From bingxuere@gmail.com Thu Jan 3 19:09:08 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: int-area@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: int-area@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4E81321F8D59 for ; Thu, 3 Jan 2013 19:09:08 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.109 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.109 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_05=-1.11, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id TMG+Yo1dbKau for ; Thu, 3 Jan 2013 19:09:07 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-ia0-f171.google.com (mail-ia0-f171.google.com [209.85.210.171]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F4B421F8CF4 for ; Thu, 3 Jan 2013 19:09:07 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-ia0-f171.google.com with SMTP id k27so13525020iad.30 for ; Thu, 03 Jan 2013 19:09:07 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to:content-type; bh=bJOQ1DX9PiwUOj6ob+P5EC6SpGnux63QVQ2w4z6aABM=; b=o9Ow71zwuSxcHf2hDwRkP4QhBf6dLJ9WqIQY2V1EaQoy0JsfoqxggXU/x3KSIaPTK9 oTaO95TqLqH6gBU49H1M6No4QO1zU3Ky4OpWI3WfNqJNvIhziBD1k6OJkq1l0TbndIgA 69d0Y5VcSCTE2wyc4biKeTNcIjYACRvY6HMY9KNV1Z9vc8TqVFwQQOCkDBb9jlGB8XbR 37zoiw1II5GDxllkcj20KSIGkGUtbypASd2EtqXh2vCWeD07o/ZZ5lOWKU4lwZ1iIvYu Uw3jBXr7B7QZEwNYJwtXhwDf98q4DT7TMZyGOvknMbyz4o3ylSIsK+lZakmrpEzKUqcp pZgA== Received: by 10.50.161.130 with SMTP id xs2mr44756629igb.34.1357268947165; Thu, 03 Jan 2013 19:09:07 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.64.76.200 with HTTP; Thu, 3 Jan 2013 19:08:25 -0800 (PST) From: Qiong Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2013 11:08:25 +0800 Message-ID: To: int-area@ietf.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=14dae934106d75e0cb04d26dcdf0 Subject: [Int-area] Call for adoption of draft-carpenter-flow-label-balancing-02 X-BeenThere: int-area@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Internet Area Mailing List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2013 03:09:08 -0000 --14dae934106d75e0cb04d26dcdf0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Hi all, I support to adopt this draft. It is a good use case of flow label. Best wishes Qiong >-----Original Message----- >From: int-area-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:int-area-bounces@ietf.org] On >Behalf Of Suresh Krishnan >Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2012 8:46 PM >To: Internet Area >Cc: Julien Laganier; Ralph Droms >Subject: [Int-area] Call for adoption of >draft-carpenter-flow-label-balancing-02 > >Hi all, > This draft has been presented at intarea face to face meetings and has >received a bit of discussion. It has been difficult to gauge whether the >wg is interested in this work or not. This call is being initiated to >determine whether there is WG consensus towards adoption of >draft-carpenter-flow-label-balancing-02 as an intarea WG draft. Please >state whether or not you're in favor of the adoption by replying to this >email. If you are not in favor, please also state your objections in >your response. This adoption call will complete on 2013-01-04. > >Regards >Suresh & Julien > > >_______________________________________________ >Int-area mailing list >Int-area@ietf.org >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area --14dae934106d75e0cb04d26dcdf0 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi all,

I support to adopt this dra= ft. It is a good use case of flow label.

Best wishes
Qiong<= br>


>-----Original=C2=A0Message-----

<= /div>

>From:=C2=A0int-area-bounces@ietf.org=C2=A0[mailto:int-area-bounces@ietf.org]=C2=A0On

>Behalf=C2=A0Of=C2=A0Suresh=C2=A0Krishnan

>Sent:=C2=A0Tuesday,=C2=A0December=C2=A018,= =C2=A02012=C2=A08:46=C2=A0PM

>To:=C2=A0Internet=C2=A0Area

>Cc:=C2=A0Julien=C2=A0Laganier;=C2=A0Ralph= =C2=A0Droms

>Subject:=C2=A0[Int-area]=C2=A0Call=C2=A0for= =C2=A0adoption=C2=A0of

>draft-carpenter-flow-label-balancing-02

>=C2=A0

>Hi=C2=A0all,

>=C2=A0=C2=A0This=C2=A0draft=C2=A0has=C2=A0b= een=C2=A0presented=C2=A0at=C2=A0intarea=C2=A0face=C2=A0to=C2=A0face=C2=A0me= etings=C2=A0and=C2=A0has

>received=C2=A0a=C2=A0bit=C2=A0of=C2=A0discu= ssion.=C2=A0It=C2=A0has=C2=A0been=C2=A0difficult=C2=A0to=C2=A0gauge=C2=A0wh= ether=C2=A0the

>wg=C2=A0is=C2=A0interested=C2=A0in=C2=A0thi= s=C2=A0work=C2=A0or=C2=A0not.=C2=A0This=C2=A0call=C2=A0is=C2=A0being=C2=A0i= nitiated=C2=A0to

>determine=C2=A0whether=C2=A0there=C2=A0is= =C2=A0WG=C2=A0consensus=C2=A0towards=C2=A0adoption=C2=A0of

>draft-carpenter-flow-label-balancing-02=C2= =A0as=C2=A0an=C2=A0intarea=C2=A0WG=C2=A0draft.=C2=A0Please

>state=C2=A0whether=C2=A0or=C2=A0not=C2=A0yo= u're=C2=A0in=C2=A0favor=C2=A0of=C2=A0the=C2=A0adoption=C2=A0by=C2=A0rep= lying=C2=A0to=C2=A0this

>email.=C2=A0If=C2=A0you=C2=A0are=C2=A0not= =C2=A0in=C2=A0favor,=C2=A0please=C2=A0also=C2=A0state=C2=A0your=C2=A0object= ions=C2=A0in

>your=C2=A0response.=C2=A0This=C2=A0adoption= =C2=A0call=C2=A0will=C2=A0complete=C2=A0on=C2=A02013-01-04.

