downward > > references to support the Area Director in the Last Call > procedure > > for them [RFC3967]. > > > > Yes. Normative references are all stable documents published as RFCs. > > > > > > (1.i) Has the Document Shepherd verified that the document IANA > > consideration section exists and is consistent with the body of > > the document? If the document specifies protocol extensions, > are > > reservations requested in appropriate IANA registries? Are the > > IANA registries clearly identified? If the document creates a > new > > registry, does it define the proposed initial contents of the > > registry and an allocation procedure for future registrations? > > Does it suggested a reasonable name for the new registry? See > > [I-D.narten-iana-considerations-rfc2434bis]. If the document > > describes an Expert Review process has Shepherd conferred with > the > > Responsible Area Director so that the IESG can appoint the > needed > > Expert during the IESG Evaluation? > > > > > > The IANA Considerations section exists. A PIM Hello Option Type is > > requested to be assigned to the PIM ECMP Redirect Hello Option. This > > document recommends 32 (0x20) as the "PIM ECMP Redirect Hello Option > Type. > > > > A PIM Message Type is requested to be assigned to the ECMP Redirect > > message. The next available Type value is 11(0xB). > > > > > > > > (1.j) Has the Document Shepherd verified that sections of the > > document that are written in a formal language, such as XML > code, > > BNF rules, MIB definitions, etc., validate correctly in an > > automated checker? > > > > > > Not applicable. > > > > > > (1.k) The IESG approval announcement includes a Document > > Announcement Write-Up. Please provide such a Document > > Announcement Writeup. Recent examples can be found in the > > "Action" announcements for approved documents. > > > > > > This document introduces the ECMP Redirect, a mechanism to improve > > the RPF procedure over ECMPs. It allows ECMP path selection to be > > based on administratively selected metrics, such as data > transmission > > delays, path preferences and routing metrics. >=20 > _______________________________________________ > pim mailing list > pim@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pim From mmcbride7@gmail.com Mon Mar 19 10:51:00 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A67821F8878 for ; Mon, 19 Mar 2012 10:51:00 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.511 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.511 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.088, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id P8kPlbwRF4fP for ; Mon, 19 Mar 2012 10:50:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-lb0-f172.google.com (mail-lb0-f172.google.com [209.85.217.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 67C6F21F889F for ; Mon, 19 Mar 2012 10:50:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: by lbol12 with SMTP id l12so4080338lbo.31 for ; Mon, 19 Mar 2012 10:50:57 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=4YxIOB9CUOWRB5EvoZjUXL0fDouhGInZ6FY0NCmDOE4=; b=HOoapExiH9ylV5e0qGsE+Hx3NgsPYyree8tlSWXF7m5AhBggFGCgmahslimU68vN3g Da9raaJF/xUbNginogGDe8ONfx9Mip1IvFrl2ZVyXBl154wg4kg2H09tbPi7k4gS8Cxx ihlKGM5W7fWED3kyPA+MP/L9o6NEFtXuturf8DPWMBWwV4vC7/wflzRAz7FEtf5Ns5YI 6cTHj0yyCW747Bx6vgtZhpEOVPQ9hQ9dGvLtXln+kENT8/XEjSS4e7Kk+Sv08ilz9ymc ET6nrKyaV1Gte7pj5OubPNd5A1Nj40Tb/z51WibA679AwBWBQHNEMXExjWMVJbU+3xb+ Ns8g== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.152.145.131 with SMTP id su3mr9933470lab.46.1332179456986; Mon, 19 Mar 2012 10:50:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.152.127.7 with HTTP; Mon, 19 Mar 2012 10:50:56 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2012 10:50:56 -0700 Message-ID: From: Mike McBride To: pim@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Subject: Re: [pim] Paris agenda X-BeenThere: pim@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Protocol Independent Multicast List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2012 17:51:00 -0000 How does this look? draft-perreault-mboned-igmp-mld-translation draft-ietf-pim-explicit-tracking-00 draft-ietf-pim-rfc4601bis-01 draft-ietf-pim-drlb-00 draft-tissa-pim-mcast-oam-00 draft-taylor-pim-v4v6-translation-01 draft-lts-pim-hello-mtu Miss anyone? mike On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 2:17 PM, Mike McBride wrote: > PIM is scheduled to meet 1300-1500 on Tuesday March 27th. Here is our > agenda as of today: > > draft-ietf-pim-explicit-tracking > draft-ietf-pim-rfc4601bis > draft-hou-pim-drlb > draft-perreault-mboned-igmp-mld-translation > draft-lts-pim-hello-mtu > > Please let Stig and I know if you would like an agenda slot. > > thanks, > mike From stig@venaas.com Mon Mar 19 12:53:03 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0812621E8017 for ; Mon, 19 Mar 2012 12:53:03 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.588 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.588 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.011, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id o7FCRfqr5V5H for ; Mon, 19 Mar 2012 12:53:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ufisa.uninett.no (ufisa.uninett.no [IPv6:2001:700:1:2:158:38:152:126]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 641A121E8013 for ; Mon, 19 Mar 2012 12:53:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.33.12.81] (128-107-239-233.cisco.com [128.107.239.233]) by ufisa.uninett.no (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id DD2727FDF; Mon, 19 Mar 2012 20:52:57 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <4F678E97.9080109@venaas.com> Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2012 12:52:55 -0700 From: Stig Venaas User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:10.0.2) Gecko/20120216 Thunderbird/10.0.