From nobody Mon Apr 4 06:19:55 2016 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 7509512D1A9 for ; Mon, 4 Apr 2016 06:19:52 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.6 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=venaas-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id mP3ZkbAxNaxA for ; Mon, 4 Apr 2016 06:19:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-lb0-x22d.google.com (mail-lb0-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c04::22d]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B85CA12D16D for ; Mon, 4 Apr 2016 06:19:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-lb0-x22d.google.com with SMTP id u8so160855042lbk.0 for ; Mon, 04 Apr 2016 06:19:50 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=venaas-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to; bh=vrno4F+ATmaYlLXWrEOnEvjFgdyP48ipuyIRCB4Vvl8=; b=aI6IgKSqFBIWRYs+P8JJXvW6gEj0b9StqDTNfI2cWlI/l4+lKSZjMnm3csVpCkPaBJ t2qRk8Wfb5eVy+9H2iPY4Z6Hqc0JTTlwh0EE+KqR9FjmtzR6iXD1g/CFGIWS8kZg1m2l +iZ6+0O6QCuib6qkaFbu/GxmSrd60X6C6wI5BQEOpvCpyVHzbq7yJSs4xbZ83NLX3Q4j n/+3UPES6uINq9UA+coEz3feBeztKk3f6CZyCrfW0dSdLi0o6NhCb6NuYNqFDNxuCFc9 wEU3+RD2Iaf3aWMP6aoT1ooCEp+dEtdx1fH7rcMZqq6KZszO0mAQycVZ66uTX6zX16pb TQdA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to; bh=vrno4F+ATmaYlLXWrEOnEvjFgdyP48ipuyIRCB4Vvl8=; b=c8+hLLoThDp6tGlDHEmmm/Tuc+0TVaZN1ndULxz9O2Crn5QZ5UW8dOjrJOTDG0yvZ3 GnJ946mjsVdsuG9thT0eIE/EY4LBhfbbNp+qSKNufAu6vyEYZk4thBQzUmxd1m5NtZUq bAVtoEiczP54XmFcB3LEv/wmyr1uLLGjBGtTwzmlTWF7RVGAGLhqUu7OKTX9qDOzCRZu UbL1RhZqMKPcnNyVyugWtuJDZXbwvHnDm6viyCALNPIa3bsBnXGKHMPgkvjnR4Jq9r+v qW+0MVl8RcnNeCCygTB/PHLgy+wiY1ZEzqohBMljMlMT6XWmy9JtUfV6d0JPl0nd4BwP HnJg== X-Gm-Message-State: AD7BkJJJJsJvazNaiBuQvbF+/uSz9WIjf39KZ44DY3wXpW3jgI4VXqNjOot2lvbKc+y6ozlCLskUkbzgqxi9iw== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.112.202.136 with SMTP id ki8mr8259155lbc.10.1459775988366; Mon, 04 Apr 2016 06:19:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.25.42.74 with HTTP; Mon, 4 Apr 2016 06:19:48 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 4 Apr 2016 06:19:48 -0700 Message-ID: From: Stig Venaas To: "pim@ietf.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Archived-At: Subject: [pim] Slides needed X-BeenThere: pim@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: Protocol Independent Multicast List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 04 Apr 2016 13:19:52 -0000 Hi If you are presenting in the pim meeting, please send me your slides ASAP. Thanks, Stig From nobody Mon Apr 4 06:36:52 2016 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 772D212D150 for ; Mon, 4 Apr 2016 06:36:50 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=venaas-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id AAGbq9SUBdPP for ; Mon, 4 Apr 2016 06:36:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-lb0-x229.google.com (mail-lb0-x229.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c04::229]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 203BB12D16D for ; Mon, 4 Apr 2016 06:36:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-lb0-x229.google.com with SMTP id u8so161546468lbk.0 for ; Mon, 04 Apr 2016 06:36:44 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=venaas-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to; bh=uZs/afUkY1IGzxXHIgp8DooRGtEtcZ95OJZmIeNO+0Q=; b=BRGD32/Nq/FL5MlFsDlgV6a/T7RHT1jZ+MvlSqBUL39/mA1g9g06yhI33fANbrgtRT CHMDWQ0lGlW3PNmFjioqQw0ohmmK2jAAtH0u7XNiEXbZVNYkkJ3YCURpGxG4UoBufEFk ccTZ3YG5kIQ5qB4FXoXYwG6eYdUrTSED0wvU8t9nBgEGgY5UE7ZloT7AJ33VJNUmC5TQ s5HB77XDftwHWFAhy/OcxndebR9O9R2rvCS9ZMkLHiLyO6ojV6juo5oTkNE52LG/7dvG ll96vpEZLQJocxCfW4QZB+tEhmXQuZtj0Cx9zby0HfVjOEWQnqgJ0e1SsUbH7+HtbIAS XsRA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to; bh=uZs/afUkY1IGzxXHIgp8DooRGtEtcZ95OJZmIeNO+0Q=; b=eVIWHgDf8NUS8m7Ag666jOs042buCuE/aA2LaDdvWvk0iaDy/uMbv5L7QdlExW9BvQ 5YJgm2DdQr32DnNxQDs3SCCYBBQKF3g7ra7EO0eicCk5rw7LvA0D6w3Siov6aNfWI0Ko Fos4mIvXjS+1LRD4NbHyGbHeKU8UJlATDCfkJMXkznUb2Y9F986ON8bWUxhJXVgb/fl2 NKDnn7T4I6iw9fuinZ7Ow55VAfTZ41dp5HOFosGEAggJm7xUyyORu8VpNfF4r3zkdx4G M2OcEW+N1xLNgCzGTN5a3++NRwJDd78eV7FKCacrMYplbA6VR+4D0U//gnCIWMvwjD8Y AWVg== X-Gm-Message-State: AD7BkJKvY9wpu7DO1L6pD+jkQYV7jpRUE7+W9slrdqj8KtJCI4byqOO6KWX7CYnS7ym3TA0d1V9lPkytRsm4rA== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.112.143.40 with SMTP id sb8mr4673192lbb.83.1459777002052; Mon, 04 Apr 2016 06:36:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.25.42.74 with HTTP; Mon, 4 Apr 2016 06:36:42 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Mon, 4 Apr 2016 06:36:42 -0700 Message-ID: From: Stig Venaas To: "pim@ietf.