From adrian@olddog.co.uk Thu May 3 08:53:59 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 184EC21F8652 for ; Thu, 3 May 2012 08:53:59 -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 N4eY3LZ4xfyU for ; Thu, 3 May 2012 08:53:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from asmtp1.iomartmail.com (asmtp1.iomartmail.com [62.128.201.248]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC3F921F8650 for ; Thu, 3 May 2012 08:53:57 -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 q43FrtMG024549 for ; Thu, 3 May 2012 16:53:55 +0100 Received: from 950129200 (173-167-193-1-ip-static.hfc.comcastbusiness.net [173.167.193.1]) (authenticated bits=0) by asmtp1.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q43FrrO7024501 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Thu, 3 May 2012 16:53:54 +0100 From: "Adrian Farrel" To: Date: Thu, 3 May 2012 16:53:52 +0100 Message-ID: <006401cd2944$f15532e0$d3ff98a0$@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: Ac0pROGsNxKDwAzcSza+qhUBoJn2+Q== Content-Language: en-gb Subject: [pim] Repeat request for help with Erratum on RFC 5384 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, 03 May 2012 15:53:59 -0000 Hi, Back in November, I asked... http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/pim/current/msg02332.html I can't find any responses. This is a brief extra call for help before I agree the Erratum (http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?eid=1597) A From stig@venaas.com Fri May 4 09:56:11 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 0258121F848E for ; Fri, 4 May 2012 09:56:11 -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 Tr5igMckYNc3 for ; Fri, 4 May 2012 09:56:10 -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 6530E21F8483 for ; Fri, 4 May 2012 09:56:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.21.100.192] (128-107-239-233.cisco.com [128.107.239.233]) by ufisa.uninett.no (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 958597FEB; Fri, 4 May 2012 18:56:06 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <4FA40A10.3000305@venaas.com> Date: Fri, 04 May 2012 09:55:44 -0700 From: Stig Venaas User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:12.0) Gecko/20120428 Thunderbird/12.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: adrian@olddog.co.uk References: <006401cd2944$f15532e0$d3ff98a0$@olddog.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <006401cd2944$f15532e0$d3ff98a0$@olddog.co.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: pim@ietf.org Subject: Re: [pim] Repeat request for help with Erratum on RFC 5384 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, 04 May 2012 16:56:11 -0000 On 03.05.2012 08:53, Adrian Farrel wrote: > Hi, > > Back in November, I asked... > > http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/pim/current/msg02332.html > > I can't find any responses. > > This is a brief extra call for help before I agree the Erratum > (http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?eid=1597) The erratum makes sense to me at least. I wish the authors of the RFC could speak up if they disagree, but it seems clear to me. Stig > A > > _______________________________________________ > pim mailing list > pim@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pim From marshall.eubanks@gmail.com Fri May 4 11:01:14 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 923C021F85AC for ; Fri, 4 May 2012 11:01:14 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -103.653 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.653 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.054, 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 xhG060b1ofCp for ; Fri, 4 May 2012 11:01:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-lpp01m010-f44.google.com (mail-lpp01m010-f44.google.com [209.85.215.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AAE3321F85AA for ; Fri, 4 May 2012 11:01:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: by lagj5 with SMTP id j5so2549076lag.31 for ; Fri, 04 May 2012 11:01:12 -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 :cc:content-type; bh=W/HKSQv8iT3XnjQr9CV+u/8sNDGPj7L8ZvK9rdlkyr8=; b=b8CUUAhdhEM7Xp7fEQu+yPryLNoH4TJo9AHt6eTFayB0T4OeGM1bBaMcif8kKqtJmz pujL70cVgI3olqp0EpTdhs4XZxg9+0LXw9VYbvEXRVxLteu/km68o2wufXTQMTutDjRp y7/+9WYpIuaNTHZ1K48ys7p8zolvIJdgtHLFbPPiT8d7vCoMntfX+AWE55RHHSrqnztY xLSfC4izFNz+LrVYf6z6eTctGOYCfSyqUTFgRL9tcpg+EtM3ShVGuR1ZAif18QLeF0gn DmcXgpNrIMHQ2AFu4+TnSgtoJ61C9ogpgY4Zfxghtz+VVOYAXz+BWacTzCLzNy0XkTLm kGHw== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.152.130.138 with SMTP id oe10mr6674865lab.5.1336154472683; Fri, 04 May 2012 11:01:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.112.56.13 with HTTP; Fri, 4 May 2012 11:01:12 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4FA40A10.3000305@venaas.com> References: <006401cd2944$f15532e0$d3ff98a0$@olddog.co.uk> <4FA40A10.3000305@venaas.com> Date: Fri, 4 May 2012 14:01:12 -0400 Message-ID: From: Marshall Eubanks To: Stig Venaas Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: pim@ietf.org Subject: Re: [pim] Repeat request for help with Erratum on RFC 5384 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, 04 May 2012 18:01:14 -0000 Yes, I read through this, and I think they are correct. I do agree with Stig about getting author by-in, though. Marshall On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 12:55 PM, Stig Venaas wrote: > On 03.05.2012 08:53, Adrian Farrel wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> Back in November, I asked... >> >> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/pim/current/msg02332.html >> >> I can't find any responses. >> >> This is a brief extra call for help before I agree the Erratum >> (http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?eid=1597) > > > The erratum makes sense to me at least. I wish the authors of > the RFC could speak up if they disagree, but it seems clear to me. > > Stig > > >> A >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 adrian@olddog.co.uk Tue May 8 08:42:08 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 4198111E80AF for ; Tue, 8 May 2012 08:42:08 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.465 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.465 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.134, 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 w1Mi1MNJh9iR for ; Tue, 8 May 2012 08:42:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from asmtp1.iomartmail.com (asmtp1.iomartmail.com [62.128.201.248]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5628711E8094 for ; Tue, 8 May 2012 08:42:07 -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 q48FdSZS008194; Tue, 8 May 2012 16:39:29 +0100 Received: from 950129200 (dsl-sp-81-140-15-32.in-addr.broadbandscope.com [81.140.15.32]) (authenticated bits=0) by asmtp1.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q48FdPdj008146 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Tue, 8 May 2012 16:39:26 +0100 From: "Adrian Farrel" To: "'IANA'" Date: Tue, 8 May 2012 16:39:25 +0100 Message-ID: <03c601cd2d30$bfb199a0$3f14cce0$@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: Ac0tMIxUUXpRbfPLS7mYcZukm3hgeg== Content-Language: en-gb Cc: pim@ietf.org, pim-chairs@tools.ietf.org Subject: [pim] IANA Registry update needed 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: Tue, 08 May 2012 15:42:08 -0000 Hi IANA, We have just verified an erratum against RFC 5384 that results in the need to update a registry. The erratum can be seen at http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?eid=1597 The registry is at http://www.iana.org/assignments/pim-parameters/pim-parameters.xml#pim-parameters -4 The registry is named "Encoded-Source Address Encoding Type Field" The entry to change is for value 1 The old text reads native encoding for the address family, but with zero or more PIM Join Attributes present The new text should native encoding for the address family, but with one or more PIM Join Attributes present Please also update the Reference to point to the erratum if that is possible. Thanks, Adrian From tom.taylor.stds@gmail.com Mon May 14 06:38:04 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 93F4421F8596 for ; Mon, 14 May 2012 06:38:04 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.469 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.469 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.130, 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 FElIVii6n8Ym for ; Mon, 14 May 2012 06:38:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-lpp01m010-f44.google.com (mail-lpp01m010-f44.google.com [209.85.215.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CCBBF21F854C for ; Mon, 14 May 2012 06:38:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: by lagv3 with SMTP id v3so2338406lag.31 for ; Mon, 14 May 2012 06:38:02 -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:cc:subject :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:x-antivirus :x-antivirus-status; bh=bRURzwIWP4Hh43YXj7rJXZ0CQq10gjEGI3mgmidKfgg=; b=0qNez8Zs0jnZmWnz52yJIabaVngba7RrpBdtvUvCNHLAM7MwjaHgXOPMe+v2IWQW+y IB8Vi9oow6H62xuJQvGybhOcPehuwAtbC9vvIRJUROHoue6q48favEl1YyxhDMZw75L4 VpfPxjpnCEhmJMvsAg4KbgHR2wNNZkFO2RaDXwiA4H3/dfBrCKi1BcJfBfrwveFIbu/X uVeoCbjIx1LW0nVoEXlKQuNNc3ncxDsv50voz5aRiZh06Q+iRXsjMC8psfIQ+4zYYSwG lsdTPE8uj6JcOWow9a3yfA9MYK3lH79EilYXGRW8CN76fdnSpOM5DP8PZtvEAQXUhz3R eIIA== Received: by 10.112.104.3 with SMTP id ga3mr3552672lbb.77.1337002682741; Mon, 14 May 2012 06:38:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (dsl-207-112-91-137.tor.primus.ca. [207.112.91.137]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id b3sm16325070lbh.6.2012.05.14.06.37.49 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Mon, 14 May 2012 06:38:01 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4FB10AA7.5000201@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 14 May 2012 09:37:43 -0400 From: Tom Taylor User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:12.0) Gecko/20120428 Thunderbird/12.