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Leonard Giuliano References: <2EEA459CD95CCB4988BFAFC0F2287B5C259E109E@SZXEML520-MBX.china.huawei.com> <4F57D3CD.8090709@venaas.com> <20120314190305.S2181@eng-mail01.juniper.net> In-Reply-To: <20120314190305.S2181@eng-mail01.juniper.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Mike McBride , "pim@ietf.org" , "Rishabh Parekh \(riparekh\)" , Marshall Eubanks Subject: Re: [pim] Collect Comments on RFC4601 Implementations and Deployments Survey Questionnaire Revision X-BeenThere: pim@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Protocol Independent Multicast List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2012 19:53:03 -0000 On 3/14/2012 7:09 PM, Leonard Giuliano wrote: > > I'd be interested in the following questions for operators: > > -Which RP mapping mechanism do you use: Static, AutoRP, or BSR? > > -How many RPs do you have deployed in your network? Do you use > Anycast-RP? If so, is it Anycast-RP using MSDP (RFC 3446) or Anycast-RP > using PIM (RFC 4610)? I also would be interested in hearing what people are deploying, but do you think these answers would help advancing 4601? 4601 doesn't really say much about mapping mechanisms. Stig > > > On Wed, 7 Mar 2012, Stig Venaas wrote: > > -) Please read carefully what Vero posted and see if anything should be > -) changed. If no comments are received by March 22nd, the current survey > -) text will be sent out to implementers/vendors and operators to get > -) their information. > -) > -) It is important that we get the information we want, so if you have any > -) thoughts on this survey, please provide your input before March 22nd. > -) > -) Stig > -) _______________________________________________ > -) pim mailing list > -) pim@ietf.org > -) https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pim > -) From lenny@juniper.net Tue Mar 20 08:02:04 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F5A821F85DB for ; Tue, 20 Mar 2012 08:02:04 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id mKu2ExSCqmPh for ; Tue, 20 Mar 2012 08:02:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from exprod7og127.obsmtp.com (exprod7og127.obsmtp.com [64.18.2.210]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 715E921F85C7 for ; Tue, 20 Mar 2012 08:02:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from P-EMHUB01-HQ.jnpr.net ([66.129.224.36]) (using TLSv1) by exprod7ob127.postini.com ([64.18.6.12]) with SMTP ID DSNKT2ib4wYMfcLBBwiC4geK7xjidtY6gIws@postini.com; Tue, 20 Mar 2012 08:02:02 PDT Received: from magenta.juniper.net (172.17.27.123) by P-EMHUB01-HQ.jnpr.net (172.24.192.33) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.3.213.0; Tue, 20 Mar 2012 08:01:30 -0700 Received: from eng-mail01.juniper.net (eng-mail01.juniper.net [172.17.28.114]) by magenta.juniper.net (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id q2KF1T160019; Tue, 20 Mar 2012 08:01:29 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from lenny@juniper.net) Received: by eng-mail01.juniper.net (Postfix, from userid 1709) id F37B911454; Tue, 20 Mar 2012 08:01:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by eng-mail01.juniper.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id E708A1144F; Tue, 20 Mar 2012 08:01:28 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2012 08:01:28 -0700 From: Leonard Giuliano To: Stig Venaas In-Reply-To: <4F678E97.9080109@venaas.com> Message-ID: <20120320075441.J40459@eng-mail01.juniper.net> References: <2EEA459CD95CCB4988BFAFC0F2287B5C259E109E@SZXEML520-MBX.china.huawei.com> <4F57D3CD.8090709@venaas.com> <20120314190305.S2181@eng-mail01.juniper.net> <4F678E97.9080109@venaas.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Cc: Mike McBride , Marshall Eubanks , "Rishabh Parekh \(riparekh\)" , "pim@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [pim] Collect Comments on RFC4601 Implementations and Deployments Survey Questionnaire Revision X-BeenThere: pim@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Protocol Independent Multicast List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2012 15:02:04 -0000 RFC 4601 does cover static/embedded/autorp/bsr, so I think the first bullet question is applicable. I do concede that the anycast questions are a stretch for 4601 applicability, but the number of RPs is somewhat pertinent and the rest are at least sort of tangentially related. Plus, yeah, I am pretty curious... On Mon, 19 Mar 2012, Stig Venaas wrote: -) On 3/14/2012 7:09 PM, Leonard Giuliano wrote: -) > -) > I'd be interested in the following questions for operators: -) > -) > -Which RP mapping mechanism do you use: Static, AutoRP, or BSR? -) > -) > -How many RPs do you have deployed in your network? Do you use -) > Anycast-RP? If so, is it Anycast-RP using MSDP (RFC 3446) or Anycast-RP -) > using PIM (RFC 4610)? -) -) I also would be interested in hearing what people are deploying, but do -) you think these answers would help advancing 4601? 