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [pim] Slides needed X-BeenThere: pim@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: Protocol Independent Multicast List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 04 Apr 2016 13:36:50 -0000 Hi I should clarify that I got slides from a few of you already. Thanks! I'll be posting them within the next 20 minutes or so. Stig On Mon, Apr 4, 2016 at 6:19 AM, Stig Venaas wrote: > Hi > > If you are presenting in the pim meeting, please send me your slides ASAP. > > Thanks, > Stig From nobody Thu Apr 7 11:54:25 2016 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 D4F1412D5C2; Thu, 7 Apr 2016 11:54:21 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -14.531 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.531 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5V7_DJfHR6Bu; Thu, 7 Apr 2016 11:54:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from alln-iport-5.cisco.com (alln-iport-5.cisco.com [173.37.142.92]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D581E12D56E; Thu, 7 Apr 2016 11:54:19 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1741; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1460055259; x=1461264859; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-id:content-transfer-encoding: mime-version; bh=xcO4hDTPk81g+qXPcvPErz5LjqHSGmlnLLPLLrBDEdI=; b=ZghWaoTYG3yxs87mSChdR4U1yt8Mat1+FEXSLipiidl1Nt0vCcgt0Rw/ RH4Tpp8rfE/PVVOePXrkVn3XRLetiWqWqfC4dZNb9+mI40HMku3fq5GPA NeFKXF2YdN6MhBpO+jn7dqL/NVOH8lttD6nbbyHiL/HUViiimWSYduAJ6 Q=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0D9AQBgrAZX/5tdJa1dgzdTfQa6PQENg?= =?us-ascii?q?XMjhWoCgUU4FAEBAQEBAQFlJ4RCAQEEOjQLEAIBCDYFCzIUBwEGAwIEAQ0FiCc?= =?us-ascii?q?OwXgBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQERBIYhhEuKFQWTGYRrAYV2iBWBZ4RNi?= =?us-ascii?q?FqPIwEeAQFCggkUFYE1bId1fgEBAQ?= X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.24,449,1454976000"; d="scan'208";a="256909470" Received: from rcdn-core-4.cisco.com ([173.37.93.155]) by alln-iport-5.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 07 Apr 2016 18:54:18 +0000 Received: from XCH-ALN-001.cisco.com (xch-aln-001.cisco.com [173.36.7.11]) by rcdn-core-4.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id u37IsIN5011338 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Thu, 7 Apr 2016 18:54:18 GMT Received: from xch-aln-002.cisco.com (173.36.7.12) by XCH-ALN-001.cisco.com (173.36.7.11) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1104.5; Thu, 7 Apr 2016 13:54:17 -0500 Received: from xch-aln-002.cisco.com ([173.36.7.12]) by XCH-ALN-002.cisco.com ([173.36.7.12]) with mapi id 15.00.1104.009; Thu, 7 Apr 2016 13:54:18 -0500 From: "Alvaro Retana (aretana)" To: "idr@ietf.org" , "pim@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: Last Call: (Multicast VPN state damping) to Proposed Standard Thread-Index: AQHRkP7jaJ+aOgEU8EmJjlM4C33WVw== Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2016 18:54:17 +0000 Message-ID: References: <20160323191825.2494.1251.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> In-Reply-To: <20160323191825.2494.1251.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1 x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted x-originating-ip: [10.82.234.83] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <4DC3A42AAA3AC34AA791DE0DE9671674@emea.cisco.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: Cc: "bess@ietf.org" Subject: [pim] FW: Last Call: (Multicast VPN state damping) to Proposed Standard X-BeenThere: pim@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: Protocol Independent Multicast List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2016 18:54:22 -0000 idr and pim WGs: Hi! Please take a look at this document and send comments to the bess WG. The IETF Last Call expires on Apr/13, but the document is scheduled to be reviewed by the IESG on May/5, so there's enough time to address comments. Thanks! Alvaro. On 3/23/16, 3:18 PM, "iesg-secretary@ietf.org" wrote: > >The IESG has received a request from the BGP Enabled Services WG (bess) >to consider the following document: >- 'Multicast VPN state damping' > 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 2016-04-13. 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 document describes procedures to damp multicast VPN routing > state changes and control the effect of the churn due to the > multicast dynamicity in customer sites. The procedures described in > this document are applicable to BGP-based multicast VPN and help > avoid uncontrolled control plane load increase in the core routing > infrastructure. New procedures are proposed inspired from BGP > unicast route damping principles, but adapted to multicast. > > > > > >The file can be obtained via >https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bess-multicast-damping/ > >IESG discussion can be tracked via >https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bess-multicast-damping/ballot/ > > >No IPR declarations have been submitted directly on this I-D. > > From nobody Tue Apr 19 03:12:29 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pim@ietf.org Delivered-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D1D7412E0BA; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 03:12:26 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: "Stephen Farrell" To: "The IESG" X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.19.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <20160419101226.31492.71970.