>=C2=A0

>Regards

>Suresh=C2=A0&=C2=A0Julien

>=C2=A0

>=C2=A0

>___________________________________________= ____

>Int-area=C2=A0mailing=C2=A0list

<= /div>
--14dae934106d75e0cb04d26dcdf0-- From healthyao@gmail.com Thu Jan 3 23:10:13 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: int-area@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: int-area@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 03C7521F8E07 for ; Thu, 3 Jan 2013 23:10:13 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.098 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_05=-1.11, FAKE_REPLY_C=2.012, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id lU3DwRALcH+r for ; Thu, 3 Jan 2013 23:10:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-pa0-f53.google.com (mail-pa0-f53.google.com [209.85.220.53]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 758DC21F8E76 for ; Thu, 3 Jan 2013 23:10:09 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-pa0-f53.google.com with SMTP id hz1so9088805pad.26 for ; Thu, 03 Jan 2013 23:10:09 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=x-received:message-id:from:to:subject:date:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:x-priority:x-msmail-priority :x-mailer:x-mimeole; bh=gMggKKIGoppSYe0Kaxw5Z5zgUcXzAbrLnX5P1uDyblk=; b=vkn9u4umYotWb6lIbmRctqCeXk2kr8OgiRRabE8WnMEbPpZmr8gid8BTz2s5jsdmko 7gLQq9YKcPUjMSwBdiuiWLkolmSvrgkupOHUk1jqDuPKM/I6YrRpJbOGTb4DWjgTtyjQ Ehlt7xIVEvmTIuQZOmW6AqgZVuYlbMPWSu8gSh1iJM9WN7QGp3irx0FkcKAGAmq3oHGE lehie9ohj5ElR/Cx7RPwnmkCeaZZviRP0riqvedSwvIgpT2M9g3wVWRIQs/adD8LTD78 OtrcQlx8LszmjZCZFA9+GgEkTyJ+O7I0QoV/cTgheczeo4M1C5331Jbik1JWtTZmthgO dvmQ== X-Received: by 10.66.76.37 with SMTP id h5mr151688292paw.33.1357283409162; Thu, 03 Jan 2013 23:10:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from LENOVO47E041CF ([218.241.111.35]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id pj1sm31735696pbb.71.2013.01.03.23.10.07 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Thu, 03 Jan 2013 23:10:08 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <1C00D0BE07A54C04ADEC568060D82446@LENOVO47E041CF> From: "Yao" To: Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2013 15:13:43 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5931 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.6157 Subject: Re: [Int-area] Call for adoption of draft-carpenter-flow-label-balancing-02 X-BeenThere: int-area@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Internet Area Mailing List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2013 07:10:13 -0000 DQoNCkl0IGlzIGEgdXNlZnVsIEluZm9ybWF0aW9uYWwgIGRvY3VtZW50Lg0KDQpKaWFua2FuZw0K DQotLS0tLU9yaWdpbmFsIE1lc3NhZ2UtLS0tLQ0KRnJvbTogaW50LWFyZWEtYm91bmNlc0BpZXRm Lm9yZyBbbWFpbHRvOmludC1hcmVhLWJvdW5jZXNAaWV0Zi5vcmddIE9uIA0KQmVoYWxmIE9mIFN1 cmVzaCBLcmlzaG5hbg0KU2VudDogVHVlc2RheSwgRGVjZW1iZXIgMTgsIDIwMTIgODo0NiBQTQ0K VG86IEludGVybmV0IEFyZWENCkNjOiBKdWxpZW4gTGFnYW5pZXI7IFJhbHBoIERyb21zDQpTdWJq ZWN0OiBbSW50LWFyZWFdIENhbGwgZm9yIGFkb3B0aW9uIG9mDQpkcmFmdC1jYXJwZW50ZXItZmxv dy1sYWJlbC1iYWxhbmNpbmctMDINCg0KSGkgYWxsLA0KVGhpcyBkcmFmdCBoYXMgYmVlbiBwcmVz ZW50ZWQgYXQgaW50YXJlYSBmYWNlIHRvIGZhY2UgbWVldGluZ3MgYW5kIA0KaGFzIHJlY2VpdmVk IGEgYml0IG9mIGRpc2N1c3Npb24uIEl0IGhhcyBiZWVuIGRpZmZpY3VsdCB0byBnYXVnZSANCndo ZXRoZXIgdGhlIHdnIGlzIGludGVyZXN0ZWQgaW4gdGhpcyB3b3JrIG9yIG5vdC4gVGhpcyBjYWxs IGlzIGJlaW5nIA0KaW5pdGlhdGVkIHRvIGRldGVybWluZSB3aGV0aGVyIHRoZXJlIGlzIFdHIGNv bnNlbnN1cyB0b3dhcmRzIGFkb3B0aW9uIA0Kb2YNCmRyYWZ0LWNhcnBlbnRlci1mbG93LWxhYmVs LWJhbGFuY2luZy0wMiBhcyBhbiBpbnRhcmVhIFdHIGRyYWZ0LiBQbGVhc2UgDQpzdGF0ZSB3aGV0 aGVyIG9yIG5vdCB5b3UncmUgaW4gZmF2b3Igb2YgdGhlIGFkb3B0aW9uIGJ5IHJlcGx5aW5nIHRv IA0KdGhpcyBlbWFpbC4gSWYgeW91IGFyZSBub3QgaW4gZmF2b3IsIHBsZWFzZSBhbHNvIHN0YXRl IHlvdXIgb2JqZWN0aW9ucyANCmluIHlvdXIgcmVzcG9uc2UuIFRoaXMgYWRvcHRpb24gY2FsbCB3 aWxsIGNvbXBsZXRlIG9uIDIwMTMtMDEtMDQuDQoNClJlZ2FyZHMNClN1cmVzaCAmIEp1bGllbg0K DQoNCl9fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fDQpJbnQt YXJlYSBtYWlsaW5nIGxpc3QNCkludC1hcmVhQGlldGYub3JnDQpodHRwczovL3d3dy5pZXRmLm9y Zy9tYWlsbWFuL2xpc3RpbmZvL2ludC1hcmVh From bob.hinden@gmail.com Fri Jan 4 11:44:38 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: int-area@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: int-area@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 122AA21F873B for ; Fri, 4 Jan 2013 11:44:37 -0800 (PST) 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 ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id PBGjXD-pPokk for ; Fri, 4 Jan 2013 11:44:33 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-vb0-f41.google.com (mail-vb0-f41.google.com [209.85.212.41]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D634721F8855 for ; Fri, 4 Jan 2013 11:44:32 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-vb0-f41.google.com with SMTP id l22so16679008vbn.14 for ; Fri, 04 Jan 2013 11:44:32 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=x-received:subject:mime-version:content-type:from:in-reply-to:date :cc:content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to:x-mailer; bh=Fu+2SBJ0v3UDjyj5fVk/gk8l68PpZ98a92IQE6ZzPSM=; b=ZKVEEhEx/IwDw3mdq0h13L/Lkeo1gOXYvZ4HITCz2JwHle4XvZ0+v1EJ6bbV8x+Ucw QGCC6BbDKqEiMBiIs5zdbEKbc72qAkTTIgaTjwTK1PvYwIQk9mpYWLN81FT/I4X7JDTV OuzTDd/q9jYMaU7/ioEdq6ZN886b1NfszdrPFwqndSVXXzRxqifE/XT4FWW0x+8cDJdJ Q2wZw8OvVZJkRl7gkAHdl+74EPzPHA5IF8tH/kgV1BacY0BJozgrjoMy6QygbvthMbHd r+MWLgrSbZKnBPICIBUY75DT+pgFoEc/NIRVNwcuwEX0/sTUQP8HTpizNG8KgutN2e5x ikfA== X-Received: by 10.58.45.105 with SMTP id l9mr29919404vem.13.1357328672309; Fri, 04 Jan 2013 11:44:32 -0800 (PST) Received: from [172.16.224.219] ([209.97.127.34]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id qj8sm44351255veb.2.2013.01.04.11.44.30 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Fri, 04 Jan 2013 11:44:31 -0800 (PST) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1283) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Bob Hinden In-Reply-To: <50D0657B.8090302@ericsson.com> Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2013 11:44:29 -0800 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <73CE2ABC-2213-49C4-81D2-D0058B3BDB94@gmail.com> References: <50D0657B.8090302@ericsson.com> To: Suresh Krishnan X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1283) Cc: Internet Area , Ralph Droms , Julien Laganier Subject: Re: [Int-area] Call for adoption of draft-carpenter-flow-label-balancing-02 X-BeenThere: int-area@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Internet Area Mailing List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2013 19:44:38 -0000 Support. Bob On Dec 18, 2012, at 4:45 AM, Suresh Krishnan wrote: > Hi all, > This draft has been presented at intarea face to face meetings and has > received a bit of discussion. It has been difficult to gauge whether the > wg is interested in this work or not. This call is being initiated to > determine whether there is WG consensus towards adoption of > draft-carpenter-flow-label-balancing-02 as an intarea WG draft. Please > state whether or not you're in favor of the adoption by replying to this > email. If you are not in favor, please also state your objections in > your response. This adoption call will complete on 2013-01-04. > > Regards > Suresh & Julien > > > _______________________________________________ > Int-area mailing list > Int-area@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area From ietf@rozanak.com Fri Jan 4 12:00:01 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: int-area@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: int-area@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 258F521F8A41 for ; Fri, 4 Jan 2013 12:00:01 -0800 (PST) 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 ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id XE7ZzW+XfySw for ; Fri, 4 Jan 2013 11:59:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from mout.perfora.net (mout.perfora.net [74.208.4.195]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A90721F85D7 for ; Fri, 4 Jan 2013 11:59:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from kopoli (g225038076.adsl.alicedsl.de [92.225.38.76]) by mrelay.perfora.net (node=mrus2) with ESMTP (Nemesis) id 0Mclzd-1TZPb70bi5-00HpCo; Fri, 04 Jan 2013 14:59:55 -0500 From: "Hosnieh Rafiee" To: References: <50D0657B.8090302@ericsson.com> <73CE2ABC-2213-49C4-81D2-D0058B3BDB94@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <73CE2ABC-2213-49C4-81D2-D0058B3BDB94@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2013 20:59:48 +0100 Message-ID: <000c01cdeab6$104cd2b0$30e67810$@rozanak.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0 Thread-Index: AQGhi2d4LRmL8bvd+SG+llMR7Ij8aQG9E0pAmIRrwEA= Content-Language: en-us X-Provags-ID: V02:K0:txEnPcGlbHiO5D3zIcfxlzc3wFZjRFfBziQcP/hdsqo Ch26BUdslaweSlNbV0sW/U6XGMshUFoIhhLaT3XgauagL7ISXJ LT5GH9xFNuocsSBKJ2tD0bODWaXrCI+5+wefeGRvhX8j86MUx3 asBiH0yOllWPXH0r7QC9b18gZv9EXXn83LddmTZ4MmAWvKOe1W xy6JAZGWJXLsDZcZPunIN6+l5znAIhzRBp2AJg50Fq6MAKky1C onOxCe9ZtQLAvFbEPsoaVXcIOgQneEqPN8kA/HcwHjB3VBMCPg 6XGhJSWRRV+E4ycP4jYwFu8lIuKDe8dZrKxngXwjePz5IvW/BU Tp8414eKXw/Lin0I8oBU= Cc: Int-area@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Int-area] Call for adoption of draft-carpenter-flow-label-balancing-02 X-BeenThere: int-area@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Internet Area Mailing List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2013 20:00:01 -0000 +1 I also found it useful. On Dec 18, 2012, at 4:45 AM, Suresh Krishnan wrote: > Hi all, > This draft has been presented at intarea face to face meetings and > has received a bit of discussion. It has been difficult to gauge > whether the wg is interested in this work or not. This call is being > initiated to determine whether there is WG consensus towards adoption > of > draft-carpenter-flow-label-balancing-02 as an intarea WG draft. Please > state whether or not you're in favor of the adoption by replying to > this email. If you are not in favor, please also state your objections > in your response. This adoption call will complete on 2013-01-04. > > Regards > Suresh & Julien > > > _______________________________________________ > Int-area mailing list > Int-area@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area _______________________________________________ Int-area mailing list Int-area@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area From diego@tid.es Fri Jan 4 15:37:59 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: int-area@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: int-area@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5D9BC21F891A for ; Fri, 4 Jan 2013 15:37:59 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id YFZlmabA3ERr for ; Fri, 4 Jan 2013 15:37:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from correo-bck.tid.es (correo-bck.tid.es [195.235.93.200]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6185321F88A1 for ; Fri, 4 Jan 2013 15:37:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from sbrightmailg02.hi.inet (Sbrightmailg02.hi.inet [10.95.78.105]) by tid.hi.inet (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTP id <0MG400GACKB052@tid.hi.inet> for Int-area@ietf.org; Sat, 05 Jan 2013 00:37:48 +0100 (MET) Received: from vanvan (vanvan.hi.inet [10.95.78.49]) by sbrightmailg02.hi.inet (Symantec Messaging Gateway) with SMTP id F4.E9.02896.CC767E05; Sat, 05 Jan 2013 00:37:48 +0100 (CET) Received: from correo.tid.es (mailhost.hi.inet [10.95.64.100]) by tid.hi.inet (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTPS id <0MG400GA8KAZ52@tid.hi.inet> for Int-area@ietf.org; Sat, 05 Jan 2013 00:37:47 +0100 (MET) Received: from EX10-MB2-MAD.hi.inet ([169.254.2.223]) by