4601 doesn't really -) say much about mapping mechanisms. -) -) Stig -) -) > -) > -) > On Wed, 7 Mar 2012, Stig Venaas wrote: -) > -) > -) Please read carefully what Vero posted and see if anything should be -) > -) changed. If no comments are received by March 22nd, the current survey -) > -) text will be sent out to implementers/vendors and operators to get -) > -) their information. -) > -) -) > -) It is important that we get the information we want, so if you have any -) > -) thoughts on this survey, please provide your input before March 22nd. -) > -) -) > -) Stig -) > -) _______________________________________________ -) > -) pim mailing list -) > -) pim@ietf.org -) > -) https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pim -) > -) -) -) _______________________________________________ -) pim mailing list -) pim@ietf.org -) https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pim -) From vero.zheng@huawei.com Thu Mar 22 20:22:21 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D4F221E8017 for ; Thu, 22 Mar 2012 20:22:21 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id MG3kJz9N8JXQ for ; Thu, 22 Mar 2012 20:22:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dfwrgout.huawei.com (dfwrgout.huawei.com [206.16.17.72]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3435E21E8013 for ; Thu, 22 Mar 2012 20:22:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 172.18.9.243 (EHLO dfweml201-edg.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.9.243]) by dfwrg01-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.2.3-GA FastPath) with ESMTP id AEP91228; Thu, 22 Mar 2012 23:22:19 -0400 (EDT) Received: from DFWEML406-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.193.5.131) by dfweml201-edg.china.huawei.com (172.18.9.107) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.3; Thu, 22 Mar 2012 20:21:44 -0700 Received: from SZXEML406-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.82.67.93) by dfweml406-hub.china.huawei.com (10.193.5.131) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.3; Thu, 22 Mar 2012 20:21:49 -0700 Received: from SZXEML520-MBX.china.huawei.com ([169.254.1.99]) by szxeml406-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.82.67.93]) with mapi id 14.01.0323.003; Fri, 23 Mar 2012 11:21:45 +0800 From: Vero Zheng To: Stig Venaas , Leonard Giuliano , "pim@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [pim] Collect Comments on RFC4601 Implementations and Deployments Survey Questionnaire Revision Thread-Index: Acz7Qu8mS8mWaR/YSWq8Djbfi4pb0QBI7uyAAw4xnGA= Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2012 03:21:44 +0000 Message-ID: <2EEA459CD95CCB4988BFAFC0F2287B5C27538B9B@SZXEML520-MBX.china.huawei.com> References: <2EEA459CD95CCB4988BFAFC0F2287B5C259E109E@SZXEML520-MBX.china.huawei.com> <4F57D3CD.8090709@venaas.com> In-Reply-To: <4F57D3CD.8090709@venaas.com> Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US Content-Language: zh-CN X-MS-Has-Attach: yes X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.108.4.53] Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="_002_2EEA459CD95CCB4988BFAFC0F2287B5C27538B9BSZXEML520MBXchi_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Subject: Re: [pim] Collect Comments on RFC4601 Implementations and Deployments Survey Questionnaire Revision X-BeenThere: pim@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Protocol Independent Multicast List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2012 03:22:21 -0000 --_002_2EEA459CD95CCB4988BFAFC0F2287B5C27538B9BSZXEML520MBXchi_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Thanks Lenny for the comments. For the first question, we believe it has be= en covered by Q7, though not directly. For the second question, even though= we don't feel it really help with the main goal, but we have incorporated = in the questionnaire since there's interests. The final questionnaire is attached. BR, Vero > -----Original Message----- > From: Stig Venaas [mailto:stig@venaas.com] > Sent: Thursday, March 08, 2012 5:32 AM > To: Vero Zheng > Cc: pim@ietf.org; Rishabh Parekh (riparekh); Mike McBride; Marshall Euban= ks > Subject: Re: [pim] Collect Comments on RFC4601 Implementations and > Deployments Survey Questionnaire Revision >=20 > Please read carefully what Vero posted and see if anything should be > changed. If no comments are received by March 22nd, the current survey > text will be sent out to implementers/vendors and operators to get > their information. >=20 > It is important that we get the information we want, so if you have any > thoughts on this survey, please provide your input before March 22nd. >=20 > Stig --_002_2EEA459CD95CCB4988BFAFC0F2287B5C27538B9BSZXEML520MBXchi_ Content-Type: text/plain; name="RFC4601_Questionnaire_Revision_v4.txt" Content-Description: RFC4601_Questionnaire_Revision_v4.txt Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="RFC4601_Questionnaire_Revision_v4.txt"; size=3390; creation-date="Fri, 23 Mar 2012 02:27:13 GMT"; modification-date="Fri, 23 Mar 2012 02:46:20 GMT" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 UXVlc3Rpb25uYWlyZQ0KDQpJbnRyb2R1Y3Rpb246DQpQSU0tU00gd2FzIGZpcnN0IHB1Ymxpc2hl ZCBhcyBSRkMgMjExNyBpbiAxOTk3IGFuZCB0aGVuIGFnYWluIGFzIFJGQyAyMzYyIGluIDE5OTgu IFRoZSBwcm90b2NvbCB3YXMgY2xhc3NpZmllZCBhcyBFeHBlcmltZW50YWwgaW4gYm90aCBvZiB0 aGVzZSBkb2N1bWVudHMuIFRoZSBQSU0tU00gcHJvdG9jb2wgc3BlY2lmaWNhdGlvbiB3YXMgdGhl biByZXdyaXR0ZW4gaW4gd2hvbGUgYW5kIGFkdmFuY2VkIHRvIFByb3Bvc2VkIFN0YW5kYXJkIGFz IFJGQzQ2MDEgaW4gMjAwNi4gQ29uc2lkZXJpbmcgdGhlIG11bHRpcGxlIGluZGVwZW5kZW50IGlt cGxlbWVudGF0aW9ucyBkZXZlbG9wZWQgYW5kIHRoZSBzdWNjZXNzZnVsIG9wZXJhdGlvbmFsIGV4 cGVyaWVuY2UgZ2FpbmVkLCB0aGUgSUVURiBoYXMgZGVjaWRlZCB0byBhZHZhbmNlIHRoZSBQSU0t U00gcm91dGluZyBwcm90b2NvbCB0byBEcmFmdCBTdGFuZGFyZC4gVGhpcyBzdXJ2ZXkgaW50ZW5k cyB0byBwcm92aWRlIHN1cHBvcnRpbmcgZG9jdW1lbnRhdGlvbiB0byBhZHZhbmNlIHRoZSBQcm90 b2NvbCBJbmRlcGVuZGVudCBNdWx0aWNhc3QgLSBTcGFyc2UgTW9kZSAoUElNLVNNKSByb3V0aW5n IHByb3RvY29sIGZyb20gSUVURiBQcm9wb3NlZCBTdGFuZGFyZCB0byBEcmFmdCBTdGFuZGFyZC4g KER1ZSB0byBSRkMgNjQxMCwgd2UgYXJlIG5vdyB0cnlpbmcgdG8gcHJvZ3Jlc3MgaXQgdG8gSW50 ZXJuZXQgU3RhbmRhcmQuRHJhZnQgU3RhbmRhcmQgaXMgbm90IHVzZWQgYW55bW9yZS4pIFRoaXMg c3VydmV5IGlzIGlzc3VlZCBvbiBiZWhhbGYgb2YgdGhlIElFVEYgUElNIFdvcmtpbmcgR3JvdXAu