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 03:12:26 -0700 Archived-At: Cc: draft-ietf-pim-hierarchicaljoinattr@ietf.org, pim-chairs@ietf.org, mmcbride7@gmail.com, pim@ietf.org Subject: [pim] Stephen Farrell's No Objection on draft-ietf-pim-hierarchicaljoinattr-07: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: pim@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 List-Id: Protocol Independent Multicast List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 10:12:27 -0000 Stephen Farrell has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-pim-hierarchicaljoinattr-07: No Objection When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-pim-hierarchicaljoinattr/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Two related but minor points: - section 5, last para: can a router always know for sure that everyone who'll get a message sent on an interface knows about this new encoding? If not, the "MUST NOT" here is incorrect. One could implement a MUST NOT that said to only send this to routers who'd expressed the hello option, but saying that the MUST NOT applies to everyone accessible from the sender's interface is arguably not implementable. The real-world result would be the same though, even if one's code would better match the latter way of describing the MUST NOT, so not that big a deal. - section 6: If a router had a bug that caused it to crash (or do bad stuff) when it unexpectedly receives a message with this new encoding, then if I faked a message with the new hello option to a peer of that router, I might be able to cause someone else to crash the victim/target. There are probably other bad things I can do if I can fake a hello like that, but this is perhaps a new one. I'm not claiming that's worth a mention though, unless the authors/chairs/shepherd want to add it. From nobody Tue Apr 19 10:17:54 2016 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 7057112E248 for ; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 10:17:48 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.6 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=venaas-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id numGQ1PSK7FQ for ; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 10:17:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-ob0-x232.google.com (mail-ob0-x232.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c01::232]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3522812E250 for ; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 10:17:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ob0-x232.google.com with SMTP id j9so18191582obd.3 for ; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 10:17:45 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=venaas-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc; bh=4i7PQ2VzTMhvv/PDann5pUWVow93ENbkoBq+2fUH7aY=; b=zKXulHAz5td3NHrM2cy88wX8GUNdE+evXBQvmbcKpl36EkQ9wGKsxiU9bWjV/cyqDd iNHIA1lZPtWfLqLtPx0hy0Gif8OztPWq11jsehbtycWPaVUQfLaU81NqMFp56zvlYvym 9VQCqJXNkmrFVtNkzmtIajfzuFKolEpfjOwH4W1bL2TRx23h9jfD+wNVUd2nFaJlcjpe I7pGs+JmucveO29VO1uWW++e3ZD0+97Gj++Tdxa+vO5704afq9aLqENC1nf2qyTell+u daeMckK2AGLHjjUqqqb38aMBmGRgof4PGX/arvM3UIUM2/wNOVmiovrT0/7UHfrK10PL V9lw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc; bh=4i7PQ2VzTMhvv/PDann5pUWVow93ENbkoBq+2fUH7aY=; b=YOuCDotoMUlUEdGkhAvzBth8Zjjx07XTi8+IoipphJEHeOWl++dfpQO4cMnmItiYIP IemLuzI6qn+0ALwVbBwlEFWpMvXttQCtNgajk7c8qANNDY9hTCXsvwNfyY4p8N6OIFur 8trnwzE+8Aeq9zSxdBh3DbrpU70Kly7BqfAyk47iOkqUyPr9ty6V+Ao5u28MxPR0cKd3 b5n6tpL5D3bnaa639ygDcQOi70yO5dX9ZhdG9fO/SJSD06QpeWvFydYD6ECQwZNp+at0 jPM8dkAf2GIgBB5pWuD+20+DB0GuqcGPrBBBhYv+d+8ogCGxHcIh3uYzY8abIWj3SAn4 Mpxg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOPr4FWLit0sEwJMWVZtpWbP4rix6itqLhW5/292pPCEfQTcZ2DRx85tt3QG/btMWWRTH9VUAHeWGZP/727Qdg== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.60.129.166 with SMTP id nx6mr1830780oeb.13.1461086264587; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 10:17:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.182.7.9 with HTTP; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 10:17:44 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20160419101226.31492.71970.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> References: <20160419101226.31492.71970.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 10:17:44 -0700 Message-ID: From: Stig Venaas To: Stephen Farrell Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Archived-At: Cc: "pim-chairs@ietf.org" , Mike McBride , The IESG , draft-ietf-pim-hierarchicaljoinattr@ietf.org, "pim@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [pim] Stephen Farrell's No Objection on draft-ietf-pim-hierarchicaljoinattr-07: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: pim@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: Protocol Independent Multicast List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 17:17:49 -0000 Hi Stephen Please see my comments inline. On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 3:12 AM, Stephen Farrell wrote: > Stephen Farrell has entered the following ballot position for > draft-ietf-pim-hierarchicaljoinattr-07: No Objection > > When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all > email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this > introductory paragraph, however.) > > > Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html > for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. > > > The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-pim-hierarchicaljoinattr/ > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > COMMENT: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > Two related but minor points: > > - section 5, last para: can a router always know for sure that > everyone who'll get a message sent on an interface knows about > this new encoding? If not, the "MUST NOT" here is incorrect. > One