EX10-HTCAS5-MAD.hi.inet ([::1]) with mapi id 14.02.0318.004; Sat, 05 Jan 2013 00:37:47 +0100 Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2013 23:37:45 +0000 From: "Diego R. Lopez" In-reply-to: <000c01cdeab6$104cd2b0$30e67810$@rozanak.com> X-Originating-IP: [10.95.64.115] To: "Int-area@ietf.org" Message-id: Content-id: <0EA8D92D09BF844A94F28B209A486726@hi.inet> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-language: en-US Content-transfer-encoding: base64 Accept-Language: en-US, es-ES Thread-topic: [Int-area] Call for adoption of draft-carpenter-flow-label-balancing-02 Thread-index: AQHN6rW+Ys4BHRS0UkGWi5tUK7Rv45g5wssA X-AuditID: 0a5f4e69-b7f636d000000b50-a5-50e767cc1fad X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFlrOKsWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsXCFe9nqHsm/XmAwYpDuhY3Zt1kcWD0WLLk J1MAYxSXTUpqTmZZapG+XQJXxqlLL1gK/glXHPv0mqWBcY9wFyMnh4SAicS+LQvZIGwxiQv3 1gPZXBxCAtsYJZ6+uMkE4fxmlFh08zNUZiajxKtf99i7GDk4WARUJf62ZoF0swGZj5p/s4PY wgJhEv2b3oGVcApYSTzptYBYoCDx59xjFhBbREBb4u3rr2DlzALOEh0TloDZvALeEhtenmQG aWUWMJPYPVkXIiwo8WPyPRaIsLrElCm5EJ3iEs2tN1kgbEWJaYsaGEFsRgFZiXfz57NCbAqX uH32FSNIq4iAkURbpznEMQISS/acZ4awRSVePv4HVi4k0McosadbegKjxCyEG2YhuWEWwg2z kNwwC8kNCxhZVzGKFScVZaZnlOQmZuakGxjpZWTqZeallmxihMRa5g7G5TtVDjEKcDAq8fBW ODwPEGJNLCuuzD3EKMnBpCTKeyQNKMSXlJ9SmZFYnBFfVJqTWnyIUYKDWUmEl9kbKMebklhZ lVqUD5OS4eBQkuAVAaYFIcGi1PTUirTMHGBCgUkzcXCCtPMAte8GGc1bXJCYW5yZDpE/xSgp Jc67GCQhAJLIKM2D633FKA50pDCvA8hoHmDqg+t6BTSQCWjgqzePQQaWJCKkpBoYPaZYfJUs y/wzx1LynaHR782chl/ePfuvuHdn/upt1++vfDprTXDoHB822x7bjPip1SpHI1ZWcRcrSXSL 2zsllskmrL6mJ8lS+dnn8tY9W2vn7Pi/bZNCxdZ3c3JO/554WHqxqXFj9Ydnk+++qNkYmLQw XaxCMvn2C+lE0UPnX1+vM/V31v00X4mlOCPRUIu5qDgRACMUImk6AwAA References: <50D0657B.8090302@ericsson.com> <73CE2ABC-2213-49C4-81D2-D0058B3BDB94@gmail.com> <000c01cdeab6$104cd2b0$30e67810$@rozanak.com> Cc: "intarea-chairs@tools.ietf.org" Subject: Re: [Int-area] Call for adoption of draft-carpenter-flow-label-balancing-02 X-BeenThere: int-area@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Internet Area Mailing List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2013 23:37:59 -0000 KzENCg0KT24gNCBKYW4gMjAxMywgYXQgMjA6NTkgLCBIb3NuaWVoIFJhZmllZSB3cm90ZToNCg0K PiArMQ0KPiBJIGFsc28gZm91bmQgaXQgdXNlZnVsLg0KPg0KPiBPbiBEZWMgMTgsIDIwMTIsIGF0 IDQ6NDUgQU0sIFN1cmVzaCBLcmlzaG5hbiB3cm90ZToNCj4NCj4+IEhpIGFsbCwNCj4+IFRoaXMg ZHJhZnQgaGFzIGJlZW4gcHJlc2VudGVkIGF0IGludGFyZWEgZmFjZSB0byBmYWNlIG1lZXRpbmdz IGFuZA0KPj4gaGFzIHJlY2VpdmVkIGEgYml0IG9mIGRpc2N1c3Npb24uIEl0IGhhcyBiZWVuIGRp ZmZpY3VsdCB0byBnYXVnZQ0KPj4gd2hldGhlciB0aGUgd2cgaXMgaW50ZXJlc3RlZCBpbiB0aGlz IHdvcmsgb3Igbm90LiBUaGlzIGNhbGwgaXMgYmVpbmcNCj4+IGluaXRpYXRlZCB0byBkZXRlcm1p bmUgd2hldGhlciB0aGVyZSBpcyBXRyBjb25zZW5zdXMgdG93YXJkcyBhZG9wdGlvbg0KPj4gb2YN Cj4+IGRyYWZ0LWNhcnBlbnRlci1mbG93LWxhYmVsLWJhbGFuY2luZy0wMiBhcyBhbiBpbnRhcmVh IFdHIGRyYWZ0LiBQbGVhc2UNCj4+IHN0YXRlIHdoZXRoZXIgb3Igbm90IHlvdSdyZSBpbiBmYXZv ciBvZiB0aGUgYWRvcHRpb24gYnkgcmVwbHlpbmcgdG8NCj4+IHRoaXMgZW1haWwuIElmIHlvdSBh cmUgbm90IGluIGZhdm9yLCBwbGVhc2UgYWxzbyBzdGF0ZSB5b3VyIG9iamVjdGlvbnMNCj4+IGlu IHlvdXIgcmVzcG9uc2UuIFRoaXMgYWRvcHRpb24gY2FsbCB3aWxsIGNvbXBsZXRlIG9uIDIwMTMt MDEtMDQuDQo+Pg0KPj4gUmVnYXJkcw0KPj4gU3VyZXNoICYgSnVsaWVuDQo+Pg0KPj4NCj4+IF9f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fDQo+PiBJbnQtYXJl YSBtYWlsaW5nIGxpc3QNCj4+IEludC1hcmVhQGlldGYub3JnDQo+PiBodHRwczovL3d3dy5pZXRm Lm9yZy9tYWlsbWFuL2xpc3RpbmZvL2ludC1hcmVhDQo+DQo+IF9fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fDQo+IEludC1hcmVhIG1haWxpbmcgbGlzdA0KPiBJ bnQtYXJlYUBpZXRmLm9yZw0KPiBodHRwczovL3d3dy5pZXRmLm9yZy9tYWlsbWFuL2xpc3RpbmZv L2ludC1hcmVhDQo+DQo+IF9fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fDQo+IEludC1hcmVhIG1haWxpbmcgbGlzdA0KPiBJbnQtYXJlYUBpZXRmLm9yZw0KPiBo dHRwczovL3d3dy5pZXRmLm9yZy9tYWlsbWFuL2xpc3RpbmZvL2ludC1hcmVhDQoNCg0KLS0NCiJF c3RhIHZleiBubyBmYWxsYXJlbW9zLCBEb2N0b3IgSW5maWVybm8iDQoNCkRyIERpZWdvIFIuIExv cGV6DQpUZWxlZm9uaWNhIEkrRA0KaHR0cDovL3Blb3BsZS50aWQuZXMvZGllZ28ubG9wZXovDQoN CmUtbWFpbDogZGllZ29AdGlkLmVzDQpUZWw6ICAgICszNCA5MTMgMTI5IDA0MQ0KTW9iaWxlOiAr MzQgNjgyIDA1MSAwOTENCi0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0t DQoNCg0KX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX18NCg0KRXN0ZSBtZW5zYWplIHNl IGRpcmlnZSBleGNsdXNpdmFtZW50ZSBhIHN1IGRlc3RpbmF0YXJpby4gUHVlZGUgY29uc3VsdGFy IG51ZXN0cmEgcG9sw610aWNhIGRlIGVudsOtbyB5IHJlY2VwY2nDs24gZGUgY29ycmVvIGVsZWN0 csOzbmljbyBlbiBlbCBlbmxhY2Ugc2l0dWFkbyBtw6FzIGFiYWpvLg0KVGhpcyBtZXNzYWdlIGlz IGludGVuZGVkIGV4Y2x1c2l2ZWx5IGZvciBpdHMgYWRkcmVzc2VlLiBXZSBvbmx5IHNlbmQgYW5k IHJlY2VpdmUgZW1haWwgb24gdGhlIGJhc2lzIG9mIHRoZSB0ZXJtcyBzZXQgb3V0IGF0Og0KaHR0 cDovL3d3dy50aWQuZXMvRVMvUEFHSU5BUy9kaXNjbGFpbWVyLmFzcHgNCg== From linda.dunbar@huawei.com Mon Jan 7 06:14:58 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: int-area@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: int-area@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 63A9921F86C2 for ; Mon, 7 Jan 2013 06:14:58 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id nu1+H+MNXM+7 for ; Mon, 7 Jan 2013 06:14:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [194.213.3.17]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0658421F8712 for ; Mon, 7 Jan 2013 06:14:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from 172.18.7.190 (EHLO lhreml204-edg.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.7.190]) by lhrrg01-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.3.5-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id AON14172; Mon, 07 Jan 2013 14:14:55 +0000 (GMT) Received: from LHREML404-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.218) by lhreml204-edg.china.huawei.com (172.18.7.223) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.3; Mon, 7 Jan 2013 14:13:34 +0000 Received: from DFWEML403-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.193.5.151) by lhreml404-hub.