IA0KDQpUaGUgcmVzcG9uc2VzIHdpbGwgYmUgY29sbGVjdGVkIGJ5IG5ldXRyYWwgdGhpcmQtcGFy dHkgYW5kIGtlcHQgc3RyaWN0bHkgY29uZmlkZW50aWFsOyBvbmx5IHRoZSBmaW5hbCBjb21iaW5l ZCByZXN1bHRzIHdpbGwgYmUgcHVibGlzaGVkLiBNYXJzaGFsbCBFdWJhbmtzIGhhcyBhZ3JlZWQg dG8gYW5vbnltaXplIHRoZSByZXNwb25zZSB0byB0aGlzIFF1ZXN0aW9ubmFpcmUuIE1hcnNoYWxs IGhhcyBhIGxvbmcgZXhwZXJpZW5jZSB3aXRoIE11bHRpY2FzdCBidXQgaGFzIG5vIGRpcmVjdCBm aW5hbmNpYWwgaW50ZXJlc3QgaW4gdGhpcyBtYXR0ZXIsIG5vciB0aWVzIHRvIGFueSBvZiB0aGUg dmVuZG9ycyBpbnZvbHZlZC4gSGUgaXMgYWxzbyBhIG1lbWJlciBvZiB0aGUgSUFPQywgQ2hhaXIg b2YgdGhlIElFVEYgVHJ1c3QgYW5kIGNvLWNoYWlyIG9mIHRoZSBJRVRGIExheWVyIDMgVlBOIFdv cmtpbmcgR3JvdXAuIFBsZWFzZSBzZW5kIFF1ZXN0aW9ubmFpcmUgcmVzcG9uc2VzIHRvIGhpcyBl bWFpbCBhZGRyZXNzLCBtYXJzaGFsbC5ldWJhbmtzQGdtYWlsLmNvbS4gSGUgcmVxdWVzdHMgdGhh dCBzdWNoIHJlc3BvbnNlcyBpbmNsdWRlIHRoZSBzdHJpbmcgIlJGQyA0NjAxIGJpcyBRdWVzdGlv bm5haXJlIiBpbiB0aGUgc3ViamVjdCBmaWVsZC4NCg0KUXVlc3Rpb25zIGZvciBvcGVyYXRvcnM6 DQoxIAlIYXZlIHlvdSBkZXBsb3llZCBQSU0tU00gaW4geW91ciBuZXR3b3JrPyANCjIgCUhvdyBs b25nIGhhdmUgeW91IGhhZCBQSU0tU00gZGVwbG95ZWQgaW4geW91ciBuZXR3b3JrPyBEbyB5b3Ug a25vdyBpZiB5b3VyIGRlcGxveW1lbnQgaXMgYmFzZWQgb24gdGhlIG1vc3QgcmVjZW50IFJGQzQ2 MDE/DQozIAlIYXZlIHlvdSBkZXBsb3llZCBQSU0tU00gZm9yIElQdjYgaW4geW91ciBuZXR3b3Jr Pw0KNAlBcmUgeW91IHVzaW5nIGVxdWlwbWVudCB3aXRoIGRpZmZlcmVudCAobXVsdGktdmVuZG9y KSBQSU0tU00gaW1wbGVtZW50YXRpb25zIGZvciB5b3VyIGRlcGxveW1lbnQ/DQo1CUhhdmUgeW91 IGVuY291bnRlcmVkIGFueSBpbnRlci1vcGVyYWJpbGl0eSBvciBiYWNrd2FyZC1jb21wYXRpYmls aXR5IGlzc3VlcyBhbW9uZ3N0IGRpZmZlcmluZyBpbXBsZW1lbnRhdGlvbnM/IElmIHllcywgd2hh dCBhcmUgeW91ciBjb25jZXJucyBhYm91dCB0aGVzZSBpc3N1ZXM/DQo2CUhhdmUgeW91IGRlcGxv eWVkIGJvdGggZGVuc2UgbW9kZSBhbmQgc3BhcnNlIG1vZGUgaW4geW91ciBuZXR3b3JrPyBJZiB5 ZXMsIGRvIHlvdSByb3V0ZSBiZXR3ZWVuIHRoZXNlIG1vZGVzIHVzaW5nIGZlYXR1cmVzIHN1Y2gg YXMgKiwqLFJQIG9yIFBNQlI/DQo3CVRvIHdoYXQgZXh0ZW50IGhhdmUgeW91IGRlcGxveWVkIFBJ TSBmdW5jdGlvbmFsaXR5LCBsaWtlIGUuZy4gQlNSLCBTU00sIGFuZCBFeHBsaWNpdCBUcmFja2lu Zz8NCjgJSG93IG1hbnkgUlBzIGhhdmUgeW91IGRlcGxveWVkIGluIHlvdXIgbmV0d29yaz8gIA0K OQlJZiB5b3UgdXNlIEFueWNhc3QtUlAsIGlzIGl0IEFueWNhc3QtUlAgdXNpbmcgTVNEUCAoUkZD IDM0NDYpIG9yIEFueWNhc3QtUlAgdXNpbmcgUElNIChSRkMgNDYxMCk/DQoxMAlEbyB5b3UgaGF2 ZSBhbnkgb3RoZXIgY29tbWVudHMgb24gUElNLVNNIGRlcGxveW1lbnQgaW4geW91ciBuZXR3b3Jr Pw0KDQpRdWVzdGlvbnMgZm9yIGltcGxlbWVudG9yczogDQoxCUhhdmUgeW91IGltcGxlbWVudGVk IFBJTS1TTT8NCjIJSXMgdGhlIFBJTS1TTSBpbXBsZW1lbnRhdGlvbiBiYXNlZCBvbiBSRkMgMjYz MiBvciBSRkMgNDYwMT8NCjMJSGF2ZSB5b3UgaW1wbGVtZW50ZWQgKCosKiwgUlApIHN0YXRlIG9m IFJGQyA0NjAxPyBXaGF0IGlzIHRoZSByYXRpb25hbGUgYmVoaW5kIGltcGxlbWVudGluZyBvciBv bWl0dGluZyAoKiwqLFJQKT8NCjQJSGF2ZSB5b3UgaW1wbGVtZW50ZWQgdGhlIFBNQlIgYXMgc3Bl Y2lmaWVkIGluIFJGQyA0NjAxIGFuZCBSRkMgMjcxNT8gV2hhdCBpcyB0aGUgcmF0aW9uYWxlIGJl aGluZCBpbXBsZW1lbnRpbmcgb3Igb21pdHRpbmcgUE1CUj8NCjUJSGF2ZSB5b3UgaW1wbGVtZW50 ZWQgb3RoZXIgZmVhdHVyZXMgYW5kIGZ1bmN0aW9ucyBvZiBSRkMgNDYwMSwgZS5nLg0KCQktIFNT TQkJDQoJCS0gSm9pbiBTdXBwcmVzc2lvbg0KCQktIEV4cGxpY2l0IHRyYWNraW5nIA0KCQktIFJl Z2lzdGVyIG1lY2hhbmlzbQ0KCQktIFNQVCBzd2l0Y2hvdmVyIGF0IGxhc3QtaG9wIHJvdXRlcg0K CQktIEFzc2VydCBtZWNoYW5pc20gIA0KCQktIEhhc2hpbmcgb2YgZ3JvdXAgdG8gUlAgbWFwcGlu Z3MsIA0KCQkJDQo2CURvZXMgeW91ciBQSU0tU00gaW1wbGVtZW50YXRpb24gc3VwcG9ydCBJUHY2 Pw0KNwlIYXZlIHlvdSBlbmNvdW50ZXJlZCBhbnkgaW50ZXItb3BlcmFiaWxpdHkgaXNzdWVzIHdp dGggb3RoZXIgUElNIGltcGxlbWVudGF0aW9ucyBpbiB0cmlhbHMgb3IgaW4gdGhlIGZpZWxkPw0K OAlEbyB5b3UgaGF2ZSBhbnkgb3RoZXIgY29tbWVudHMgb3IgY29uY2VybnMgYWJvdXQgUElNLVNN IGFzIHNwZWNpZmllZCBpbiBSRkM0NjAxPw0K --_002_2EEA459CD95CCB4988BFAFC0F2287B5C27538B9BSZXEML520MBXchi_-- From lenny@juniper.net Fri Mar 23 08:14:10 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 36E8321F84B3 for ; Fri, 23 Mar 2012 08:14:10 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id XZIek6KQ3ICn for ; Fri, 23 Mar 2012 08:14:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from exprod7og126.obsmtp.com (exprod7og126.obsmtp.com [64.18.2.206]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2E74F21F8468 for ; Fri, 23 Mar 2012 08:14:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from P-EMHUB02-HQ.jnpr.net ([66.129.224.36]) (using TLSv1) by exprod7ob126.postini.com ([64.18.6.12]) with SMTP ID DSNKT2yTPWwYhrHxh3prFkSgKioZzvR3Z6yV@postini.com; Fri, 23 Mar 2012 08:14:09 PDT Received: from magenta.juniper.net (172.17.27.123) by P-EMHUB02-HQ.jnpr.net (172.24.192.33) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.3.213.0; Fri, 23 Mar 2012 08:13:35 -0700 Received: from eng-mail01.juniper.net (eng-mail01.juniper.net [172.17.28.114]) by magenta.juniper.net (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id q2NFDU171014; Fri, 23 Mar 2012 08:13:35 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from lenny@juniper.net) Received: by eng-mail01.juniper.net (Postfix, from userid 1709) id A33E51145A; Fri, 23 Mar 2012 08:13:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by eng-mail01.juniper.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9901F11446; Fri, 23 Mar 2012 08:13:30 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2012 08:13:30 -0700 From: Leonard Giuliano To: Vero Zheng In-Reply-To: <2EEA459CD95CCB4988BFAFC0F2287B5C27538B9B@SZXEML520-MBX.china.huawei.com> Message-ID: <20120323081253.K297@eng-mail01.juniper.net> References: <2EEA459CD95CCB4988BFAFC0F2287B5C259E109E@SZXEML520-MBX.china.huawei.com> <4F57D3CD.8090709@venaas.com> <2EEA459CD95CCB4988BFAFC0F2287B5C27538B9B@SZXEML520-MBX.china.huawei.