could implement a MUST NOT that said to only send this to > routers who'd expressed the hello option, but saying that the > MUST NOT applies to everyone accessible from the sender's > interface is arguably not implementable. The real-world result > would be the same though, even if one's code would better match > the latter way of describing the MUST NOT, so not that big a > deal. I think I know what you mean, but I don't think the draft states quite what you write here. Note that the PIM message is sent to the all-pim-routers multicast address, so in theory it should reach all PIM routers that are present on the link. The draft states: A PIM router MUST NOT send a Join/Prune message with Join/Prune attributes encoded in the Upstream Neighbor Address or any of the group addresses out any interface on which there is a PIM neighbor that has not included this option in its Hellos. It doesn't strictly talk about "everyone accessible", but only the routers that are this particular PIM router's PIM neighbors. That they are PIM neighbors means that this router must have received PIM Hello messages from them, as that is how you establish the neighborship. The meaning of the draft then is that if at least one of these neighbors do not support the new mechanism (the hello option was not present in the last hello from the neighbor), then the router MUST NOT send a message using the new mechanism. In theory there could be routers on the link receiving the message that we did not receive hello messages from. In that case we may still send messages with the new mechanism and those routers would not be able to parse the message, but this does not violate the specification since they are not PIM neighbors. > - section 6: If a router had a bug that caused it to crash (or > do bad stuff) when it unexpectedly receives a message with this > new encoding, then if I faked a message with the new hello > option to a peer of that router, I might be able to cause > someone else to crash the victim/target. There are probably > other bad things I can do if I can fake a hello like that, but > this is perhaps a new one. I'm not claiming that's worth a > mention though, unless the authors/chairs/shepherd want to add > it. Yes, I'm not sure if worth mentioning since this is true for any new encoding. The parsing does get more complicated though, so it increases the chance that an implementation got it wrong. Perhaps it is worth pointing out that routers not supporting this new encoding would ignore the encoded data. Hence no direct harm is caused if an attacker (or a router by accident) sends a message with the new encoding, the worst that can happen is that some data gets ignored. It could potentially be an issue (not necessarily a security issue) if a router accidentally sends such a message and some routers ignore the data though. Hence we only use it when we believe all the routers support it. But as I commented on the other issue above, there could be routers receiving it that we are unaware of. But during normal correct operations, this would only happen if a router interface just came up and we have not yet received a hello. Since we send periodic J/P messages and have soft state, this should at most cause a temporary problem. This is more an operational issue than a security issue I would think. Note that we generally use PIM hello options to signal capabilities and we have the same issues in those cases as well. Stig From nobody Tue Apr 19 21:44:12 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pim@ietf.org Delivered-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5345A12E1CA; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 21:44:10 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: "Suresh Krishnan" To: "The IESG" X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.19.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <20160420044410.31581.22241.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 21:44:10 -0700 Archived-At: Cc: draft-ietf-pim-hierarchicaljoinattr@ietf.org, pim-chairs@ietf.org, mmcbride7@gmail.com, pim@ietf.org Subject: [pim] Suresh Krishnan's No Objection on draft-ietf-pim-hierarchicaljoinattr-07: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: pim@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 List-Id: Protocol Independent Multicast List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2016 04:44:10 -0000 Suresh Krishnan has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-pim-hierarchicaljoinattr-07: No Objection When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-pim-hierarchicaljoinattr/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Section 5 contains the following text "Note that it also needs to include the Join-Attribute Hello option as specified in [RFC5384]." but it does not talk about what exactly happens if a message is received with the Hierarchical Join/Prune Attribute but without the Join-Attribute. Can you clarify what happens in this case? I would also prefer it if this can be reworded as a MUST. From nobody Wed Apr 20 09:20:58 2016 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 8A7DA12DE1C for ; Wed, 20 Apr 2016 09:20:56 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.6 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=venaas-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id yhFY8Xybnfhu for ; Wed, 20 Apr 2016 09:20:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-lb0-x235.google.com (mail-lb0-x235.