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: pim@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 120514-0, 14/05/2012), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean Cc: Qiong Sun Subject: [pim] Where to go with draft-taylor-pim-v4v6-translation? 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, 14 May 2012 13:38:04 -0000 I am trying to figure out where to take draft-taylor-pim-v4v6-translation. We had an interesting discussion in Paris on routing where both IPv4 and IPv6 routes are available, and I could follow up on that, but it doesn't seem likely that we could get to the point of saying something useful very quickly. I suppose the first question to ask is whether dual-stack PIM routers, capable of translating in both directions, are already the general state of the art, so that advice on implementing them is pointless. There is definitely something useful to be said about translation of multicast data packets. Teemu Kiviniemi was kind enough to direct me to his Master's thesis, which contains a lot of useful discussion on this topic. Someone noted that translation of multicast data packets might deserve a separate draft, since it is common to IGMP/MLD interworking and PIM translation. RFC 6145 does not deal explicitly with multicast data packets, and there are, as Teemu's thesis points out, some differences between multicast and unicast. Comments? Tom Taylor From ietf-ipr@ietf.org Mon May 14 13:54:31 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 445A221F88C0; Mon, 14 May 2012 13:54:31 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.391 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.391 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.208, 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 k6IqJx13l6IR; Mon, 14 May 2012 13:54:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BDB6421F888B; Mon, 14 May 2012 13:54:30 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: IETF Secretariat To: lwei@cisco.com, hou@cisco.com, varya@directv.com, sjethwani@directv.com, yiqunc@microsoft.com X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 4.02 Message-ID: <20120514205430.10959.40277.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Mon, 14 May 2012 13:54:30 -0700 X-Mailman-Approved-At: Tue, 15 May 2012 10:35:36 -0700 Cc: mmcbride7@gmail.com, pim@ietf.org, ipr-announce@ietf.org Subject: [pim] IPR Disclosure: Cisco's Statement of IPR Related to draft-ietf-pim-ecmp-03 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, 14 May 2012 20:54:31 -0000 Dear Liming Wei, Heidi Ou, Vishal Arya, Sunil Jethwani, Yiqun Cai: An IPR disclosure that pertains to your Internet-Draft entitled "Protocol Independent Multicast ECMP Redirect" (draft-ietf-pim-ecmp) was submitted to= the IETF Secretariat on 2012-05-14 and has been posted on the "IETF Page of Intellectual Property Rights Disclosures" (https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/1780/). The title of the IPR disclosure is "Cisco's Statement of IPR Related to draft-ietf-pim-ecmp-03.""); The IETF Secretariat From mmcbride7@gmail.com Tue May 15 12:49:19 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 7545C21F86A7 for ; Tue, 15 May 2012 12:49:19 -0700 (PDT) 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 SN5E7jHj+nUh for ; Tue, 15 May 2012 12:49:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-gg0-f172.google.com (mail-gg0-f172.google.com [209.85.161.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E2AD521F869A for ; Tue, 15 May 2012 12:49:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: by ggnc4 with SMTP id c4so3262036ggn.31 for ; Tue, 15 May 2012 12:49:18 -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:content-transfer-encoding; bh=XLrm7jO3hoq504Kw6ytvnpj7+IOs/91cltFxpkC/yKM=; b=W1gHMY1P4sNggKuwgi7sJLgDH1d+37r/CVRsFqjwcRE6fgsm2vJv5IlgOqfWavUv8h pGc9zdZ0IE5oG416hJ04+8SsFfR3pyPRlwbOkASXRDupPH5Yu/2Ql2pNSOFRHLHDy5C+ W3zOE4xuCB0GM5vo6GZw1By2Adc/c7QCRZZWtvQVFw0FSq91zcQYqX76W69RwtNjGleV KARQSOc6d8XpVTyhC9uRyrp9bDX04KyjcCtgFmKRS1Dt1WRm4ucFaB5rmPSJtrlIiGgJ veiK5cRwYX6VXl2zAzy20QokPtbfjnpbW8Y43HO7R8k4Gol+0VjPneplwhvrOXdPpz99 5evw== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.50.76.136 with SMTP id k8mr248090igw.2.1337111358079; Tue, 15 May 2012 12:49:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.64.8.111 with HTTP; Tue, 15 May 2012 12:49:17 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20120514205430.10959.40277.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> References: <20120514205430.10959.40277.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Tue, 15 May 2012 12:49:17 -0700 Message-ID: From: Mike McBride To: pim@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [pim] IPR Disclosure: Cisco's Statement of IPR Related to draft-ietf-pim-ecmp-03 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, 15 May 2012 19:49:19 -0000 During the document write-up it was found that there is IPR on draft-ietf-pim-ecmp-03 which has now been formally disclosed. Please speak up if this alters the working group consensus to have the draft published as a Standards Track document. I will wait a week for responses before sending the write-up to Adrian. thanks, mike On Mon, May 14, 2012 at 1:54 PM, IETF Secretariat wrote= : > > Dear Liming Wei, Heidi Ou, Vishal Arya, Sunil Jethwani, Yiqun Cai: > > =A0An IPR disclosure that pertains to your Internet-Draft entitled "Proto= col > Independent Multicast ECMP Redirect" (draft-ietf-pim-ecmp) was submitted = to the > IETF Secretariat on 2012-05-14 and has been posted on the "IETF Page of > Intellectual Property Rights Disclosures" > (https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/1780/). The title of the IPR disclosure= is > "Cisco's Statement of IPR Related to draft-ietf-pim-ecmp-03.""); > > The IETF Secretariat > From marshall.eubanks@gmail.com Tue May 15 15:34:49 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 0B5C911E80B7 for ; Tue, 15 May 2012 15:34:49 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -103.632 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.632 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.033, 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 Otqui3KI9Edm for ; Tue, 15 May 2012 15:34:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-lpp01m010-f44.google.com (mail-lpp01m010-f44.google.com [209.85.215.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E241911E80AF for ; Tue, 15 May 2012 15:34:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: by lagv3 with SMTP id v3so70842lag.31 for ; Tue, 15 May 2012 15:34:46 -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 :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=VIlG+8aXKzSyc5cFEo7TC0REfwRP+2wJl9pvk9G+Nyg=; b=fSTR5NuO0gb921XkRb3tGhcSlROS5bS0Tnlexfox1ngi2xhxuMTZwDcw3ztCdAypFN cwy7d0kaR58D2gcaI8I2HGTnLDDUfxmUNysoLZXrR5giJs9AuBTXw6TXxP18Jd9mGJPi 52o68ewflu46EmLqoPz3+sNsrj8/hXUiSnnEks6Ker4PiPEvySEqPgMk/MVHckfV2g6p XoVvRjnsJJ9iN+Q72jYvFzCwFMazSE1z5U2XSMZfPJou30o2tQyGmpmWVLuEW4GCslpK WG92bXP6eVytzw7eGlKtU4ge/QciM7ziFvgJNxnsSQ5QD/qLh2f2Dt3FirZ0kI8h/hAB n8Qw== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.152.128.201 with SMTP id nq9mr667287lab.26.1337121286903; Tue, 15 May 2012 15:34:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.112.56.13 with HTTP; Tue, 15 May 2012 15:34:46 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <20120514205430.10959.40277.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Tue, 15 May 2012 18:34:46 -0400 Message-ID: From: Marshall Eubanks To: Mike McBride Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: pim@ietf.org Subject: Re: [pim] IPR Disclosure: Cisco's Statement of IPR Related to draft-ietf-pim-ecmp-03 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, 15 May 2012 22:34:49 -0000 I can't actually find this patent on the uspto.gov web site, which I assume is because it was sent in yesterday. Could we wait until we actually can get a look at it before we decide this (or, can someone send me a URL for the patent)? Regards Marshall On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 3:49 PM, Mike McBride wrote: > During the document write-up it was found that there is IPR on > draft-ietf-pim-ecmp-03 which has now been formally disclosed. Please > speak up if this alters the working group consensus to have the draft > published as a Standards Track document. I will wait a week for > responses before sending the write-up to Adrian. > > thanks, > mike > > On Mon, May 14, 2012 at 1:54 PM, IETF Secretariat wro= te: >> >> Dear Liming Wei, Heidi Ou, Vishal Arya, Sunil Jethwani, Yiqun Cai: >> >> =A0An IPR disclosure that pertains to your Internet-Draft entitled "Prot= ocol >> Independent Multicast ECMP Redirect" (draft-ietf-pim-ecmp) was submitted= to the >> IETF Secretariat on 2012-05-14 and has been posted on the "IETF Page of >> Intellectual Property Rights Disclosures" >> (https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/1780/). The title of the IPR disclosur= e is >> "Cisco's Statement of IPR Related to draft-ietf-pim-ecmp-03.""); >> >> The IETF Secretariat >> > _______________________________________________ > pim mailing list > pim@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pim From hou@cisco.com Tue May 15 22:33:19 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 1123821F8686 for ; Tue, 15 May 2012 22:33:19 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -8.867 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.867 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.335, BAYES_00=-2.599, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=1.396, 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 oYpP-ICXOhMo for ; Tue, 15 May 2012 22:33:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mtv-iport-3.cisco.com (mtv-iport-3.cisco.com [173.36.130.14]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 56A7921F867C for ; Tue, 15 May 2012 22:33:18 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=hou@cisco.com; l=1909; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1337146398; x=1338355998; h=date:subject:from:to:cc:message-id:in-reply-to: mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=E4A2PEinUl9ajydMmY85p+4HM5irwwdx/26n4s1uuRM=; b=DRrRdFu9yRyXHHxfI3dDkLZtQNWHDe42cXLDoSxJwA8/3IVV3AWsVmku 4Y/kmKvm5khDrXBt738GPVSQEh/gL63W3xfZeRl0uZ3corCmxZdYK+wvc EKL12qhf/8xOVsgJPbl659wbbZW6woZ+JpHcvShUbv2VGEb4Jc1bsJHdd c=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Av8EAM46s0+rRDoJ/2dsb2JhbABEtASBB4IVAQEBAwEBAQEPASkBMQsFDQEIGE8GMAEBBAENBSKHXgMGBAELmxOWOA2JU4ouboVYBIgwNI0ZgRGKLIMagWmDCQ X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.75,600,1330905600"; d="scan'208";a="42401245" Received: from mtv-core-4.cisco.com ([171.68.58.9]) by mtv-iport-3.cisco.com with ESMTP; 16 May 2012 05:33:18 +0000 Received: from xbh-sjc-211.amer.cisco.com (xbh-sjc-211.cisco.com [171.70.151.144]) by mtv-core-4.cisco.