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Cc: "pim@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [pim] Collect Comments on RFC4601 Implementations and Deployments Survey Questionnaire Revision X-BeenThere: pim@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Protocol Independent Multicast List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2012 15:14:10 -0000 Vero- I think the first question is much more pertinent and I don't think #7 adequately covers it. On Fri, 23 Mar 2012, Vero Zheng wrote: -) Thanks Lenny for the comments. For the first question, we believe it has been covered by Q7, though not directly. For the second question, even though we don't feel it really help with the main goal, but we have incorporated in the questionnaire since there's interests. -) The final questionnaire is attached. -) -) BR, -) Vero -) -) > -----Original Message----- -) > From: Stig Venaas [mailto:stig@venaas.com] -) > Sent: Thursday, March 08, 2012 5:32 AM -) > To: Vero Zheng -) > Cc: pim@ietf.org; Rishabh Parekh (riparekh); Mike McBride; Marshall Eubanks -) > Subject: Re: [pim] Collect Comments on RFC4601 Implementations and -) > Deployments Survey Questionnaire Revision -) > -) > Please read carefully what Vero posted and see if anything should be -) > changed. If no comments are received by March 22nd, the current survey -) > text will be sent out to implementers/vendors and operators to get -) > their information. -) > -) > It is important that we get the information we want, so if you have any -) > thoughts on this survey, please provide your input before March 22nd. -) > -) > Stig -) From adrian@olddog.co.uk Sat Mar 24 13:18:52 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A08D421F853D for ; Sat, 24 Mar 2012 13:18:52 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.215 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.215 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.384, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id akvxl39YLLKy for ; Sat, 24 Mar 2012 13:18:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from asmtp5.iomartmail.com (asmtp5.iomartmail.com [62.128.201.176]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 89E4D21F84EC for ; Sat, 24 Mar 2012 13:18:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from asmtp5.iomartmail.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by asmtp5.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q2OKIlrf005986; Sat, 24 Mar 2012 20:18:47 GMT Received: from 950129200 ([90.84.144.240]) (authenticated bits=0) by asmtp5.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q2OKHF1M005605 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Sat, 24 Mar 2012 20:18:44 GMT From: "Adrian Farrel" To: Date: Sat, 24 Mar 2012 20:17:10 -0000 Message-ID: <010801cd09fb$5203bb70$f60b3250$@olddog.co.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0 Thread-Index: Ac0J+Ag6zx0IAy7YTZaIagumOGGSKg== Content-Language: en-gb Cc: pim@ietf.org Subject: [pim] Question about draft-ietf-pim-ecmp X-BeenThere: pim@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: adrian@olddog.co.uk List-Id: Protocol Independent Multicast List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 24 Mar 2012 20:18:52 -0000 Hi authors of draft-ietf-pim-ecmp, I'm doing my AD review in response to the publication request for your draft. One point has me confused (Only one point? It must be a short draft). I can't decide whether this document is intended to apply to ECMP between adjacent routers (i.e. parallel links), or a more generic ECMP across the network (i.e. parallel paths). The concept of ECMP bundle in Section 3 encourages me to think you are talking about parallel links, but then the document talks about selection of a different upstream router, which must mean parallel paths. If parallel paths are the intention of the document then there are some oddities that confuse me further: the addition of a member of an ECMP bundle seems to be based on configuration which is fine for parallel links, but it seems a much larger issue to configure an ECMP bundle across a collection of routers, and it could lead to the actual path being not the shortest; the definition of an ECMP bundle seems to require that all bundle members have the same upstream and downstream ends; an upstream router is required to announce that it is not the preferred router which requires it to know about all other upstream routers that are an option for the computed path. Can you sort me out on this point so that I can complete my review? Thanks, Adrian From lwei@cisco.com Sat Mar 24 21:36:06 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ABD2321F8489 for ; Sat, 24 Mar 2012 21:36:06 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -10.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id yEMxpO9GI3qc for ; Sat, 24 Mar 2012 21:36:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mtv-iport-1.cisco.com (mtv-iport-1.cisco.com [173.36.130.12]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 01BF221F8484 for ; Sat, 24 Mar 2012 21:36:06 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=lwei@cisco.com; l=1817; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1332650165; x=1333859765; h=message-id:date:from:mime-version:to:cc:subject: references:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=MkfObden4NlwVQc4c5tjy1+c9CAidehlBORtVvN7Lyk=; b=AlcTGdnMkjflrQMUf/43YYZClC+VghVA/4hpyeG+VGNKrCA/srGBJStw ay6CNjFrmve3zyRmElcVVdQ44EBPM3wM5oBtXgoVn+UJA0yug1ir1k8EX 2B74r2w8UrE6gRpclKy+GGxlLE0YlMRv4eZ/k4fSjI1CUT8f7uGbRoo2/ 4=; X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.73,644,1325462400"; d="scan'208";a="34436474" Received: from mtv-core-1.cisco.com ([171.68.58.6]) by mtv-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 25 Mar 2012 04:36:05 +0000 Received: from lwei-mac.local (sjc-vpn6-103.cisco.com [10.21.120.103]) by mtv-core-1.cisco.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id q2P4a5kH021820; Sun, 25 Mar 2012 04:36:05 GMT Message-ID: <4F6EA0C1.1030705@cisco.com> Date: Sat, 24 Mar 2012 21:36:17 -0700 From: Liming Wei Organization: cisco systems Inc. User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; rv:11.0) Gecko/20120313 Thunderbird/11.