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c04::235]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E305712DDA7 for ; Wed, 20 Apr 2016 09:20:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-lb0-x235.google.com with SMTP id b1so10834028lbi.1 for ; Wed, 20 Apr 2016 09:20:54 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=venaas-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc; bh=cIbJuEmHGUcAt8pptVD2CAEbru/6NrsJuA6qmG1K5sE=; b=KuQoE4KhQD32PJQBkA/VvHKKz4sH1GLiw0NPGvbcrHTY02ghd41XrPweVvRnCzHFSs +Hpxd7fzfaUxX30GirVyOFT/OpmN3brLNLi7T5M2mA/x4EV/cpHY0fsUX0OzJ2qFY6lR oFiucp5Irx8WQlHEN5J9hl3Af0LMX5vrguJJ6TjAUFpXcChCGVFkUrP8bxREhYcOkdKe MvAZVMcyXOlKar/TlF3ASk+smFxXZeHwri8zj0gEDBnGofdx1Bx+kT4uD3waMSurnMtO AJGDvy/AP3epr9EqrV6uIpJD87amW4QUsikzoSOl//fl4qU3Er9uUkQGUnS1FOFs438p rD2g== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc; bh=cIbJuEmHGUcAt8pptVD2CAEbru/6NrsJuA6qmG1K5sE=; b=gLacDOxZtIg8beoCW0N8WQ1Cmdt5xBXKHjeCP2mJFfBRDQ9hlrLLBbVpl02sFlbleL tcg3fTeOhRVAe5JcKAmRlSPl0tHI9vjYbxgLq8mwkIlLsFmVmQkPkhK1ZNSWz262jqfr 8gRGum3UhP9EO3/xlkC+xIMOee1/cQk3NNTu94zvFyPvuxRrc2+/HeRhpckx/21Jd3lC miMjv7toplmDWFK6zbU5kWb6cKcQPyK4GZt/I2AsxPcTkEm3NJgJjuLCmsImkZ2cPkJ1 cIzUF7u7izQjwcETjVlLSqd1xlii88sSfjZdh7G7jOB/BdwIgiYxuvi7qaHmXxsTsszg 0fAQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOPr4FVURRYRC6mRusn6pEWLMwPtHkeqZ9RE7cmdUc3weRCtkHU2Ww1K9IbzvJLGcfuSJMvL/EPfAiaLgXsc0w== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.112.53.168 with SMTP id c8mr4115245lbp.10.1461169252915; Wed, 20 Apr 2016 09:20:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.25.42.74 with HTTP; Wed, 20 Apr 2016 09:20:52 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20160420044410.31581.22241.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> References: <20160420044410.31581.22241.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2016 09:20:52 -0700 Message-ID: From: Stig Venaas To: Suresh Krishnan Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Archived-At: Cc: "pim-chairs@ietf.org" , Mike McBride , The IESG , draft-ietf-pim-hierarchicaljoinattr@ietf.org, "pim@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [pim] Suresh Krishnan's No Objection on draft-ietf-pim-hierarchicaljoinattr-07: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: pim@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: Protocol Independent Multicast List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2016 16:20:56 -0000 Hi, I agree MUST is better. I will change that. I'm not sure if we need to say what happens if the MUST is not adhered to. But basically we have 2 capabilities, A and HA where HA is an extension of A. The hello options are used for the routers to figure out what capabilities they have. All routers supporting HA also support A. If all routers on the link support A, but only some support HA, then you want the routers to at least use A. The routers only supporting A would likely not know the meaning of the HA option and cannot figure that they also would support A. In a way you can say it is v1 and v2 of the capability, but the hello option is just a boolean. And routers only supporting v1 wouldn't know that this new option indicates v2. But I don't think this needs to be explained in the document. Stig On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 9:44 PM, Suresh Krishnan wrote: > Suresh Krishnan has entered the following ballot position for > draft-ietf-pim-hierarchicaljoinattr-07: No Objection > > When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all > email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this > introductory paragraph, however.) > > > Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html > for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. > > > The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-pim-hierarchicaljoinattr/ > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > COMMENT: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Section 5 contains the following text > > "Note that it also needs to include the Join-Attribute Hello option as > specified in [RFC5384]." > > but it does not talk about what exactly happens if a message is received > with the Hierarchical Join/Prune Attribute but without the > Join-Attribute. Can you clarify what happens in this case? I would also > prefer it if this can be reworded as a MUST. > > From nobody Sun Apr 24 22:47:57 2016 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 7A03812B044; Sun, 24 Apr 2016 22:47:56 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -105.216 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-105.216 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.996, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id gBm-lItaVsqT; Sun, 24 Apr 2016 22:47:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx5.zte.com.cn (mx5.zte.com.cn [63.217.80.70]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AB64B12B005; Sun, 24 Apr 2016 22:47:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from zte.com.cn (unknown [192.168.168.119]) by Websense Email Security Gateway with ESMTP id 1D4E1CE539AA4; Mon, 25 Apr 2016 13:47:50 +0800 (CST) Received: from mse01.zte.com.cn (unknown [10.30.3.20]) by Websense Email