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id q4G5XHxq021929; Wed, 16 May 2012 05:33:17 GMT Received: from xmb-sjc-231.amer.cisco.com ([128.107.191.73]) by xbh-sjc-211.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Tue, 15 May 2012 22:33:17 -0700 Received: from 10.21.125.250 ([10.21.125.250]) by xmb-sjc-231.amer.cisco.com ([128.107.191.73]) with Microsoft Exchange Server HTTP-DAV ; Wed, 16 May 2012 05:33:16 +0000 User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/12.26.0.100708 Date: Tue, 15 May 2012 22:33:16 -0700 From: Heidi Ou To: Marshall Eubanks , Mike McBride Message-ID: Thread-Topic: [pim] IPR Disclosure: Cisco's Statement of IPR Related to draft-ietf-pim-ecmp-03 Thread-Index: Ac0zJWS0Tq66nJS1RUSff9bLoUNtJw== In-Reply-To: Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable X-OriginalArrivalTime: 16 May 2012 05:33:17.0471 (UTC) FILETIME=[65956AF0:01CD3325] Cc: pim@ietf.org Subject: Re: [pim] IPR Disclosure: Cisco's Statement of IPR Related to draft-ietf-pim-ecmp-03 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, 16 May 2012 05:33:19 -0000 Marshall, The patent application was filed early last year with US patent office. The approval process may take a while. Thanks - Heidi On 5/15/12 3:34 PM, "Marshall Eubanks" wrote: > I can't actually find this patent on the uspto.gov web site, which I > assume is because it was > sent in yesterday. Could we wait until we actually can get a look at > it before we decide this (or, > can someone send me a URL for the patent)? >=20 > Regards > Marshall >=20 >=20 > On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 3:49 PM, Mike McBride wrote= : >> During the document write-up it was found that there is IPR on >> draft-ietf-pim-ecmp-03 which has now been formally disclosed. Please >> speak up if this alters the working group consensus to have the draft >> published as a Standards Track document. I will wait a week for >> responses before sending the write-up to Adrian. >>=20 >> thanks, >> mike >>=20 >> On Mon, May 14, 2012 at 1:54 PM, IETF Secretariat wr= ote: >>>=20 >>> Dear Liming Wei, Heidi Ou, Vishal Arya, Sunil Jethwani, Yiqun Cai: >>>=20 >>> =A0An IPR disclosure that pertains to your Internet-Draft entitled "Proto= col >>> Independent Multicast ECMP Redirect" (draft-ietf-pim-ecmp) was submitte= d to >>> the >>> IETF Secretariat on 2012-05-14 and has been posted on the "IETF Page of >>> Intellectual Property Rights Disclosures" >>> (https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/1780/). The title of the IPR disclosu= re is >>> "Cisco's Statement of IPR Related to draft-ietf-pim-ecmp-03.""); >>>=20 >>> The IETF Secretariat >>>=20 >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 adrian@olddog.co.uk Wed May 16 14:50:00 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 20B6521F8742 for ; Wed, 16 May 2012 14:50:00 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.539 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.539 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.060, 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 R8zWHOem5o1p for ; Wed, 16 May 2012 14:49:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from asmtp3.iomartmail.com (asmtp3.iomartmail.com [62.128.201.159]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 25A6521F8724 for ; Wed, 16 May 2012 14:49:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from asmtp3.iomartmail.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by asmtp3.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q4GLntGT027230; Wed, 16 May 2012 22:49:55 +0100 Received: from 950129200 (dsl-sp-81-140-15-32.in-addr.broadbandscope.com [81.140.15.32]) (authenticated bits=0) by asmtp3.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q4GLnsXI027197 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Wed, 16 May 2012 22:49:54 +0100 From: "Adrian Farrel" To: "'Heidi Ou'" , "'Marshall Eubanks'" , "'Mike McBride'" References: In-Reply-To: Date: Wed, 16 May 2012 22:49:50 +0100 Message-ID: <09cc01cd33ad$d38a7e00$7a9f7a00$@olddog.co.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0 Thread-Index: AQJm1JpJ3lJwnTuGaOTsglTCOmtJXZWZskEg Content-Language: en-gb Cc: pim@ietf.org Subject: Re: [pim] IPR Disclosure: Cisco's Statement of IPR Related to draft-ietf-pim-ecmp-03 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: Wed, 16 May 2012 21:50:00 -0000 Yes, I think the number is an application number. It would still be useful if someone could point to a copy, but I = understand this may be hard. Adrian > -----Original Message----- > From: pim-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:pim-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of = Heidi > Ou > Sent: 16 May 2012 06:33 > To: Marshall Eubanks; Mike McBride > Cc: pim@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [pim] IPR Disclosure: Cisco's Statement of IPR Related to draft-ietf- > pim-ecmp-03 >=20 > Marshall, >=20 > The patent application was filed early last year with US patent = office. The > approval process may take a while. >=20 > Thanks > - Heidi >=20 >=20 > On 5/15/12 3:34 PM, "Marshall Eubanks" = wrote: >=20 > > I can't actually find this patent on the uspto.gov web site, which I > > assume is because it was > > sent in yesterday. Could we wait until we actually can get a look at > > it before we decide this (or, > > can someone send me a URL for the patent)? > > > > Regards > > Marshall > > > > > > On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 3:49 PM, Mike McBride > wrote: > >> During the document write-up it was found that there is IPR on > >> draft-ietf-pim-ecmp-03 which has now been formally disclosed. = Please > >> speak up if this alters the working group consensus to have the = draft > >> published as a Standards Track document. I will wait a week for > >> responses before sending the write-up to Adrian. > >> > >> thanks, > >> mike > >> > >> On Mon, May 14, 2012 at 1:54 PM, IETF Secretariat = wrote: > >>> > >>> Dear Liming Wei, Heidi Ou, Vishal Arya, Sunil Jethwani, Yiqun Cai: > >>> > >>> =A0An IPR disclosure that pertains to your Internet-Draft entitled = "Protocol > >>> Independent Multicast ECMP Redirect" (draft-ietf-pim-ecmp) was = submitted > to > >>> the > >>> IETF Secretariat on 2012-05-14 and has been posted on the "IETF = Page of > >>> Intellectual Property Rights Disclosures" > >>> (https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/1780/). The title of the IPR = disclosure is > >>> "Cisco's Statement of IPR Related to draft-ietf-pim-ecmp-03.""); > >>> > >>> The IETF Secretariat > >>> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> 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 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > pim mailing list > pim@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pim From marshall.eubanks@gmail.com Wed May 16 19:31:34 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 6B0FC11E8091 for ; Wed, 16 May 2012 19:31:34 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -103.647 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.647 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.048, 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 bVPJe1V7sZMR for ; Wed, 16 May 2012 19:31:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-lpp01m010-f44.google.com (mail-lpp01m010-f44.google.com [209.85.215.