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: adrian@olddog.co.uk References: <010801cd09fb$5203bb70$f60b3250$@olddog.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <010801cd09fb$5203bb70$f60b3250$@olddog.co.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: draft-ietf-pim-ecmp@tools.ietf.org, pim@ietf.org Subject: Re: [pim] Question about draft-ietf-pim-ecmp X-BeenThere: pim@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Protocol Independent Multicast List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 25 Mar 2012 04:36:06 -0000 Hi Adrian, This document is intended to apply to ECMP links between routers adjacent to each other. Your assumption about the downstream routers sharing the same set of ECMP "next hop"'s is correct. Thanks, -Liming On 3/24/12 1:17 PM, Adrian Farrel wrote: > Hi authors of draft-ietf-pim-ecmp, > > I'm doing my AD review in response to the publication request for your draft. > > One point has me confused (Only one point? It must be a short draft). > > I can't decide whether this document is intended to apply to ECMP between > adjacent routers (i.e. parallel links), or a more generic ECMP across the > network (i.e. parallel paths). > > The concept of ECMP bundle in Section 3 encourages me to think you are talking > about parallel links, but then the document talks about selection of a different > upstream router, which must mean parallel paths. > > If parallel paths are the intention of the document then there are some oddities > that confuse me further: the addition of a member of an ECMP bundle seems to be > based on configuration which is fine for parallel links, but it seems a much > larger issue to configure an ECMP bundle across a collection of routers, and it > could lead to the actual path being not the shortest; the definition of an ECMP > bundle seems to require that all bundle members have the same upstream and > downstream ends; an upstream router is required to announce that it is not the > preferred router which requires it to know about all other upstream routers that > are an option for the computed path. > > Can you sort me out on this point so that I can complete my review? > > Thanks, > Adrian > > _______________________________________________ > pim mailing list > pim@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pim From internet-drafts@ietf.org Sun Mar 25 21:30:12 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 905B221E8082; Sun, 25 Mar 2012 21:30:12 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id QRbZniRwYVia; Sun, 25 Mar 2012 21:30:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7602521E8034; Sun, 25 Mar 2012 21:30:11 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: i-d-announce@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 4.00 Message-ID: <20120326043011.28803.10948.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Sun, 25 Mar 2012 21:30:11 -0700 Cc: pim@ietf.org Subject: [pim] I-D Action: draft-ietf-pim-drlb-01.txt X-BeenThere: pim@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Protocol Independent Multicast List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2012 04:30:13 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts director= ies. This draft is a work item of the Protocol Independent Multicast Workin= g Group of the IETF. Title : Protocol Independent Multicast DR Load Balancing Author(s) : Yiqun Cai Sri Vallepalli Heidi Ou Andy Green Filename : draft-ietf-pim-drlb-01.txt Pages : 13 Date : 2012-03-25 On a multi-access network such as an Ethernet, one of the PIM routers is elected as a Designated Router (DR). The PIM DR has two roles in the PIM protocol. On the first hop network, the PIM DR is responsible for registering an active source to the RP if the group is operated in PIM SM. On the last hop network, the PIM DR is responsible for tracking local multicast listeners and forwarding traffic to these listeners if the group is operated in PIM SM/SSM/DM. In this document, we propose a modification to the PIM protocol that allows more than one of these last hop routers to be selected so that the forwarding load can be distributed to and handled among these routers. A router responsible for forwarding for a particular group is called a Group Designated Router (GDR). A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-pim-drlb-01.txt Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ This Internet-Draft can be retrieved at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-pim-drlb-01.txt From adrian@olddog.co.uk Mon Mar 26 04:26:11 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B05721F85ED for ; Mon, 26 Mar 2012 04:26:11 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.533 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.533 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.066, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Lh4Jn7PcHA1J for ; Mon, 26 Mar 2012 04:26:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from asmtp1.iomartmail.com (asmtp1.iomartmail.com [62.128.201.248]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE67F21F85DB for ; Mon, 26 Mar 2012 04:26:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from asmtp1.iomartmail.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by asmtp1.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q2QBPvBM029046; Mon, 26 Mar 2012 12:25:57 +0100 Received: from 950129200 (dhcp-11f1.meeting.ietf.org [130.129.17.241]) (authenticated bits=0) by asmtp1.