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.218) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.3; Mon, 7 Jan 2013 22:14:27 +0800 Received: from DFWEML505-MBX.china.huawei.com ([10.124.31.100]) by dfweml403-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.193.5.151]) with mapi id 14.01.0323.003; Mon, 7 Jan 2013 06:14:24 -0800 From: Linda Dunbar To: "Int-area@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [Int-area] Call for adoption of draft-carpenter-flow-label-balancing-02 Thread-Index: AQHN6tSQN1CppifGp0m5irq4idx2XJg97Niw Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2013 14:14:23 +0000 Message-ID: <4A95BA014132FF49AE685FAB4B9F17F6450DEA31@dfweml505-mbx> References: <50D0657B.8090302@ericsson.com> <73CE2ABC-2213-49C4-81D2-D0058B3BDB94@gmail.com> <000c01cdeab6$104cd2b0$30e67810$@rozanak.com> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US, zh-CN Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.47.131.90] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Cc: "intarea-chairs@tools.ietf.org" Subject: Re: [Int-area] Call for adoption of draft-carpenter-flow-label-balancing-02 X-BeenThere: int-area@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Internet Area Mailing List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 07 Jan 2013 14:14:58 -0000 DQorMQ0KDQpMaW5kYQ0KPiANCj4gT24gNCBKYW4gMjAxMywgYXQgMjA6NTkgLCBIb3NuaWVoIFJh ZmllZSB3cm90ZToNCj4gDQo+ID4gKzENCj4gPiBJIGFsc28gZm91bmQgaXQgdXNlZnVsLg0KPiA+ DQo+ID4gT24gRGVjIDE4LCAyMDEyLCBhdCA0OjQ1IEFNLCBTdXJlc2ggS3Jpc2huYW4gd3JvdGU6 DQo+ID4NCj4gPj4gSGkgYWxsLA0KPiA+PiBUaGlzIGRyYWZ0IGhhcyBiZWVuIHByZXNlbnRlZCBh dCBpbnRhcmVhIGZhY2UgdG8gZmFjZSBtZWV0aW5ncyBhbmQNCj4gPj4gaGFzIHJlY2VpdmVkIGEg Yml0IG9mIGRpc2N1c3Npb24uIEl0IGhhcyBiZWVuIGRpZmZpY3VsdCB0byBnYXVnZQ0KPiA+PiB3 aGV0aGVyIHRoZSB3ZyBpcyBpbnRlcmVzdGVkIGluIHRoaXMgd29yayBvciBub3QuIFRoaXMgY2Fs bCBpcyBiZWluZw0KPiA+PiBpbml0aWF0ZWQgdG8gZGV0ZXJtaW5lIHdoZXRoZXIgdGhlcmUgaXMg V0cgY29uc2Vuc3VzIHRvd2FyZHMNCj4gYWRvcHRpb24NCj4gPj4gb2YNCj4gPj4gZHJhZnQtY2Fy cGVudGVyLWZsb3ctbGFiZWwtYmFsYW5jaW5nLTAyIGFzIGFuIGludGFyZWEgV0cgZHJhZnQuDQo+ IFBsZWFzZQ0KPiA+PiBzdGF0ZSB3aGV0aGVyIG9yIG5vdCB5b3UncmUgaW4gZmF2b3Igb2YgdGhl IGFkb3B0aW9uIGJ5IHJlcGx5aW5nIHRvDQo+ID4+IHRoaXMgZW1haWwuIElmIHlvdSBhcmUgbm90 IGluIGZhdm9yLCBwbGVhc2UgYWxzbyBzdGF0ZSB5b3VyDQo+IG9iamVjdGlvbnMNCj4gPj4gaW4g eW91ciByZXNwb25zZS4gVGhpcyBhZG9wdGlvbiBjYWxsIHdpbGwgY29tcGxldGUgb24gMjAxMy0w MS0wNC4NCj4gPj4NCj4gPj4gUmVnYXJkcw0KPiA+PiBTdXJlc2ggJiBKdWxpZW4NCj4gPj4NCj4g Pj4NCj4gPj4gX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX18N Cj4gPj4gSW50LWFyZWEgbWFpbGluZyBsaXN0DQo+ID4+IEludC1hcmVhQGlldGYub3JnDQo+ID4+ IGh0dHBzOi8vd3d3LmlldGYub3JnL21haWxtYW4vbGlzdGluZm8vaW50LWFyZWENCj4gPg0KPiA+ IF9fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fDQo+ID4gSW50 LWFyZWEgbWFpbGluZyBsaXN0DQo+ID4gSW50LWFyZWFAaWV0Zi5vcmcNCj4gPiBodHRwczovL3d3 dy5pZXRmLm9yZy9tYWlsbWFuL2xpc3RpbmZvL2ludC1hcmVhDQo+ID4NCj4gPiBfX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fXw0KPiA+IEludC1hcmVhIG1haWxp bmcgbGlzdA0KPiA+IEludC1hcmVhQGlldGYub3JnDQo+ID4gaHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuaWV0Zi5vcmcv bWFpbG1hbi9saXN0aW5mby9pbnQtYXJlYQ0KPiANCj4gDQo+IC0tDQo+ICJFc3RhIHZleiBubyBm YWxsYXJlbW9zLCBEb2N0b3IgSW5maWVybm8iDQo+IA0KPiBEciBEaWVnbyBSLiBMb3Bleg0KPiBU ZWxlZm9uaWNhIEkrRA0KPiBodHRwOi8vcGVvcGxlLnRpZC5lcy9kaWVnby5sb3Blei8NCj4gDQo+ IGUtbWFpbDogZGllZ29AdGlkLmVzDQo+IFRlbDogICAgKzM0IDkxMyAxMjkgMDQxDQo+IE1vYmls ZTogKzM0IDY4MiAwNTEgMDkxDQo+IC0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0t LS0tLS0tDQo+IA0KPiANCj4gX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX18NCj4gDQo+ IEVzdGUgbWVuc2FqZSBzZSBkaXJpZ2UgZXhjbHVzaXZhbWVudGUgYSBzdSBkZXN0aW5hdGFyaW8u IFB1ZWRlDQo+IGNvbnN1bHRhciBudWVzdHJhIHBvbMOtdGljYSBkZSBlbnbDrW8geSByZWNlcGNp w7NuIGRlIGNvcnJlbyBlbGVjdHLDs25pY28NCj4gZW4gZWwgZW5sYWNlIHNpdHVhZG8gbcOhcyBh YmFqby4NCj4gVGhpcyBtZXNzYWdlIGlzIGludGVuZGVkIGV4Y2x1c2l2ZWx5IGZvciBpdHMgYWRk cmVzc2VlLiBXZSBvbmx5IHNlbmQNCj4gYW5kIHJlY2VpdmUgZW1haWwgb24gdGhlIGJhc2lzIG9m IHRoZSB0ZXJtcyBzZXQgb3V0IGF0Og0KPiBodHRwOi8vd3d3LnRpZC5lcy9FUy9QQUdJTkFTL2Rp c2NsYWltZXIuYXNweA0KPiBfX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fXw0KPiBJbnQtYXJlYSBtYWlsaW5nIGxpc3QNCj4gSW50LWFyZWFAaWV0Zi5vcmcNCj4g aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuaWV0Zi5vcmcvbWFpbG1hbi9saXN0aW5mby9pbnQtYXJlYQ0K From suresh.krishnan@ericsson.com Mon Jan 14 06:18:05 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: int-area@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: int-area@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9453B21F8569 for ; Mon, 14 Jan 2013 06:18:05 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -103.518 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.518 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-3.081, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_NET=0.611, RDNS_NONE=0.1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ss-iHJvqW1W2 for ; Mon, 14 Jan 2013 06:18:05 -0800 (PST) Received: from usevmg21.ericsson.net (unknown [198.24.6.65]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 16F1721F855D for ; Mon, 14 Jan 2013 06:18:04 -0800 (PST) X-AuditID: c6180641-b7f926d000000e79-5f-50f4139cdc82 Received: from EUSAAHC006.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain [147.117.188.90]) by usevmg21.ericsson.net (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id 77.0F.03705.C9314F05; Mon, 14 Jan 2013 15:18:04 +0100 (CET) Received: from eusaamw0706.eamcs.ericsson.se (147.117.20.31) by EUSAAHC006.ericsson.se (147.117.188.90) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.2.318.4; Mon, 14 Jan 2013 09:18:03 -0500 Received: from [164.48.125.60] (147.117.20.214) by smtps-am.internal.ericsson.com (147.117.20.31) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.3.279.1; Mon, 14 Jan 2013 09:18:02 -0500 Message-ID: <50F412FF.7070705@ericsson.com> Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2013 09:15:27 -0500 From: Suresh Krishnan User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/17.0 Thunderbird/17.