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 21C8711E8096 for ; Wed, 16 May 2012 19:31:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: by lagv3 with SMTP id v3so1117383lag.31 for ; Wed, 16 May 2012 19:31:32 -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 :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=EDE6SFVB/7ENCGT11LQVvoLkt3PTeRw4gKryYux+5x4=; b=Jjn8+rrsMK7skcdwL8G/SYthS/Wh6BOj23vSnAY1e7SQS/nYDogfKpqpp2DqHRsjul FDhzJIkezZ3/UcaCeweZ6xHpoiOYkboqex2gSbe5FX5IDs7V440ee30skUs19OdsOHLc FErnRWLNHEitahhnHwandosaNresudWfERtYGZM6r290ARQzJSo73ihO6jxQUgSNPkp3 lXiEbYH9Zj5Drzizn+MQdg6BP4mHFBEs2cjjEvhi2AeG9NoFNRRGxz0YSbEwjAQb4fCQ iCTkoRqlPNk26NtRFSMCxsmxMET09jAM2B+ZZQd+48CdTIckei1Dc625VanMbN3PXiUf 8J5w== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.112.40.36 with SMTP id u4mr2434272lbk.70.1337221892067; Wed, 16 May 2012 19:31:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.112.56.13 with HTTP; Wed, 16 May 2012 19:31:31 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <09cc01cd33ad$d38a7e00$7a9f7a00$@olddog.co.uk> References: <09cc01cd33ad$d38a7e00$7a9f7a00$@olddog.co.uk> Date: Wed, 16 May 2012 22:31:31 -0400 Message-ID: From: Marshall Eubanks To: adrian@olddog.co.uk Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: Mike McBride , pim@ietf.org Subject: Re: [pim] IPR Disclosure: Cisco's Statement of IPR Related to draft-ietf-pim-ecmp-03 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, 17 May 2012 02:31:34 -0000 On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 5:49 PM, Adrian Farrel wrote: > Yes, > > I think the number is an application number. You can retrieve applications directly from the USPTO. http://appft1.uspto.gov/netahtml/PTO/search-bool.html It says, "Data current through May 10, 2012." The IPR statement says https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/1780/ Cisco is the owner of US Patent Application Serial No. 12/932,604 relating to the subject matter of "Protocol Independent Multicast ECMP Redirect" On the number, I get Results of Search in db for: "12/932,604": 0 applications. No application publications have matched your query (Note : Valid patent applications have numbers like 20121234567, so the above # doesn't look right to me.) On the name, the same lack of results. Results of Search in db for: "Protocol Independent Multicast ECMP Redirect": 0 applications. A _very_ cursory search finds a patent application in the database from as recently as April 26, 2012. Obviously, if the above is a bad application number, it should be corrected. In any case, I would like to see it in the USPTO DB before I come to any conclusion about this IPR statement. Regards Marshall > > It would still be useful if someone could point to a copy, but I understa= nd this > may be hard. > > Adrian > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: pim-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:pim-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of He= idi >> Ou >> Sent: 16 May 2012 06:33 >> To: Marshall Eubanks; Mike McBride >> Cc: pim@ietf.org >> Subject: Re: [pim] IPR Disclosure: Cisco's Statement of IPR Related to > draft-ietf- >> pim-ecmp-03 >> >> Marshall, >> >> The patent application was filed early last year with US patent office. = The >> approval process may take a while. >> >> Thanks >> - Heidi >> >> >> On 5/15/12 3:34 PM, "Marshall Eubanks" wrot= e: >> >> > I can't actually find this patent on the uspto.gov web site, which I >> > assume is because it was >> > sent in yesterday. Could we wait until we actually can get a look at >> > it before we decide this (or, >> > can someone send me a URL for the patent)? >> > >> > Regards >> > Marshall >> > >> > >> > On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 3:49 PM, Mike McBride >> wrote: >> >> During the document write-up it was found that there is IPR on >> >> draft-ietf-pim-ecmp-03 which has now been formally disclosed. Please >> >> speak up if this alters the working group consensus to have the draft >> >> published as a Standards Track document. I will wait a week for >> >> responses before sending the write-up to Adrian. >> >> >> >> thanks, >> >> mike >> >> >> >> On Mon, May 14, 2012 at 1:54 PM, IETF Secretariat > wrote: >> >>> >> >>> Dear Liming Wei, Heidi Ou, Vishal Arya, Sunil Jethwani, Yiqun Cai: >> >>> >> >>> =A0An IPR disclosure that pertains to your Internet-Draft entitled "= Protocol >> >>> Independent Multicast ECMP Redirect" (draft-ietf-pim-ecmp) was submi= tted >> to >> >>> the >> >>> IETF Secretariat on 2012-05-14 and has been posted on the "IETF Page= of >> >>> Intellectual Property Rights Disclosures" >> >>> (https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/1780/). The title of the IPR discl= osure > is >> >>> "Cisco's Statement of IPR Related to draft-ietf-pim-ecmp-03.""); >> >>> >> >>> The IETF Secretariat >> >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> 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 >> >> _______________________________________________ >> pim mailing list >> pim@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pim > From hou@cisco.com Thu May 17 09:57:10 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 1F7DD21F86B2 for ; Thu, 17 May 2012 09:57:10 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -9.633 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.633 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.966, 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 c--E6AvnLYZn for ; Thu, 17 May 2012 09:57:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mtv-iport-2.cisco.com (mtv-iport-2.cisco.com [173.36.130.13]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3E11C21F86A6 for ; Thu, 17 May 2012 09:57:09 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=hou@cisco.com; l=4503; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1337273829; x=1338483429; h=date:subject:from:to:cc:message-id:in-reply-to: mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=tIFBuVVbRbUSTsOmjokedBsufiBTvdjXbQPW8i3k5MI=; b=AC3f6IJG/Dg6TXSRCeDqbeXiGei+FSPDNTBLcSYFIAEVocu8vICUDS52 P/dv5BQDyuHdwsHb1K7W91HfjcJs2+qUJqkuXXJE4YBKHVhtZcWztrdE0 nqgsCT/J/S1ZWzohlTwFXZR33OPKsgPwETEo/bDXMBFuTyoVyClOB4f82 c=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Av8EAMgstU+rRDoH/2dsb2JhbABEs0CBB4IVAQEBAwEBAQEPASkBMQsFBwYBCBEEAQEBJygGHwkIAQEEAQ0FIodeAwYEAQubb5YoDYlTiiRvhVcDiC80jReBEYosgxqBaYMJ X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.75,611,1330905600"; d="scan'208";a="45199725" Received: from mtv-core-2.cisco.com ([171.68.58.7]) by mtv-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 17 May 2012 16:57:09 +0000 Received: from xbh-sjc-221.amer.cisco.com (xbh-sjc-221.cisco.com [128.107.191.63]) by mtv-core-2.cisco.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id q4HGv87Q001767; Thu, 17 May 2012 16:57:08 GMT Received: from xmb-sjc-231.amer.cisco.com ([128.107.191.73]) by xbh-sjc-221.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Thu, 17 May 2012 09:57:08 -0700 Received: from 10.154.210.14 ([10.154.210.14]) by xmb-sjc-231.amer.cisco.com ([128.107.191.73]) with Microsoft Exchange Server HTTP-DAV ; Thu, 17 May 2012 16:57:08 +0000 User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/12.26.0.100708 Date: Thu, 17 May 2012 09:57:07 -0700 From: Heidi Ou To: Marshall Eubanks , Message-ID: Thread-Topic: [pim] IPR Disclosure: Cisco's Statement of IPR Related to draft-ietf-pim-ecmp-03 Thread-Index: Ac00TheAPz47kBt39Ee1UslvcZpD4Q== In-Reply-To: Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable X-OriginalArrivalTime: 17 May 2012 16:57:08.0711 (UTC) FILETIME=[18858770:01CD344E] Cc: Mike McBride , pim@ietf.org Subject: Re: [pim] IPR Disclosure: Cisco's Statement of IPR Related to draft-ietf-pim-ecmp-03 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, 17 May 2012 16:57:10 -0000 Marshall, It takes about 18 months from the date of filing for an application to be published. Before an application is published, it is not accessible to the general public (only the attorneys listed on the customer number associated with the application have access). Thanks - Heidi On 5/16/12 7:31 PM, "Marshall Eubanks" wrote: > On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 5:49 PM, Adrian Farrel wrot= e: >> Yes, >>=20 >> I think the number is an application number. >=20 > You can retrieve applications directly from the USPTO. >=20 > http://appft1.uspto.gov/netahtml/PTO/search-bool.html >=20 > It says, "Data current through May 10, 2012." >=20 > The IPR statement says >=20 > https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/1780/ >=20 > Cisco is the owner of US Patent Application Serial No. 12/932,604 > relating to the subject matter of > "Protocol Independent Multicast ECMP Redirect" >=20 > On the number, I get >=20 > Results of Search in db for: > "12/932,604": 0 applications. >=20 > No application publications have matched your query >=20 > (Note : Valid patent applications have numbers like > 20121234567, so the above # doesn't look right to me.) >=20 > On the name, the same lack of results. >=20 > Results of Search in db for: > "Protocol Independent Multicast ECMP Redirect": 0 applications. >=20 > A _very_ cursory search finds a patent application in the database > from as recently as April 26, 2012. >=20 > Obviously, if the above is a bad application number, it should be > corrected. In any case, I would like to see it in the USPTO DB before > I come to any conclusion about this IPR statement. >=20 > Regards > Marshall >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 >>=20 >> It would still be useful if someone could point to a copy, but I underst= and >> this >> may be hard. >>=20 >> Adrian >>=20 >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: pim-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:pim-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of H= eidi >>> Ou >>> Sent: 16 May 2012 06:33 >>> To: Marshall Eubanks; Mike McBride >>> Cc: pim@ietf.org >>> Subject: Re: [pim] IPR Disclosure: Cisco's Statement of IPR Related to >> draft-ietf- >>> pim-ecmp-03 >>>=20 >>> Marshall, >>>=20 >>> The patent application was filed early last year with US patent office.