Security Gateway with ESMTPS id CCEE5D56BE869; Mon, 25 Apr 2016 13:47:49 +0800 (CST) Received: from notes_smtp.zte.com.cn ([10.30.1.239]) by mse01.zte.com.cn with ESMTP id u3P5krVn067474; Mon, 25 Apr 2016 13:46:58 +0800 (GMT-8) (envelope-from zhang.zheng@zte.com.cn) To: yang-multicast@ietf.org MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 6.5.4 March 27, 2005 Message-ID: From: zhang.zheng@zte.com.cn Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2016 13:47:07 +0800 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on notes_smtp/zte_ltd(Release 8.5.3FP6|November 21, 2013) at 2016-04-25 13:46:46, Serialize complete at 2016-04-25 13:46:46 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=_alternative 001FC43C48257FA0_=" X-MAIL: mse01.zte.com.cn u3P5krVn067474 Archived-At: Cc: pim@ietf.org, > Subject: [pim] FW: New Version Notification for draft-zhang-pim-msdp-yang-00.txt X-BeenThere: pim@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: Protocol Independent Multicast List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2016 05:47:56 -0000 This is a multipart message in MIME format. --=_alternative 001FC43C48257FA0_= Content-Type: text/plain; charset="GB2312" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 SGkgYWxsLA0KDQogICAgV2UgaGFwcGVuIHRvIHN1Ym1pdCBhIFlBTkcgbW9kZWwgb2YgTVNEUC4g V291bGQgbGlrZSB0byBjYWxsIHlvdXIgDQphdHRlbnRpb24gdG8gdGhpcyBkcmFmdC4gQW55IGNv bW1lbnRzIGFyZSB3ZWxjb21lZC4NCg0KVVJMOiAgICAgICAgICAgIA0KaHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuaWV0 Zi5vcmcvaW50ZXJuZXQtZHJhZnRzL2RyYWZ0LXpoYW5nLXBpbS1tc2RwLXlhbmctMDAudHh0DQpT dGF0dXM6ICAgICAgICAgDQpodHRwczovL2RhdGF0cmFja2VyLmlldGYub3JnL2RvYy9kcmFmdC16 aGFuZy1waW0tbXNkcC15YW5nLw0KSHRtbGl6ZWQ6ICAgICAgIGh0dHBzOi8vdG9vbHMuaWV0Zi5v cmcvaHRtbC9kcmFmdC16aGFuZy1waW0tbXNkcC15YW5nLTAwDQoNClRoYW5rcy4NClNhbmR5DQoN Cg0KLS0tLS0g16q3osjLINXF1fcwMDc5NDAvdXNlci96dGVfbHRkIMqxvOQgMjAxNi8wNC8yNSAx Mzo0MCAtLS0tLQ0KDQoiWWFuZy1tdWx0aWNhc3QiIDx5YW5nLW11bHRpY2FzdC1ib3VuY2VzQGll dGYub3JnPiDQtNPaIDIwMTYvMDQvMjEgDQoyMzo1NzoxNzoNCg0KPiBIaQ0KPiANCj4gT24gNC8y MS8yMDE2IDQ6NTQgQU0sIEFuaXNoIFBldGVyIHdyb3RlOg0KPiA+IEhpIFlpc29uZywNCj4gPiAg IFRoZSBJRVRGIHdvcmtpbmcgZ3JvdXAgZm9yIG12cG4gaXMgYmVzcy4gSGVuY2UgSSBndWVzcyBp dHMgb3V0IG9mDQo+ID4gc2NvcGUgZm9yIHRoaXMgZGVzaWduIHRlYW0uDQo+ID4gICBPcGVuIGZv ciBjb21tZW50cy4NCj4gDQo+IElmIHlvdSB3YW50IHRvIHdvcmsgb24gaXQsIHBlcmhhcHMgY2hl Y2sgd2l0aCBiZXNzIGNoYWlycyBhbmQgc2VlIGlmDQo+IHRoZXJlIGFyZSBvdGhlcnMgaW50ZXJl c3RlZCB0aGVyZSwgYnV0IGFueW9uZSB3aG8gd2FudHMgdG8gY2FuIHdyaXRlIGENCj4gZHJhZnQg YW5kIHByZXNlbnQgaXQgaW4gdGhlIGJlc3MgV0cuIElmIHdlIGhhdmUgcGVvcGxlIGluIHRoaXMg dGVhbQ0KPiB0aGF0IHdhbnQgdG8gd29yayBvbiBNVlBOIFlBTkcgbW9kZWxzLCB0aGVuIHRoYXQg aXMgZ3JlYXQuIFRoZSBsaXN0IGlzDQo+IG9wZW4gZm9yIGFueSBkaXNjdXNzaW9ucyBhYm91dCBZ QU5HIGFuZCBtdWx0aWNhc3QuIEl0J3MgZ3JlYXQgaWYgdGhhdA0KPiBkb2Vzbid0IHNsb3cgZG93 biB0aGUgd29yayBvbiBQSU0gYW5kIElHTVAvTUxEIHRob3VnaC4gTVNEUCBjb3VsZCBhbHNvDQo+ IGJlIGludGVyZXN0aW5nLg0KPiANCj4gSSdtIGp1c3QgaGFwcHkgdG8gc2VlIHRoYXQgcGVvcGxl IHdhbnQgdG8gd29yayBvbiBtdWx0aWNhc3QgcmVsYXRlZA0KPiBZQU5HIG1vZGVscy4NCj4gDQo+ IFN0aWcNCj4gDQo+ID4gVGhhbmtzLA0KPiA+IEFuaXNoDQo+ID4NCj4gPiBPbiA0LzIxLzE2IDM6 MjYgUE0sIExpdXlpc29uZyB3cm90ZToNCj4gPj4NCj4gPj4gSGkgZXZlcnlvbmUsDQo+ID4+DQo+ ID4+IEkgaGF2ZSBjcmVhdGVkIHRhYmxlIGluIHRoZSBtdWx0aWNhc3QgeWFuZyB3aWtpIDoNCj4g Pj4gaHR0cHM6Ly90cmFjLnRvb2xzLmlldGYub3JnL3dnL3BpbS90cmFjL3dpa2kveWFuZywgYW5k IEkgaG9wZSB5b3UgY2FuDQo+ID4+IGZpbGwgaW4gdGhlIHRhYmxlIGJ5IHlvdXIgaW1wbGVtZW50 YXRpb24uDQo+ID4+DQo+ID4+IFRoYW5rcy4NCj4gPj4NCj4gPj4gWWlzb25nDQo+ID4+DQo+ID4+ DQo+ID4+DQo+ID4+IF9fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fDQo+ID4+IFlhbmctbXVsdGljYXN0IG1haWxpbmcgbGlzdA0KPiA+PiBZYW5nLW11bHRpY2Fz dEBpZXRmLm9yZw0KPiA+PiBodHRwczovL3d3dy5pZXRmLm9yZy9tYWlsbWFuL2xpc3RpbmZvL3lh bmctbXVsdGljYXN0DQo+ID4NCj4gPg0KPiA+DQo+ID4gX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX18NCj4gPiBZYW5nLW11bHRpY2FzdCBtYWlsaW5nIGxpc3QN Cj4gPiBZYW5nLW11bHRpY2FzdEBpZXRmLm9yZw0KPiA+IGh0dHBzOi8vd3d3LmlldGYub3JnL21h aWxtYW4vbGlzdGluZm8veWFuZy1tdWx0aWNhc3QNCj4gPg0KPiANCj4gX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX18NCj4gWWFuZy1tdWx0aWNhc3QgbWFpbGlu ZyBsaXN0DQo+IFlhbmctbXVsdGljYXN0QGlldGYub3JnDQo+IGh0dHBzOi8vd3d3LmlldGYub3Jn L21haWxtYW4vbGlzdGluZm8veWFuZy1tdWx0aWNhc3QNCg0K --=_alternative 001FC43C48257FA0_= Content-Type: text/html; charset="GB2312" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 DQo8YnI+PGZvbnQgc2l6ZT0yIGZhY2U9InNhbnMtc2VyaWYiPkhpIGFsbCw8L2ZvbnQ+DQo8YnI+ DQo8YnI+PGZvbnQgc2l6ZT0yIGZhY2U9InNhbnMtc2VyaWYiPiZuYnNwOyAmbmJzcDsgV2UgaGFw cGVuIHRvIHN1Ym1pdCBhDQpZQU5HIG1vZGVsIG9mIE1TRFAuIFdvdWxkIGxpa2UgdG8gY2FsbCB5 b3VyIDwvZm9udD4NCjxicj48Zm9udCBzaXplPTIgZmFjZT0ic2Fucy1zZXJpZiI+YXR0ZW50aW9u IHRvIHRoaXMgZHJhZnQuIEFueSBjb21tZW50cw0KYXJlIHdlbGNvbWVkLjwvZm9udD4NCjxicj4N Cjxicj48Zm9udCBzaXplPTI+PHR0PlVSTDogJm5ic3A7ICZuYnNwOyAmbmJzcDsgJm5ic3A7ICZu YnNwOyAmbmJzcDtodHRwczovL3d3dy5pZXRmLm9yZy9pbnRlcm5ldC1kcmFmdHMvZHJhZnQtemhh bmctcGltLW1zZHAteWFuZy0wMC50eHQ8YnI+DQpTdGF0dXM6ICZuYnNwOyAmbmJzcDsgJm5ic3A7 ICZuYnNwOyBodHRwczovL2RhdGF0cmFja2VyLmlldGYub3JnL2RvYy9kcmFmdC16aGFuZy1waW0t bXNkcC15YW5nLzxicj4NCkh0bWxpemVkOiAmbmJzcDsgJm5ic3A7ICZuYnNwOyBodHRwczovL3Rv b2xzLmlldGYub3JnL2h0bWwvZHJhZnQtemhhbmctcGltLW1zZHAteWFuZy0wMDxicj4NCjwvdHQ+ PC9mb250Pg0KPGJyPjxmb250IHNpemU9MiBmYWNlPSJzYW5zLXNlcmlmIj5UaGFua3MuPC9mb250 Pg0KPGJyPjxmb250IHNpemU9MiBmYWNlPSJzYW5zLXNlcmlmIj5TYW5keTwvZm9udD4NCjxicj48 