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Internet Area X-Enigmail-Version: 1.4.6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFprOLMWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUyuXRPlO4c4S8BBu/myFgcfnWW1WLh3V+s Fjdm3WSx+HJ0GrMDi8fOWXfZPZYs+cnk8eXyZ7YA5igum5TUnMyy1CJ9uwSujH+/djEVPGSs 2Hn1IVsD4w7GLkZODgkBE4lne1eyQthiEhfurWfrYuTiEBI4wiixs/cME4Szm1Hiy/G1jBDO FkaJrSfmsoG08ApoS+xbuwTMZhFQlXh/+jPYWDagsRt2fmYCsUUFAiQWLznHDlEvKHFy5hMW EFsEqP711otg65gFZjJK9P49B5YQFvCQmLrrOwvETZISi6Z1gtnMAnoSU662MELY8hLb385h BrGFBDQltq75zjqBUXAWkh2zkLTMQtKygJF5FSNHaXFqWW66keEmRmDgHpNgc9zBuOCT5SFG aQ4WJXHeUNcLAUIC6YklqdmpqQWpRfFFpTmpxYcYmTg4pRoYWV97mH38f5dnTfzzozLB2ivu 3mGMWrJy0x7/e6t/Xdjbm332r8D58K1W3ZOe37d+mh5nqhJ1fKuReG2D8NReFsdfjbMW3Sr9 Vu0aGi35M18o9GntJR0+ntDJ6e7ix2SmpQlwL5LeeG5lQJEJc5qDrPx11TxtxqmKSXmy91Mu uzVN+3Rjs9EnJZbijERDLeai4kQAGZAkJioCAAA= Cc: Julien Laganier , draft-carpenter-flow-label-balancing@tools.ietf.org, "int-ads@tools.ietf.org" Subject: [Int-area] Adoption of draft-carpenter-flow-label-balancing-02 as wg draft X-BeenThere: int-area@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Internet Area Mailing List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2013 14:18:05 -0000 Hi all, The adoption call on the mailing list has demonstrated consensus to adopt this draft as a wg draft. Authors, please resubmit this draft as draft-ietf-intarea-flow-label-balancing-00. Regards Suresh & Julien From internet-drafts@ietf.org Tue Jan 15 07:01:24 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: int-area@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: int-area@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8856E21F8696; Tue, 15 Jan 2013 07:01:24 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.51 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.51 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.089, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id G9Gi5CoAd0Da; Tue, 15 Jan 2013 07:01:23 -0800 (PST) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E649B21F853D; Tue, 15 Jan 2013 07:01:23 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: i-d-announce@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 4.37 Message-ID: <20130115150123.1869.28795.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2013 07:01:23 -0800 Cc: int-area@ietf.org Subject: [Int-area] I-D Action: draft-ietf-intarea-flow-label-balancing-00.txt X-BeenThere: int-area@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Internet Area Mailing List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2013 15:01:24 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts director= ies. This draft is a work item of the Internet Area Working Group Working Group= of the IETF. Title : Using the IPv6 Flow Label for Server Load Balancing Author(s) : Brian Carpenter Sheng Jiang Willy Tarreau Filename : draft-ietf-intarea-flow-label-balancing-00.txt Pages : 13 Date : 2013-01-15 Abstract: This document describes how the IPv6 flow label as currently specified can be used to enhance layer 3/4 load distribution and balancing for large server farms. The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-intarea-flow-label-balancing There's also a htmlized version available at: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-intarea-flow-label-balancing-00 Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ From linda.dunbar@huawei.com Wed Jan 16 14:52:40 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: int-area@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: int-area@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F14E11E80EC for ; Wed, 16 Jan 2013 14:52:40 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.351 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.351 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.067, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, SARE_MILLIONSOF=0.315] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id IMZA8WOG2KcO for ; Wed, 16 Jan 2013 14:52:39 -0800 (PST) Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [194.213.3.17]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A6DC11E80A6 for ; Wed, 16 Jan 2013 14:52:30 -0800 (PST) Received: from 172.18.7.190 (EHLO lhreml204-edg.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.7.190]) by lhrrg02-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.3.5-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id ANP49374; Wed, 16 Jan 2013 22:52:29 +0000 (GMT) Received: from LHREML406-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.243) by lhreml204-edg.china.huawei.com (172.18.7.223) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.3; Wed, 16 Jan 2013 22:52:14 +0000 Received: from DFWEML403-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.193.5.151) by lhreml406-hub.