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q2QBPr11028901 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Mon, 26 Mar 2012 12:25:54 +0100 From: "Adrian Farrel" To: "'Liming Wei'" References: <010801cd09fb$5203bb70$f60b3250$@olddog.co.uk> <4F6EA0C1.1030705@cisco.com> In-Reply-To: <4F6EA0C1.1030705@cisco.com> Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2012 12:25:55 +0100 Message-ID: <028701cd0b43$363c2c80$a2b48580$@olddog.co.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0 Thread-Index: AQHJM3FYiGeemRxWy2I2SDYNM24zaAG9eDi2lnYzcWA= Content-Language: en-gb Cc: draft-ietf-pim-ecmp@tools.ietf.org, pim@ietf.org Subject: Re: [pim] Question about draft-ietf-pim-ecmp X-BeenThere: pim@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: adrian@olddog.co.uk List-Id: Protocol Independent Multicast List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2012 11:26:11 -0000 Thanks for that. I may pick out some points where you need to make this a bit clearer. Cheers, Adrian > -----Original Message----- > From: Liming Wei [mailto:lwei@cisco.com] > Sent: 25 March 2012 05:36 > To: adrian@olddog.co.uk > Cc: draft-ietf-pim-ecmp@tools.ietf.org; pim@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [pim] Question about draft-ietf-pim-ecmp > > Hi Adrian, > > This document is intended to apply to ECMP links between routers > adjacent to each other. > Your assumption about the downstream routers sharing the same set of > ECMP "next hop"'s is correct. > > Thanks, > -Liming > > On 3/24/12 1:17 PM, Adrian Farrel wrote: > > Hi authors of draft-ietf-pim-ecmp, > > > > I'm doing my AD review in response to the publication request for your draft. > > > > One point has me confused (Only one point? It must be a short draft). > > > > I can't decide whether this document is intended to apply to ECMP between > > adjacent routers (i.e. parallel links), or a more generic ECMP across the > > network (i.e. parallel paths). > > > > The concept of ECMP bundle in Section 3 encourages me to think you are > talking > > about parallel links, but then the document talks about selection of a different > > upstream router, which must mean parallel paths. > > > > If parallel paths are the intention of the document then there are some > oddities > > that confuse me further: the addition of a member of an ECMP bundle seems > to be > > based on configuration which is fine for parallel links, but it seems a much > > larger issue to configure an ECMP bundle across a collection of routers, and it > > could lead to the actual path being not the shortest; the definition of an ECMP > > bundle seems to require that all bundle members have the same upstream and > > downstream ends; an upstream router is required to announce that it is not the > > preferred router which requires it to know about all other upstream routers > that > > are an option for the computed path. > > > > Can you sort me out on this point so that I can complete my review? > > > > Thanks, > > Adrian > > > > _______________________________________________ > > pim mailing list > > pim@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pim From wwwrun@rfc-editor.org Mon Mar 26 04:39:58 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0568821F8467; Mon, 26 Mar 2012 04:39:58 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.452 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.452 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.148, BAYES_00=-2.599, NO_RELAYS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id n0Ra4sE9mZv2; Mon, 26 Mar 2012 04:39:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [IPv6:2001:1890:123a::1:2f]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3514421F867A; Mon, 26 Mar 2012 04:39:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: by rfc-editor.org (Postfix, from userid 30) id 4694CB1E015; Mon, 26 Mar 2012 04:38:40 -0700 (PDT) To: ietf-announce@ietf.org, rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org From: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org Message-Id: <20120326113840.4694CB1E015@rfc-editor.org> Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2012 04:38:40 -0700 (PDT) Cc: pim@ietf.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org Subject: [pim] RFC 6559 on A Reliable Transport Mechanism for PIM X-BeenThere: pim@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Protocol Independent Multicast List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2012 11:39:58 -0000 A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries. RFC 6559 Title: A Reliable Transport Mechanism for PIM Author: D. Farinacci, IJ. Wijnands, S. Venaas, M. Napierala Status: Experimental Stream: IETF Date: March 2012 Mailbox: dino@cisco.com, ice@cisco.com, stig@cisco.com, mnapierala@att.com Pages: 29 Characters: 70159 Updates/Obsoletes/SeeAlso: None I-D Tag: draft-ietf-pim-port-09.txt URL: http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6559.txt This document defines a reliable transport mechanism for the PIM protocol for transmission of Join/Prune messages. This eliminates the need for periodic Join/Prune message transmission and processing. The reliable transport mechanism can use either TCP or SCTP as the transport protocol. This document defines an Experimental Protocol for the Internet community. This document is a product of the Protocol Independent Multicast Working Group of the IETF. EXPERIMENTAL: This memo defines an Experimental Protocol for the Internet community. It does not specify an Internet standard of any kind. Discussion and suggestions for improvement are requested. Distribution of this memo is unlimited. This announcement is sent to the IETF-Announce and rfc-dist lists. To subscribe or unsubscribe, see http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce http://mailman.