Zm9udCBzaXplPTIgZmFjZT0ic2Fucy1zZXJpZiI+PGJyPg0KPC9mb250Pg0KPGJyPjxmb250IHNp emU9MSBjb2xvcj0jODAwMDgwIGZhY2U9InNhbnMtc2VyaWYiPi0tLS0tINeqt6LIyyDVxdX3MDA3 OTQwL3VzZXIvenRlX2x0ZA0KyrG85CAyMDE2LzA0LzI1IDEzOjQwIC0tLS0tPC9mb250Pg0KPGJy Pg0KPGJyPjxmb250IHNpemU9Mj48dHQ+JnF1b3Q7WWFuZy1tdWx0aWNhc3QmcXVvdDsgJmx0O3lh bmctbXVsdGljYXN0LWJvdW5jZXNAaWV0Zi5vcmcmZ3Q7DQrQtNPaIDIwMTYvMDQvMjEgMjM6NTc6 MTc6PGJyPg0KPGJyPg0KJmd0OyBIaTxicj4NCiZndDsgPGJyPg0KJmd0OyBPbiA0LzIxLzIwMTYg NDo1NCBBTSwgQW5pc2ggUGV0ZXIgd3JvdGU6PGJyPg0KJmd0OyAmZ3Q7IEhpIFlpc29uZyw8YnI+ DQomZ3Q7ICZndDsgJm5ic3A7IFRoZSBJRVRGIHdvcmtpbmcgZ3JvdXAgZm9yIG12cG4gaXMgYmVz cy4gSGVuY2UgSSBndWVzcw0KaXRzIG91dCBvZjxicj4NCiZndDsgJmd0OyBzY29wZSBmb3IgdGhp cyBkZXNpZ24gdGVhbS48YnI+DQomZ3Q7ICZndDsgJm5ic3A7IE9wZW4gZm9yIGNvbW1lbnRzLjxi cj4NCiZndDsgPGJyPg0KJmd0OyBJZiB5b3Ugd2FudCB0byB3b3JrIG9uIGl0LCBwZXJoYXBzIGNo ZWNrIHdpdGggYmVzcyBjaGFpcnMgYW5kIHNlZQ0KaWY8YnI+DQomZ3Q7IHRoZXJlIGFyZSBvdGhl cnMgaW50ZXJlc3RlZCB0aGVyZSwgYnV0IGFueW9uZSB3aG8gd2FudHMgdG8gY2FuIHdyaXRlDQph PGJyPg0KJmd0OyBkcmFmdCBhbmQgcHJlc2VudCBpdCBpbiB0aGUgYmVzcyBXRy4gSWYgd2UgaGF2 ZSBwZW9wbGUgaW4gdGhpcyB0ZWFtPGJyPg0KJmd0OyB0aGF0IHdhbnQgdG8gd29yayBvbiBNVlBO IFlBTkcgbW9kZWxzLCB0aGVuIHRoYXQgaXMgZ3JlYXQuIFRoZSBsaXN0DQppczxicj4NCiZndDsg b3BlbiBmb3IgYW55IGRpc2N1c3Npb25zIGFib3V0IFlBTkcgYW5kIG11bHRpY2FzdC4gSXQncyBn cmVhdCBpZiB0aGF0PGJyPg0KJmd0OyBkb2Vzbid0IHNsb3cgZG93biB0aGUgd29yayBvbiBQSU0g YW5kIElHTVAvTUxEIHRob3VnaC4gTVNEUCBjb3VsZA0KYWxzbzxicj4NCiZndDsgYmUgaW50ZXJl c3RpbmcuPGJyPg0KJmd0OyA8YnI+DQomZ3Q7IEknbSBqdXN0IGhhcHB5IHRvIHNlZSB0aGF0IHBl b3BsZSB3YW50IHRvIHdvcmsgb24gbXVsdGljYXN0IHJlbGF0ZWQ8YnI+DQomZ3Q7IFlBTkcgbW9k ZWxzLjxicj4NCiZndDsgPGJyPg0KJmd0OyBTdGlnPGJyPg0KJmd0OyA8YnI+DQomZ3Q7ICZndDsg VGhhbmtzLDxicj4NCiZndDsgJmd0OyBBbmlzaDxicj4NCiZndDsgJmd0Ozxicj4NCiZndDsgJmd0 OyBPbiA0LzIxLzE2IDM6MjYgUE0sIExpdXlpc29uZyB3cm90ZTo8YnI+DQomZ3Q7ICZndDsmZ3Q7 PGJyPg0KJmd0OyAmZ3Q7Jmd0OyBIaSBldmVyeW9uZSw8YnI+DQomZ3Q7ICZndDsmZ3Q7PGJyPg0K Jmd0OyAmZ3Q7Jmd0OyBJIGhhdmUgY3JlYXRlZCB0YWJsZSBpbiB0aGUgbXVsdGljYXN0IHlhbmcg d2lraSA6PGJyPg0KJmd0OyAmZ3Q7Jmd0OyBodHRwczovL3RyYWMudG9vbHMuaWV0Zi5vcmcvd2cv cGltL3RyYWMvd2lraS95YW5nLCBhbmQgSQ0KaG9wZSB5b3UgY2FuPGJyPg0KJmd0OyAmZ3Q7Jmd0 OyBmaWxsIGluIHRoZSB0YWJsZSBieSB5b3VyIGltcGxlbWVudGF0aW9uLjxicj4NCiZndDsgJmd0 OyZndDs8YnI+DQomZ3Q7ICZndDsmZ3Q7IFRoYW5rcy48YnI+DQomZ3Q7ICZndDsmZ3Q7PGJyPg0K Jmd0OyAmZ3Q7Jmd0OyBZaXNvbmc8YnI+DQomZ3Q7ICZndDsmZ3Q7PGJyPg0KJmd0OyAmZ3Q7Jmd0 Ozxicj4NCiZndDsgJmd0OyZndDs8YnI+DQomZ3Q7ICZndDsmZ3Q7IF9fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fPGJyPg0KJmd0OyAmZ3Q7Jmd0OyBZYW5nLW11 bHRpY2FzdCBtYWlsaW5nIGxpc3Q8YnI+DQomZ3Q7ICZndDsmZ3Q7IFlhbmctbXVsdGljYXN0QGll dGYub3JnPGJyPg0KJmd0OyAmZ3Q7Jmd0OyBodHRwczovL3d3dy5pZXRmLm9yZy9tYWlsbWFuL2xp c3RpbmZvL3lhbmctbXVsdGljYXN0PGJyPg0KJmd0OyAmZ3Q7PGJyPg0KJmd0OyAmZ3Q7PGJyPg0K Jmd0OyAmZ3Q7PGJyPg0KJmd0OyAmZ3Q7IF9fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fPGJyPg0KJmd0OyAmZ3Q7IFlhbmctbXVsdGljYXN0IG1haWxpbmcgbGlz dDxicj4NCiZndDsgJmd0OyBZYW5nLW11bHRpY2FzdEBpZXRmLm9yZzxicj4NCiZndDsgJmd0OyBo dHRwczovL3d3dy5pZXRmLm9yZy9tYWlsbWFuL2xpc3RpbmZvL3lhbmctbXVsdGljYXN0PGJyPg0K Jmd0OyAmZ3Q7PGJyPg0KJmd0OyA8YnI+DQomZ3Q7IF9fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fPGJyPg0KJmd0OyBZYW5nLW11bHRpY2FzdCBtYWlsaW5nIGxp c3Q8YnI+DQomZ3Q7IFlhbmctbXVsdGljYXN0QGlldGYub3JnPGJyPg0KJmd0OyBodHRwczovL3d3 dy5pZXRmLm9yZy9tYWlsbWFuL2xpc3RpbmZvL3lhbmctbXVsdGljYXN0PGJyPg0KPC90dD48L2Zv bnQ+DQo= --=_alternative 001FC43C48257FA0_=-- From nobody Mon Apr 25 13:24:28 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pim@ietf.org Delivered-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9085612D5E9; Mon, 25 Apr 2016 13:24:25 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.19.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <20160425202425.30214.91304.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2016 13:24:25 -0700 Archived-At: Cc: pim@ietf.org Subject: [pim] I-D Action: draft-ietf-pim-hierarchicaljoinattr-08.txt X-BeenThere: pim@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 List-Id: Protocol Independent Multicast List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2016 20:24:25 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Protocols for IP Multicast of the IETF. Title : Hierarchical Join/Prune Attributes Authors : Stig Venaas Jesus Arango Isidor Kouvelas Filename : draft-ietf-pim-hierarchicaljoinattr-08.txt Pages : 8 Date : 2016-04-25 Abstract: This document defines a hierachical method of encoding Join attributes, providing a more efficient encoding when the same attribute values need to be specified for multiple sources in a PIM Join/Prune message. This document updates RFC 5384 by renaming the Encoding Type registry specified there. The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-pim-hierarchicaljoinattr/ There's also a htmlized version available at: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-pim-hierarchicaljoinattr-08 A diff from the previous version is available at: https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-pim-hierarchicaljoinattr-08 Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ From nobody Mon Apr 25 16:02:31 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pim@ietf.org Delivered-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8080512B023; Mon, 25 Apr 2016 16:02:26 -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: 6.19.