= The >>> approval process may take a while. >>>=20 >>> Thanks >>> - Heidi >>>=20 >>>=20 >>> On 5/15/12 3:34 PM, "Marshall Eubanks" wro= te: >>>=20 >>>> I can't actually find this patent on the uspto.gov web site, which I >>>> assume is because it was >>>> sent in yesterday. Could we wait until we actually can get a look at >>>> it before we decide this (or, >>>> can someone send me a URL for the patent)? >>>>=20 >>>> Regards >>>> Marshall >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>> On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 3:49 PM, Mike McBride >>> wrote: >>>>> During the document write-up it was found that there is IPR on >>>>> draft-ietf-pim-ecmp-03 which has now been formally disclosed. Please >>>>> speak up if this alters the working group consensus to have the draft >>>>> published as a Standards Track document. I will wait a week for >>>>> responses before sending the write-up to Adrian. >>>>>=20 >>>>> thanks, >>>>> mike >>>>>=20 >>>>> On Mon, May 14, 2012 at 1:54 PM, IETF Secretariat >> wrote: >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> Dear Liming Wei, Heidi Ou, Vishal Arya, Sunil Jethwani, Yiqun Cai: >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> =A0An IPR disclosure that pertains to your Internet-Draft entitled >>>>>> "Protocol >>>>>> Independent Multicast ECMP Redirect" (draft-ietf-pim-ecmp) was submi= tted >>> to >>>>>> the >>>>>> IETF Secretariat on 2012-05-14 and has been posted on the "IETF Page= of >>>>>> Intellectual Property Rights Disclosures" >>>>>> (https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/1780/). The title of the IPR discl= osure >> is >>>>>> "Cisco's Statement of IPR Related to draft-ietf-pim-ecmp-03.""); >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> The IETF Secretariat >>>>>>=20 >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> 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 >>>=20 >>> _______________________________________________ >>> pim mailing list >>> pim@ietf.org >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pim >>=20 From adrian@olddog.co.uk Fri May 18 02:09:19 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 055D221F8663 for ; Fri, 18 May 2012 02:09:18 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.534 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.534 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.065, 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 7ff1FG9Ko-4M for ; Fri, 18 May 2012 02:09:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from asmtp2.iomartmail.com (asmtp2.iomartmail.com [62.128.201.249]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB73D21F8657 for ; Fri, 18 May 2012 02:09:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from asmtp2.iomartmail.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by asmtp2.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q4I99DOj022823 for ; Fri, 18 May 2012 10:09:13 +0100 Received: from 950129200 (dsl-sp-81-140-15-32.in-addr.broadbandscope.com [81.140.15.32]) (authenticated bits=0) by asmtp2.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q4I99Ao9022776 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Fri, 18 May 2012 10:09:12 +0100 From: "Adrian Farrel" To: References: <03c601cd2d30$bfb199a0$3f14cce0$@olddog.co.uk> In-Reply-To: Date: Fri, 18 May 2012 10:09:08 +0100 Message-ID: <0db201cd34d5$e2cfa5b0$a86ef110$@olddog.co.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0 Thread-Index: AQGFYiAOAhh7pnYjnTEncjXFHrziIAE/Bz6+AP0EwuKXTQcGQA== Content-Language: en-gb Subject: [pim] FW: [IANA #565745] IANA Registry update needed - PIM 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: Fri, 18 May 2012 09:09:19 -0000 FYI Adrian > -----Original Message----- > From: Pearl Liang via RT [mailto:iana-matrix@iana.org] > Sent: 17 May 2012 23:59 > To: adrian@olddog.co.uk > Subject: [IANA #565745] IANA Registry update needed - PIM > > Hi Adrian, > > This is done. Please see > > http://www.iana.org/assignments/pim-parameters/pim-parameters.xml#pim- > parameters-4 > > Sorry for the delay. > > Thank you, > ~pearl > > On Tue May 08 10:00:27 2012, adrian@olddog.co.uk wrote: > > Hi IANA, > > > > We have just verified an erratum against RFC 5384 that results in the > > need to > > update a registry. > > > > The erratum can be seen at http://www.rfc- > > editor.org/errata_search.php?eid=1597 > > > > The registry is at > > http://www.iana.org/assignments/pim-parameters/pim-parameters.xml#pim- > > parameters > > -4 > > The registry is named "Encoded-Source Address Encoding Type Field" > > The entry to change is for value 1 > > The old text reads > > native encoding for the address family, but with zero or more PIM > > Join > > Attributes present > > The new text should > > native encoding for the address family, but with one or more PIM > > Join > > Attributes present > > > > Please also update the Reference to point to the erratum if that is > > possible. > > > > Thanks, > > Adrian > > From mmcbride7@gmail.com Fri May 18 15:01:47 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 AEFCD21F8576 for ; Fri, 18 May 2012 15:01:47 -0700 (PDT) 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 SZC5THvkIIV7 for ; Fri, 18 May 2012 15:01:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-gh0-f172.google.com (mail-gh0-f172.google.com [209.85.160.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AAAF621F854F for ; Fri, 18 May 2012 15:01:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: by ghbg16 with SMTP id g16so177130ghb.31 for ; Fri, 18 May 2012 15:01:46 -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 :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=9SXUMqN6deJ6jOKb8AWTTZ54oM/mu81chylqJdMfjc4=; b=Q0SqnaiL3JpWcsjX6pAKdBSK5TnITWXD5nEWx66YBGJsTnuvdvOhfoEIPE8tHf4pNV 73zn2/JFwlPUhM8fu2KsR0UPA/1G8TJtYkNDuQFT39ByAXlyYnvRg3YYAbOOFb1slxjO zGPhat8SqLHfk7exQZ1Kizgz56l8iokSajS0xaE8rcFFZ72+CWWijMSPZ1PkbwzmlHE7 fXiQ2/GEn5Jo6bYIX7tJe6CIkr3+mHh+SF4FTtCybozHQj9IPPkrjWTfq7rEBB1C0Zwm nN3Zx66vbZYQpCVpyKAr2ITstoqwbddl3ovocPF1VCrCLFUHzgmFZuEV0JWl6vvT7nJ1 MKcg== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.50.179.105 with SMTP id df9mr2093974igc.4.1337378505808; Fri, 18 May 2012 15:01:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.64.8.111 with HTTP; Fri, 18 May 2012 15:01:45 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Fri, 18 May 2012 15:01:45 -0700 Message-ID: From: Mike McBride To: Heidi Ou Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: pim@ietf.org, Marshall Eubanks Subject: Re: [pim] IPR Disclosure: Cisco's Statement of IPR Related to draft-ietf-pim-ecmp-03 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, 18 May 2012 22:01:47 -0000 The disclosure that IPR exists should suffice and the official RFC editor IPR declaration will be included in the document before it is published. If anyone would like details on the IPR please contact Heidi directly. thanks, mike On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 9:57 AM, Heidi Ou wrote: > Marshall, > > It takes about 18 months from the date of filing for an application to be > published. Before an application is published, it is not accessible to th= e > general public (only the attorneys listed on the customer number associat= ed > with the application have access). > > > Thanks > - Heidi > > On 5/16/12 7:31 PM, "Marshall Eubanks" wrote= : > >> On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 5:49 PM, Adrian Farrel wro= te: >>> Yes, >>> >>> I think the number is an application number. >> >> You can retrieve applications directly from the USPTO. >> >> http://appft1.uspto.gov/netahtml/PTO/search-bool.html >> >> It says, "Data current through May 10, 2012." >> >> The IPR statement says >> >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/1780/ >> >> Cisco is the owner of US Patent Application Serial No. 12/932,604 >> relating to the subject matter of >> "Protocol Independent Multicast ECMP Redirect" >> >> On the number, I get >> >> Results of Search in db for: >> "12/932,604": 0 applications. >> >> No application publications have matched your query >> >> (Note : Valid patent applications have numbers like >> =A020121234567, so the above # doesn't look right to me.) >> >> On the name, the same lack of results. >> >> Results of Search in db for: >> "Protocol Independent Multicast ECMP Redirect": 0 applications. >> >> A _very_ cursory search finds a patent application in the database >> from as recently as April 26, 2012. >> >> Obviously, if the above is a bad application number, it should be >> corrected. In any case, I would like to see it in the USPTO DB before >> I come to any conclusion about this IPR statement. >> >> Regards >> Marshall >> >> >> >> >> >>> >>> It would still be useful if someone could point to a copy, but I unders= tand >>> this >>> may be hard. >>> >>> Adrian >>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: pim-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:pim-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of = Heidi >>>> Ou >>>> Sent: 16 May 2012 06:33 >>>> To: Marshall Eubanks; Mike McBride >>>> Cc: pim@ietf.org >>>> Subject: Re: [pim] IPR Disclosure: Cisco's Statement of IPR Related to >>> draft-ietf- >>>> pim-ecmp-03 >>>> >>>> Marshall, >>>> >>>> The patent application was filed early last year with US patent office= . The >>>> approval process may take a while. >>>> >>>> Thanks >>>> - Heidi >>>> >>>> >>>> On 5/15/12 3:34 PM, "Marshall Eubanks" wr= ote: >>>> >>>>> I can't actually find this patent on the uspto.gov web site, which I >>>>> assume is because it was >>>>> sent in yesterday. Could we wait until we actually can get a look at >>>>> it before we decide this (or, >>>>> can someone send me a URL for the patent)? >>>>> >>>>> Regards >>>>> Marshall >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 3:49 PM, Mike McBride >>>> wrote: >>>>>> During the document write-up it was found that there is IPR on >>>>>> draft-ietf-pim-ecmp-03 which has now been formally disclosed. Please >>>>>> speak up if this alters the working group consensus to have the draf= t >>>>>> published as a Standards Track document. I will wait a week for >>>>>> responses before sending the write-up to Adrian. >>>>>> >>>>>> thanks, >>>>>> mike >>>>>> >>>>>> On Mon, May 14, 2012 at 1:54 PM, IETF Secretariat >>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Dear Liming Wei, Heidi Ou, Vishal Arya, Sunil Jethwani, Yiqun Cai: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> =A0An IPR disclosure that pertains to your Internet-Draft entitled >>>>>>> "Protocol >>>>>>> Independent Multicast ECMP Redirect" (draft-ietf-pim-ecmp) was subm= itted >>>> to >>>>>>> the >>>>>>> IETF Secretariat on 2012-05-14 and has been posted on the "IETF Pag= e of >>>>>>> Intellectual Property Rights Disclosures" >>>>>>> (https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/1780/). The title of the IPR disc= losure >>> is >>>>>>> "Cisco's Statement of IPR Related to draft-ietf-pim-ecmp-03.""); >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The IETF Secretariat >>>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> 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 >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> pim mailing list >>>> pim@ietf.org >>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pim >>> > From marshall.eubanks@gmail.com Fri May 18 20:42:47 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 5DDF49E802A for ; Fri, 18 May 2012 20:42:47 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -103.