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-dist For searching the RFC series, see http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfcsearch.html. For downloading RFCs, see http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc.html. Requests for special distribution should be addressed to either the author of the RFC in question, or to rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org. Unless specifically noted otherwise on the RFC itself, all RFCs are for unlimited distribution. The RFC Editor Team Association Management Solutions, LLC From vero.zheng@huawei.com Tue Mar 27 01:34:34 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C932721F887E for ; Tue, 27 Mar 2012 01:34:34 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 1.925 X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.925 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-4.524, BAYES_00=-2.599, CHARSET_FARAWAY_HEADER=3.2, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, MIME_BASE64_TEXT=1.753, MIME_CHARSET_FARAWAY=2.45, SARE_SUB_ENC_GB2312=1.345] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id OcOE4LJnswvK for ; Tue, 27 Mar 2012 01:34:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dfwrgout.huawei.com (dfwrgout.huawei.com [206.16.17.72]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F3D0421F887C for ; Tue, 27 Mar 2012 01:34:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 172.18.9.243 (EHLO dfweml201-edg.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.9.243]) by dfwrg01-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.2.3-GA FastPath) with ESMTP id AES58462; Tue, 27 Mar 2012 04:34:33 -0400 (EDT) Received: from DFWEML403-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.193.5.151) by dfweml201-edg.china.huawei.com (172.18.9.107) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.3; Tue, 27 Mar 2012 01:31:58 -0700 Received: from SZXEML403-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.82.67.35) by dfweml403-hub.china.huawei.com (10.193.5.151) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.3; Tue, 27 Mar 2012 01:31:24 -0700 Received: from SZXEML520-MBX.china.huawei.com ([169.254.1.77]) by szxeml403-hub.china.huawei.com ([::1]) with mapi id 14.01.0323.003; Tue, 27 Mar 2012 16:31:56 +0800 From: Vero Zheng To: Leonard Giuliano Thread-Topic: [pim] Collect Comments on RFC4601 Implementations and Deployments Survey Questionnaire Revision Thread-Index: Acz7Qu8mS8mWaR/YSWq8Djbfi4pb0QBI7uyAAw4xnGAACUBwAADL3tX3 Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2012 08:31:55 +0000 Message-ID: <2EEA459CD95CCB4988BFAFC0F2287B5C2C868CC3@SZXEML520-MBX.china.huawei.com> References: <2EEA459CD95CCB4988BFAFC0F2287B5C259E109E@SZXEML520-MBX.china.huawei.com> <4F57D3CD.8090709@venaas.com> <2EEA459CD95CCB4988BFAFC0F2287B5C27538B9B@SZXEML520-MBX.china.huawei.com>, <20120323081253.K297@eng-mail01.juniper.net> In-Reply-To: <20120323081253.K297@eng-mail01.juniper.net> Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US Content-Language: zh-CN X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [172.24.1.45] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="gb2312" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Cc: "pim@ietf.org" Subject: [pim] =?gb2312?b?tPC4tDogIENvbGxlY3QgQ29tbWVudHMgb24gUkZDNDYwMSBJ?= =?gb2312?b?bXBsZW1lbnRhdGlvbnMgYW5kIERlcGxveW1lbnRzIFN1cnZleSBRdWVzdGlv?= =?gb2312?b?bm5haXJlIFJldmlzaW9u?= X-BeenThere: pim@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Protocol Independent Multicast List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2012 08:34:34 -0000 TGVubnksCgpXZSB3aWxsIGluY29ycG9yYXRlIHRoZSBmaXJzdCBxdWVzdGlvbiB3aXRoIHRoZSBR IzcuCgpCUiwKVmVybwpfX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fCrei vP7IyzogTGVvbmFyZCBHaXVsaWFubyBbbGVubnlAanVuaXBlci5uZXRdCreiy83KsbzkOiAyMDEy xOoz1MIyM8jVIDIzOjEzCrW9OiBWZXJvIFpoZW5nCkNjOiBTdGlnIFZlbmFhczsgcGltQGlldGYu b3JnCtb3zOI6IFJFOiBbcGltXSBDb2xsZWN0IENvbW1lbnRzIG9uIFJGQzQ2MDEgSW1wbGVtZW50 YXRpb25zIGFuZCBEZXBsb3ltZW50cyBTdXJ2ZXkgUXVlc3Rpb25uYWlyZSBSZXZpc2lvbgoKVmVy by0gSSB0aGluayB0aGUgZmlyc3QgcXVlc3Rpb24gaXMgbXVjaCBtb3JlIHBlcnRpbmVudCBhbmQg SSBkb24ndCB0aGluawojNyBhZGVxdWF0ZWx5IGNvdmVycyBpdC4KCgpPbiBGcmksIDIzIE1hciAy MDEyLCBWZXJvIFpoZW5nIHdyb3RlOgoKLSkgVGhhbmtzIExlbm55IGZvciB0aGUgY29tbWVudHMu IEZvciB0aGUgZmlyc3QgcXVlc3Rpb24sIHdlIGJlbGlldmUgaXQgaGFzIGJlZW4gY292ZXJlZCBi eSBRNywgdGhvdWdoIG5vdCBkaXJlY3RseS4gRm9yIHRoZSBzZWNvbmQgcXVlc3Rpb24sIGV2ZW4g dGhvdWdoIHdlIGRvbid0IGZlZWwgaXQgcmVhbGx5IGhlbHAgd2l0aCB0aGUgbWFpbiBnb2FsLCBi dXQgd2UgaGF2ZSBpbmNvcnBvcmF0ZWQgaW4gdGhlIHF1ZXN0aW9ubmFpcmUgc2luY2UgdGhlcmUn cyBpbnRlcmVzdHMuCi0pIFRoZSBmaW5hbCBxdWVzdGlvbm5haXJlIGlzIGF0dGFjaGVkLgotKQot KSBCUiwKLSkgVmVybwotKQotKSA+IC0tLS0tT3JpZ2luYWwgTWVzc2FnZS0tLS0tCi0pID4gRnJv bTogU3RpZyBWZW5hYXMgW21haWx0bzpzdGlnQHZlbmFhcy5jb21dCi0pID4gU2VudDogVGh1cnNk YXksIE1hcmNoIDA4LCAyMDEyIDU6MzIgQU0KLSkgPiBUbzogVmVybyBaaGVuZwotKSA+IENjOiBw aW1AaWV0Zi5vcmc7IFJpc2hhYmggUGFyZWtoIChyaXBhcmVraCk7IE1pa2UgTWNCcmlkZTsgTWFy c2hhbGwgRXViYW5rcwotKSA+IFN1YmplY3Q6IFJlOiBbcGltXSBDb2xsZWN0IENvbW1lbnRzIG9u IFJGQzQ2MDEgSW1wbGVtZW50YXRpb25zIGFuZAotKSA+IERlcGxveW1lbnRzIFN1cnZleSBRdWVz dGlvbm5haXJlIFJldmlzaW9uCi0pID4KLSkgPiBQbGVhc2UgcmVhZCBjYXJlZnVsbHkgd2hhdCBW ZXJvIHBvc3RlZCBhbmQgc2VlIGlmIGFueXRoaW5nIHNob3VsZCBiZQotKSA+IGNoYW5nZWQuIElm IG5vIGNvbW1lbnRzIGFyZSByZWNlaXZlZCBieSBNYXJjaCAyMm5kLCB0aGUgY3VycmVudCBzdXJ2 ZXkKLSkgPiB0ZXh0IHdpbGwgYmUgc2VudCBvdXQgdG8gaW1wbGVtZW50ZXJzL3ZlbmRvcnMgYW5k IG9wZXJhdG9ycyB0byBnZXQKLSkgPiB0aGVpciBpbmZvcm1hdGlvbi4KLSkgPgotKSA+IEl0IGlz IGltcG9ydGFudCB0aGF0IHdlIGdldCB0aGUgaW5mb3JtYXRpb24gd2Ugd2FudCwgc28gaWYgeW91 IGhhdmUgYW55Ci0pID4gdGhvdWdodHMgb24gdGhpcyBzdXJ2ZXksIHBsZWFzZSBwcm92aWRlIHlv dXIgaW5wdXQgYmVmb3JlIE1hcmNoIDIybmQuCi0pID4KLSkgPiBTdGlnCi0pCg==