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.243) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.3; Wed, 16 Jan 2013 22:52:25 +0000 Received: from DFWEML505-MBX.china.huawei.com ([10.124.31.100]) by dfweml403-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.193.5.151]) with mapi id 14.01.0323.003; Wed, 16 Jan 2013 14:52:15 -0800 From: Linda Dunbar To: Linda Dunbar , Greg Daley , Suresh Krishnan Thread-Topic: IPv6 ND applicability in draft-nachum-sarp-03 Thread-Index: Ac3BJiJbrs+Mg7erTp6yFDNDBTG1HwBE2TIAAAw+YCABIeL/AAAP6wxwABQJswAADjfooAAAzhYAAA7QLEAAI/yEgAEQleQgCdq+WSA= Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 22:52:14 +0000 Message-ID: <4A95BA014132FF49AE685FAB4B9F17F6450F88B3@dfweml505-mbx> References: <4A95BA014132FF49AE685FAB4B9F17F6450951DE@dfweml505-mbx> <50A2D76C.9080407@ericsson.com> <4A95BA014132FF49AE685FAB4B9F17F645096D95@dfweml505-mbx> <50AAC2FC.7060505@ericsson.com> <4A95BA014132FF49AE685FAB4B9F17F645098E1A@dfweml505-mbx> <50ABB448.3050206@ericsson.com> <4A95BA014132FF49AE685FAB4B9F17F645099345@dfweml505-mbx> <50AC191A.1040205@ericsson.com> <4A95BA014132FF49AE685FAB4B9F17F64509971A@dfweml505-mbx> <72381AF1F18BAE4F890A0813768D9928F25D62@sdcexchms.au.logicalis.com> <4A95BA014132FF49AE685FAB4B9F17F6450B626D@dfweml505-mbx> In-Reply-To: <4A95BA014132FF49AE685FAB4B9F17F6450B626D@dfweml505-mbx> Accept-Language: en-US, zh-CN Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.47.135.75] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Cc: "julien.ietf@gmail.com" , "int-area@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [Int-area] IPv6 ND applicability in draft-nachum-sarp-03 X-BeenThere: int-area@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Internet Area Mailing List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 22:52:40 -0000 Thanks to many people's response and comments to this draft.=20 We want to clarify a couple of issues of this draft: People are under the impression that the draft is to scale the flooding of = ND messages on all links. MLD was brought up to say that ND messages are ac= tually suppressed from flooding to links which don't have the target hosts.= But that is the not the main intent of this draft.=20 The real impact of ARP/ND in DC with massive number of hosts (or VMs) is on= the L2/L3 boundary router (or Default GW). When hosts in subnet A needs to= send data frames to Subnet B, the router has to 1) respond the ARP/ND requ= ests from hosts in Subnet-A and 2) resolve target MAC for hosts in subnet-B= .=20 The second step is not only CPU intensive but also buffer intensive. There = are some practices to alleviate the pain of Step 1) for IPv4, but not for I= Pv6 (https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-dunbar-armd-arp-nd-scaling-prac= tices/). In order to protect routers CPU being overburdened by target resolution req= uests, some routers has to rate limit the Target MAC resolution requests t= o CPU (Glean Throttling rate in this manual). http://www.cisco.com/en/US/do= cs/switches/datacenter/sw/5_x/nx-os/unicast/configuration/guide/l3_ip.pdf ,= searching for "Glean Throttling".=20 When the Glean Throttling rate is exceeded, the incoming data frames are dr= opped.=20 In traditional Data Center, it is less of an issue because the number of ho= sts attached to one L2/L3 boundary router is limited by physical ports of s= witches/routers. When Servers are virtualized to support 30 plus VMs, the n= umber of hosts under one router can grow 30 plus times.=20 The solution proposed in this draft can eliminate (or reduce the likelihood= of) inter-subnet data frames being dropped. =20 In addition, the traditional DC has each subnet nicely placed in limited nu= mber of server racks, i.e. switches under router only need to deal with MAC= addresses of those limited subnets. With subnets being spread across many = server racks, the switches are exposed to VLAN/MAC of many subnets, greatly= increasing the FDB.=20 This draft also addresses the FDB entries explosion issue.=20 Is it clear enough? We can update the draft with this explanation.=20 Linda > -----Original Message----- > From: int-area-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:int-area-bounces@ietf.org] On > Behalf Of Linda Dunbar > Sent: Tuesday, November 27, 2012 12:41 PM > To: Greg Daley; Suresh Krishnan > Cc: julien.ietf@gmail.com; int-area@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [Int-area] IPv6 ND applicability in draft-nachum-sarp-03 >=20 > Greg, >=20 > Thank you very much for the detailed explanation. >=20 > As for Router sending MLD query to all-nodes multicast ff02::1, if > Explicit Tracing is not turned on, routers usually don't keep all the > host IP addresses attached to each port/link, does it? > If the ToR switches has MLD proxy, it could suppress reports from some > IP hosts. Then, the Router may not receive MLD reports from all hosts > attached to one port. >=20 > Under this scenario, when a host "a" sends Neighbor Solicitation > multicast to "b", router may not know which link "b" is attached. As > the result router could flood all the ports which has the subnet > enabled. >=20 > The MLD with Explicit Tracking being turned on can make router be > refreshed with all hosts in the domain. That can definitely scope the > ND multicast. > However, MLD with Explicit Tracking could be very resource intensive. >=20 > "draft-nachum-sarp" gives another approach to scope the ND multicast > and alleviates the burden on router when subnets are spread across > multiple links/ToRs. >=20 > Linda >=20 > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Greg Daley [mailto:gdaley@au.logicalis.com] > > Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2012 6:13 PM > > To: Linda Dunbar; Suresh Krishnan > > Cc: julien.ietf@gmail.com; int-area@ietf.org > > Subject: RE: IPv6 ND applicability in draft-nachum-sarp-03 > > > > Hi Linda, > > (also noting some overlap with Julien's response) > > > > The MLDv1 (RFC2710) or v2 (RFC3810) Querier sends out a general query > R > > times (where R is the reliability factor for the link), which > requests > > that all devices respond. This goes to all-nodes multicast ff02::1, > > and the desitnation of the query doesn't have to match recipients > (all > > of which listen to that multicast group). > > > > This scales with responses on order N x R where N is the number of > > nodes. > > > > If a router needs to manage a particular stream, it can send a > specific > > query to one of the multicast addresses, particularly to verify that > > participants. > > > > The router doesn't actually need to track the solicited nodes > multicast > > addresses, as these are link-local scoped and