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[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 oUmHOaIhZCwn for ; Fri, 18 May 2012 20:42:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-lpp01m010-f44.google.com (mail-lpp01m010-f44.google.com [209.85.215.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC3B09E801F for ; Fri, 18 May 2012 20:42:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: by lagv3 with SMTP id v3so2853305lag.31 for ; Fri, 18 May 2012 20:42:45 -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 :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=xwcyK30bPYpCJwRognG4O1E7sK5hzEGn8Go72srvw5A=; b=bWQ1mBDGIZ8cG6sCI321cmWvm7goacUwL6Epi4xNAv0I5WhSLK3dSKoTaUp6w7aeLN zHC0VBMfkrsbuI9gKuVJ9nLCFIkSqY6YF7K3j2bksgHDR7b3rCiXAhU43icXiCWkNhkA f9NuEwRTduJ2ObtHxzvPhg++kysxS+BXzul6dZUCgvoy9ssmmqgo014YJwXA4ruZKDQH rAgcBCeYJ4lt7dFDymrt7fJVEzk+ocxc2vmfz+IjhezqtuLlVsRgG8k8NZ28wWtBEIL4 umx1euLNTdJv72YTI6PnbW6yrARAHgetQ7FPZcuvI0YyVpZtqAl2zmmofyUVWN9qfVvW 7/Hg== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.152.104.77 with SMTP id gc13mr13095482lab.31.1337398964913; Fri, 18 May 2012 20:42:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.112.56.13 with HTTP; Fri, 18 May 2012 20:42:44 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Fri, 18 May 2012 23:42:44 -0400 Message-ID: From: Marshall Eubanks To: Mike McBride Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: pim@ietf.org Subject: Re: [pim] IPR Disclosure: Cisco's Statement of IPR Related to draft-ietf-pim-ecmp-03 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: Sat, 19 May 2012 03:42:47 -0000 Just to be clear, I have not called for the holding up of the document, but I would like to understand what the claim actually is. Please email the application to me, if you would. Regards Marshall On Fri, May 18, 2012 at 6:01 PM, Mike McBride wrote: > The disclosure that IPR exists should suffice and the official RFC > editor IPR declaration will be included in the document before it is > published. If anyone would like details on the IPR please contact > Heidi directly. > > thanks, > mike > > On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 9:57 AM, Heidi Ou wrote: >> Marshall, >> >> It takes about 18 months from the date of filing for an application to b= e >> published. Before an application is published, it is not accessible to t= he >> general public (only the attorneys listed on the customer number associa= ted >> with the application have access). >> >> >> Thanks >> - Heidi >> >> On 5/16/12 7:31 PM, "Marshall Eubanks" wrot= e: >> >>> On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 5:49 PM, Adrian Farrel wr= ote: >>>> Yes, >>>> >>>> I think the number is an application number. >>> >>> You can retrieve applications directly from the USPTO. >>> >>> http://appft1.uspto.gov/netahtml/PTO/search-bool.html >>> >>> It says, "Data current through May 10, 2012." >>> >>> The IPR statement says >>> >>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/1780/ >>> >>> Cisco is the owner of US Patent Application Serial No. 12/932,604 >>> relating to the subject matter of >>> "Protocol Independent Multicast ECMP Redirect" >>> >>> On the number, I get >>> >>> Results of Search in db for: >>> "12/932,604": 0 applications. >>> >>> No application publications have matched your query >>> >>> (Note : Valid patent applications have numbers like >>> =A020121234567, so the above # doesn't look right to me.) >>> >>> On the name, the same lack of results. >>> >>> Results of Search in db for: >>> "Protocol Independent Multicast ECMP Redirect": 0 applications. >>> >>> A _very_ cursory search finds a patent application in the database >>> from as recently as April 26, 2012. >>> >>> Obviously, if the above is a bad application number, it should be >>> corrected. In any case, I would like to see it in the USPTO DB before >>> I come to any conclusion about this IPR statement. >>> >>> Regards >>> Marshall >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>> >>>> It would still be useful if someone could point to a copy, but I under= stand >>>> this >>>> may be hard. >>>> >>>> Adrian >>>> >>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>> From: pim-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:pim-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of= Heidi >>>>> Ou >>>>> Sent: 16 May 2012 06:33 >>>>> To: Marshall Eubanks; Mike McBride >>>>> Cc: pim@ietf.org >>>>> Subject: Re: [pim] IPR Disclosure: Cisco's Statement of IPR Related t= o >>>> draft-ietf- >>>>> pim-ecmp-03 >>>>> >>>>> Marshall, >>>>> >>>>> The patent application was filed early last year with US patent offic= e. The >>>>> approval process may take a while. >>>>> >>>>> Thanks >>>>> - Heidi >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 5/15/12 3:34 PM, "Marshall Eubanks" w= rote: >>>>> >>>>>> I can't actually find this patent on the uspto.gov web site, which I >>>>>> assume is because it was >>>>>> sent in yesterday. Could we wait until we actually can get a look at >>>>>> it before we decide this (or, >>>>>> can someone send me a URL for the patent)? >>>>>> >>>>>> Regards >>>>>> Marshall >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 3:49 PM, Mike McBride >>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> During the document write-up it was found that there is IPR on >>>>>>> draft-ietf-pim-ecmp-03 which has now been formally disclosed. Pleas= e >>>>>>> speak up if this alters the working group consensus to have the dra= ft >>>>>>> published as a Standards Track document. I will wait a week for >>>>>>> responses before sending the write-up to Adrian. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> thanks, >>>>>>> mike >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Mon, May 14, 2012 at 1:54 PM, IETF Secretariat >>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Dear Liming Wei, Heidi Ou, Vishal Arya, Sunil Jethwani, Yiqun Cai: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> =A0An IPR disclosure that pertains to your Internet-Draft entitled >>>>>>>> "Protocol >>>>>>>> Independent Multicast ECMP Redirect" (draft-ietf-pim-ecmp) was sub= mitted >>>>> to >>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>> IETF Secretariat on 2012-05-14 and has been posted on the "IETF Pa= ge of >>>>>>>> Intellectual Property Rights Disclosures" >>>>>>>> (https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/1780/). The title of the IPR dis= closure >>>> is >>>>>>>> "Cisco's Statement of IPR Related to draft-ietf-pim-ecmp-03.""); >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The IETF Secretariat >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> 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 >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> pim mailing list >>>>> pim@ietf.org >>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pim >>>> >> From hou@cisco.com Sat May 19 00:43:02 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 19CFD21F864C for ; Sat, 19 May 2012 00:43:02 -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 KU8R54Run6hy for ; Sat, 19 May 2012 00:43:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mtv-iport-2.cisco.com (mtv-iport-2.cisco.com [173.36.130.13]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C333521F863B for ; Sat, 19 May 2012 00:43:00 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=hou@cisco.com; l=5846; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1337413380; x=1338622980; h=date:subject:from:to:cc:message-id:in-reply-to: mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=FJf43syJuMtUjG8NOkgt/DV/FdCyuKuEiJr+Uc90Ya4=; b=bllFNh17CZKLIOFHfso3LMvHc2kwAWMVYL1C3cmcX2sM3rd8BpfzoNFy 0eZgkMo7P6X+a4lQapOEMn8gq6ZXQ6NigLV/qyBtDzURq4ZLWcFe+9fAD SCtiRyv3B+UcTXZ9OtVwCVirN0nufK5qXfkW04hLAyuOZ6/jydhvjcHeV Y=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AtcFAMNNt0+rRDoI/2dsb2JhbABFiy+oXIEHghUBAQEDAQEBAQ8BKQExCwUHBgEIEQQBAQEnKAYfCQgBAQQBDQUih14DBgQBC5xTlhMNiVKKFm+FTQOIDzOMWYEPiWiDFYFkgwmBPw X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.75,621,1330905600"; d="scan'208";a="45467870" Received: from mtv-core-3.cisco.com ([171.68.58.8]) by mtv-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 19 May 2012 07:43:00 +0000 Received: from xbh-sjc-211.amer.cisco.com (xbh-sjc-211.cisco.com [171.70.151.144]) by mtv-core-3.cisco.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id q4J7h0hb025520; Sat, 19 May 2012 07:43:00 GMT Received: from xmb-sjc-231.amer.cisco.com ([128.107.191.73]) by xbh-sjc-211.