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <20160425230226.30234.99593.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2016 16:02:26 -0700 Archived-At: Cc: pim-chairs@ietf.org, Mike McBride , The IESG , draft-ietf-pim-hierarchicaljoinattr@ietf.org, pim@ietf.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org Subject: [pim] Protocol Action: 'Hierarchical Join/Prune Attributes' to Proposed Standard (draft-ietf-pim-hierarchicaljoinattr-08.txt) X-BeenThere: pim@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 List-Id: Protocol Independent Multicast List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2016 23:02:27 -0000 The IESG has approved the following document: - 'Hierarchical Join/Prune Attributes' (draft-ietf-pim-hierarchicaljoinattr-08.txt) as Proposed Standard This document is the product of the Protocols for IP Multicast Working Group. The IESG contact persons are Alvaro Retana, Alia Atlas and Deborah Brungard. A URL of this Internet Draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-pim-hierarchicaljoinattr/ Technical Summary This document defines a hierachical method of encoding Join attributes, providing a more efficient encoding when the same attribute values need to be specified for multiple sources in a PIM Join/Prune message. Working Group Summary There has been light, but unanimous, support for the document. Only support has been shown, nothing controversial in this draft. Document Quality There are implementation plans from at least one vendor. Personnel Document Shepherd = Mike McBride Area Director = Alvaro Retana From nobody Tue Apr 26 15:04:39 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pim@ietf.org Delivered-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3953312D117; Tue, 26 Apr 2016 15:04:36 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.19.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <20160426220436.30184.71461.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2016 15:04:36 -0700 Archived-At: Cc: pim@ietf.org Subject: [pim] I-D Action: draft-ietf-pim-explicit-rpf-vector-09.txt X-BeenThere: pim@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 List-Id: Protocol Independent Multicast List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2016 22:04:36 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Protocols for IP Multicast of the IETF. Title : Explicit RPF Vector Authors : Javed Asghar IJsbrand Wijnands Sowmya Krishnaswamy Apoorva Karan Vishal Arya Filename : draft-ietf-pim-explicit-rpf-vector-09.txt Pages : 9 Date : 2016-04-26 Abstract: The PIM Reverse Path Forwarding (RPF) Vector TLV defined in RFC 5496 can be included in a PIM Join Attribute such that the RPF neighbor is selected based on the unicast reachability of the RPF Vector instead of the Source or Randezvous Point associated with the multicast tree. This document defines a new RPF Vector Attribute type such that an explicit RPF neighbor list can be encoded in the PIM Join Attribute, bypassing the unicast route lookup. The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-pim-explicit-rpf-vector/ There's also a htmlized version available at: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-pim-explicit-rpf-vector-09 A diff from the previous version is available at: https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-pim-explicit-rpf-vector-09 Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ From nobody Wed Apr 27 11:52:31 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pim@ietf.org Delivered-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 06F2D12D55A; Wed, 27 Apr 2016 11:52:30 -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: 6.19.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <20160427185229.25289.79258.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2016 11:52:29 -0700 Archived-At: Cc: draft-ietf-pim-explicit-rpf-vector@ietf.org, pim-chairs@ietf.org, mmcbride7@gmail.com, The IESG , pim@ietf.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org Subject: [pim] Protocol Action: 'Explicit RPF Vector' to Proposed Standard (draft-ietf-pim-explicit-rpf-vector-09.txt) X-BeenThere: pim@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 List-Id: Protocol Independent Multicast List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2016 18:52:30 -0000 The IESG has approved the following document: - 'Explicit RPF Vector' (draft-ietf-pim-explicit-rpf-vector-09.txt) as Proposed Standard This document is the product of the Protocols for IP Multicast Working Group. The IESG contact persons are Alvaro Retana, Alia Atlas and Deborah Brungard. A URL of this Internet Draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-pim-explicit-rpf-vector/ Technical Summary For some applications, it might be useful to have a way to specify the explicit path along which the PIM join is propagated. This document defines a new Reverse Path Forwarding (RPF) Vector TLV to build multicast trees via an explicit path sent in the PIM join. Working Group Summary: There was several comments on the mailing list during the working group last call. All comments have been addressed in this latest draft. Document Quality: At least one vendor (Cisco) has indicted that they will implement the functionality documented in this draft. Personnel: Mike McBride is the document shepherd Alvaro Retana is the Area Director.