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Sat, 19 May 2012 00:42:59 -0700 Received: from 10.21.125.163 ([10.21.125.163]) by xmb-sjc-231.amer.cisco.com ([128.107.191.73]) with Microsoft Exchange Server HTTP-DAV ; Sat, 19 May 2012 07:42:59 +0000 User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/12.26.0.100708 Date: Sat, 19 May 2012 00:42:57 -0700 From: Heidi Ou To: Marshall Eubanks , Mike McBride Message-ID: Thread-Topic: [pim] IPR Disclosure: Cisco's Statement of IPR Related to draft-ietf-pim-ecmp-03 Thread-Index: Ac01kwHIhGI8vT57UEqw9JFZSRHcyA== In-Reply-To: Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable X-OriginalArrivalTime: 19 May 2012 07:42:59.0877 (UTC) FILETIME=[037F9550:01CD3593] Cc: pim@ietf.org Subject: Re: [pim] IPR Disclosure: Cisco's Statement of IPR Related to draft-ietf-pim-ecmp-03 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: Sat, 19 May 2012 07:43:02 -0000 Marshall, I will send you a copy to you. Thanks - Heidi On 5/18/12 8:42 PM, "Marshall Eubanks" wrote: > Just to be clear, I have not called for the holding up of the > document, but I would like to understand > what the claim actually is. >=20 > Please email the application to me, if you would. >=20 > Regards > Marshall >=20 > On Fri, May 18, 2012 at 6:01 PM, Mike McBride wrote= : >> The disclosure that IPR exists should suffice and the official RFC >> editor IPR declaration will be included in the document before it is >> published. If anyone would like details on the IPR please contact >> Heidi directly. >>=20 >> thanks, >> mike >>=20 >> On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 9:57 AM, Heidi Ou wrote: >>> Marshall, >>>=20 >>> It takes about 18 months from the date of filing for an application to = be >>> published. Before an application is published, it is not accessible to = the >>> general public (only the attorneys listed on the customer number associ= ated >>> with the application have access). >>>=20 >>>=20 >>> Thanks >>> - Heidi >>>=20 >>> On 5/16/12 7:31 PM, "Marshall Eubanks" wro= te: >>>=20 >>>> On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 5:49 PM, Adrian Farrel w= rote: >>>>> Yes, >>>>>=20 >>>>> I think the number is an application number. >>>>=20 >>>> You can retrieve applications directly from the USPTO. >>>>=20 >>>> http://appft1.uspto.gov/netahtml/PTO/search-bool.html >>>>=20 >>>> It says, "Data current through May 10, 2012." >>>>=20 >>>> The IPR statement says >>>>=20 >>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/1780/ >>>>=20 >>>> Cisco is the owner of US Patent Application Serial No. 12/932,604 >>>> relating to the subject matter of >>>> "Protocol Independent Multicast ECMP Redirect" >>>>=20 >>>> On the number, I get >>>>=20 >>>> Results of Search in db for: >>>> "12/932,604": 0 applications. >>>>=20 >>>> No application publications have matched your query >>>>=20 >>>> (Note : Valid patent applications have numbers like >>>> =A020121234567, so the above # doesn't look right to me.) >>>>=20 >>>> On the name, the same lack of results. >>>>=20 >>>> Results of Search in db for: >>>> "Protocol Independent Multicast ECMP Redirect": 0 applications. >>>>=20 >>>> A _very_ cursory search finds a patent application in the database >>>> from as recently as April 26, 2012. >>>>=20 >>>> Obviously, if the above is a bad application number, it should be >>>> corrected. In any case, I would like to see it in the USPTO DB before >>>> I come to any conclusion about this IPR statement. >>>>=20 >>>> Regards >>>> Marshall >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>>>=20 >>>>> It would still be useful if someone could point to a copy, but I >>>>> understand >>>>> this >>>>> may be hard. >>>>>=20 >>>>> Adrian >>>>>=20 >>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>> From: pim-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:pim-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf O= f >>>>>> Heidi >>>>>> Ou >>>>>> Sent: 16 May 2012 06:33 >>>>>> To: Marshall Eubanks; Mike McBride >>>>>> Cc: pim@ietf.org >>>>>> Subject: Re: [pim] IPR Disclosure: Cisco's Statement of IPR Related = to >>>>> draft-ietf- >>>>>> pim-ecmp-03 >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> Marshall, >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> The patent application was filed early last year with US patent offi= ce. >>>>>> The >>>>>> approval process may take a while. >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> Thanks >>>>>> - Heidi >>>>>>=20 >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> On 5/15/12 3:34 PM, "Marshall Eubanks" >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>=20 >>>>>>> I can't actually find this patent on the uspto.gov web site, which = I >>>>>>> assume is because it was >>>>>>> sent in yesterday. Could we wait until we actually can get a look a= t >>>>>>> it before we decide this (or, >>>>>>> can someone send me a URL for the patent)? >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>> Regards >>>>>>> Marshall >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>> On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 3:49 PM, Mike McBride >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> During the document write-up it was found that there is IPR on >>>>>>>> draft-ietf-pim-ecmp-03 which has now been formally disclosed. Plea= se >>>>>>>> speak up if this alters the working group consensus to have the dr= aft >>>>>>>> published as a Standards Track document. I will wait a week for >>>>>>>> responses before sending the write-up to Adrian. >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>> thanks, >>>>>>>> mike >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>> On Mon, May 14, 2012 at 1:54 PM, IETF Secretariat >>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> Dear Liming Wei, Heidi Ou, Vishal Arya, Sunil Jethwani, Yiqun Cai= : >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> =A0An IPR disclosure that pertains to your Internet-Draft entitled >>>>>>>>> "Protocol >>>>>>>>> Independent Multicast ECMP Redirect" (draft-ietf-pim-ecmp) was >>>>>>>>> submitted >>>>>> to >>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>> IETF Secretariat on 2012-05-14 and has been posted on the "IETF P= age >>>>>>>>> of >>>>>>>>> Intellectual Property Rights Disclosures" >>>>>>>>> (https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/1780/). The title of the IPR >>>>>>>>> disclosure >>>>> is >>>>>>>>> "Cisco's Statement of IPR Related to draft-ietf-pim-ecmp-03.""); >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> The IETF Secretariat >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>> 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 >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> pim mailing list >>>>>> pim@ietf.org >>>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pim >>>>>=20 >>>=20 From Ben.Wright@metaswitch.com Mon May 28 02:26:46 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 6705721F8501 for ; Mon, 28 May 2012 02:26:46 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.598 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=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 Ve8d+95NbMrb for ; Mon, 28 May 2012 02:26:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from enficsets2.metaswitch.com (enficsets2.metaswitch.com [192.91.191.39]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B2DB621F84E1 for ; Mon, 28 May 2012 02:26:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ENFICSCAS1.datcon.co.uk (172.18.4.13) by enficsets2.metaswitch.com (172.18.4.22) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.2.298.4; Mon, 28 May 2012 10:28:22 +0100 Received: from ENFICSMBX1.datcon.co.uk ([fe80::d5d5:c683:a3be:3a19]) by ENFICSCAS1.datcon.co.uk ([::1]) with mapi id 14.02.0283.003; Mon, 28 May 2012 10:26:43 +0100 From: Ben Wright To: "draft-ietf-pim-drlb@tools.ietf.org" Thread-Topic: Clarification on draft-ietf-pim-drlb Thread-Index: AQHNOoPtbjigp3rl4EWXEbCjoSCDMQ== Date: Mon, 28 May 2012 09:26:43 +0000 Message-ID: Accept-Language: en-GB, en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [172.18.72.106] Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_B3B6FD81D3159A45B5421AF9DD500F8865E20107ENFICSMBX1datco_" MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: "pim@ietf.org" Subject: [pim] Clarification on draft-ietf-pim-drlb 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, 28 May 2012 09:26:46 -0000 --_000_B3B6FD81D3159A45B5421AF9DD500F8865E20107ENFICSMBX1datco_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Yiqun Cai et al, I'd like to clarify the behaviour as in draft-ietf-pim-drlb on networks com= prising routers which support this draft and routers which do not. Sectio= n s6.3 says: "If a router on the LAN does not support this specification, the Assert modification described above will not take place, that is only the IP address of an Assert sender is used as the tie breaker." Assuming I've understood correctly, I'd prefer the following: "If any router on the LAN does not advertise an LBM TLV in its Hello messag= es (that is, does not support this specification), then the modified Assert= tie-breaker described in this document MUST NOT be used to resolve asserts= between nodes on that LAN. The Assert tie-breaker specified in RFC4601 MU= ST be used instead." I want to be clear that if two routers sending asserts on a LAN both suppor= t this specification, but another router does not, then new assert procedur= es should still not be used (otherwise the other router may send any Join m= essages for the asserted (S,G) flow to the assert loser, causing a continua= tion of the duplicate traffic being forwarded onto the LAN). Thanks, Ben --_000_B3B6FD81D3159A45B5421AF9DD500F8865E20107ENFICSMBX1datco_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi Yiqun Cai et al,

 

I’d like to clarify the behaviour as in draft-= ietf-pim-drlb on networks comprising routers which support this draft and r= outers which do not.   Section s6.3 says:

 

“If a router on the LAN does not support this specification=
, the

  = ; Assert modification described above will not take place, that is only

  = ; the IP address of an Assert sender is used as the tie breaker.”

 

Assuming I’ve understood correctly, I’d = prefer the following:

 

“If any r= outer on the LAN does not advertise an LBM TLV in its Hello messages (that = is, does not support this specification), then the modified Assert tie-brea= ker described in this document MUST NOT be used to resolve asserts between nodes on that LAN.  The Assert tie-br= eaker specified in RFC4601 MUST be used instead.”

 

I want to be clear that if two routers sending asser= ts on a LAN both support this specification, but another router does not, t= hen new assert procedures should still not be used (otherwise the other rou= ter may send any Join messages for the asserted (S,G) flow to the assert loser, causing a continuation of the= duplicate traffic being forwarded onto the LAN). 

 

Thanks,

 

Ben

 

--_000_B3B6FD81D3159A45B5421AF9DD500F8865E20107ENFICSMBX1datco_-- From iesg-secretary@ietf.org Tue May 29 12:43:38 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 C5F4A11E80EC; Tue, 29 May 2012 12:43:38 -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 vbdf-cdzWV8j; Tue, 29 May 2012 12:43:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D3E911E80A0; Tue, 29 May 2012 12:43:38 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: The IESG To: IETF-Announce X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 4.02 Message-ID: <20120529194338.27344.20212.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Tue, 29 May 2012 12:43:38 -0700 Cc: pim@ietf.org Subject: [pim] Last Call: (Protocol Independent Multicast ECMP Redirect) to Proposed Standard X-BeenThere: pim@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: ietf@ietf.org List-Id: Protocol Independent Multicast List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 29 May 2012 19:43:38 -0000 The IESG has received a request from the Protocol Independent Multicast WG (pim) to consider the following document: - 'Protocol Independent Multicast ECMP Redirect' as Proposed Standard 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 2012-06-12. 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 A Protocol Independent Multicast (PIM) [RFC4601] router uses the Reverse Path Forwarding (RPF) procedure to select an upstream interface and router to build forwarding state. When there are equal cost multiple paths (ECMP), existing implementations often use hash algorithms to select a path. Such algorithms do not allow the spread of traffic among the ECMPs according to administrative metrics. This usually leads to inefficient or ineffective use of network resources. 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. The file can be obtained via http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-pim-ecmp/ IESG discussion can be tracked via http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-pim-ecmp/ballot/ The following IPR Declarations may be related to this I-D: http://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/1780/ From iesg-secretary@ietf.org Tue May 29 12:44:54 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 9E02911E8116; Tue, 29 May 2012 12:44:54 -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 spSRWlGIk80v; Tue, 29 May 2012 12:44:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9AAF621F8582; Tue, 29 May 2012 12:44:48 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: The IESG To: IETF-Announce X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 4.02 Message-ID: <20120529194448.29186.80030.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Tue, 29 May 2012 12:44:48 -0700 Cc: pim@ietf.org Subject: [pim] Last Call: (Population Count Extensions to PIM) to Experimental RFC X-BeenThere: pim@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: ietf@ietf.org List-Id: Protocol Independent Multicast List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 29 May 2012 19:44:54 -0000 The IESG has received a request from the Protocol Independent Multicast WG (pim) to consider the following document: - 'Population Count Extensions to PIM' as Experimental 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 2012-06-12. 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 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. The file can be obtained via http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-pim-pop-count/ IESG discussion can be tracked via http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-pim-pop-count/ballot/ No IPR declarations have been submitted directly on this I-D.