not multicast routed > off- > > link. > > > > Actually in conformance with RFC 6398/BCP 168 (IP Router Alert > > Considerations and Usage)/RFC 6192 (Protecting the Router Control > Plane) > > it is feasible to construct filters which ignore MLD report messages > > which only contain Link-local scoped multicast groups on the router. > > With the correct hardware support, this can be done at the line > > interface, without CPU processing. The default is to pass all MLD > > reports up to the Router though. > > > > Arguably, the only reason to send MLD Join messages for Solicited > > Nodes' multicast addresses _is_ to support MLD snooping switches. > > > > Please note that MLD snooping is an LRU caching scheme, where the > cache > > is refreshed for all active users through the background polling of > the > > MLD querier. The switches do not need to know anything ahead of > time. > > Devices which do not respond to the query will be dropped from the > > cache, and only the number of active hosts will be retained. > > > > If you changed the IP addresses of every host on the link within a > > single query interval, the maximum number of Solicited nodes > addresses > > cached by an MLD snooping network would be: > > > > ^A x N x 2 > > > > Where: > > > > The original the number of addresses is ^A x N > > and ^A is the mean number of addresses per host, and N is the number > of > > hosts on the link. > > > > Sincerely > > > > Greg Daley > > > > > > > > > > > > > From: int-area-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:int-area-bounces@ietf.org] > On > > Behalf Of Linda Dunbar > > > Sent: Thursday, 22 November 2012 2:17 AM > > > To: Suresh Krishnan > > > Cc: julien.ietf@gmail.com; int-area@ietf.org > > > Subject: Re: [Int-area] IPv6 ND applicability in draft-nachum-sarp- > 03 > > > > > > Suresh, > > > > > > "solicited node multicast address" is formed by taking the low- > order > > 24 bits of target address (unicast or anycast) and appending those > bits > > to the prefix > FF02:0:0:0:0:1:FF00::/104 > > > > > > Routers don't know ahead of time what hosts are present in their > > Layer 2 domain. In DC with virtual machines added/deleted > consistently, > > there could > be millions of possibilities. > > > > > > What multicast addresses should router send out MLD Query? > > > > > > What you are proposing is like using MLD snooping to achieve ND > > function, which doesn't scale. > > > > > > Linda > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Suresh Krishnan [mailto:suresh.krishnan@ericsson.com] > > > Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2012 5:58 PM > > > To: Linda Dunbar > > > Cc: int-area@ietf.org; julien.ietf@gmail.com; Tal Mizrahi > > > Subject: Re: IPv6 ND applicability in draft-nachum-sarp-03 > > > > > > Hi Linda, > > > > > > On 11/20/2012 01:05 PM, Linda Dunbar wrote: > > > > Suresh, > > > > > > > > Are you saying that router has to send out MLD Query for all > > > potential ND multicast addresses and keep up state for listeners > for > > > all those multicast addresses? > > > > > > Nope. Only for those solicited node multicast groups that have at > > least > > > one host on the subnet join. > > > > > > > > > > > There could be millions of "Solicited-Node multicast addresses". > > That > > > is a lot of processing on routers. > > > > > > Not sure that I follow. Do you have millions of hosts on the subnet? > > If > > > not, I do not see why you have to keep track of "millions of > > solicited > > > node multicast addresses". > > > > > > Thanks > > > Suresh > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Int-area mailing list > Int-area@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area From suresh.krishnan@ericsson.com Tue Jan 22 20:46:31 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: int-area@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: int-area@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 166E221F8807 for ; Tue, 22 Jan 2013 20:46:31 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -99.635 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-99.635 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.802, BAYES_00=-2.599, DEAR_SOMETHING=1.605, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_NET=0.611, RDNS_NONE=0.1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id cLTFqaQPDW4H for ; Tue, 22 Jan 2013 20:46:30 -0800 (PST) Received: from usevmg20.ericsson.net (unknown [198.24.6.45]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6677621F859A for ; Tue, 22 Jan 2013 20:46:16 -0800 (PST) X-AuditID: c618062d-b7fcb6d000007ada-a1-50ff6b15d83e Received: from EUSAAHC001.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain [147.117.188.75]) by usevmg20.ericsson.net (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id E2.8F.31450.51B6FF05; Wed, 23 Jan 2013 05:46:14 +0100 (CET) Received: from eusaamw0712.eamcs.ericsson.se (147.117.20.181) by EUSAAHC001.ericsson.se (147.117.188.75) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.2.318.4; Tue, 22 Jan 2013 23:46:13 -0500 Received: from [164.48.125.27] (147.117.20.214) by smtps-am.internal.ericsson.com (147.117.20.181) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.3.279.1; Tue, 22 Jan 2013 23:46:12 -0500 Message-ID: <50FF6A7A.3000602@ericsson.com> Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2013 23:43:38 -0500 From: Suresh Krishnan User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130106 Thunderbird/17.0.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Internet Area , "int-ads@tools.ietf.org" X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFvrFJMWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUyuXSPt65Y9v8Ag+ltfBYL7/5itbgx6yaL A5PHkiU/mTy+XP7MFsAUxWWTkpqTWZZapG+XwJXxo28PS8Ef24qNLc+YGhh3GXUxcnJICJhI HOqawwphi0lcuLeerYuRi0NI4AijRO/WVewQzh5Gib0PG5kgnK2MEl/v/Adr4RXQlpj5uIUd xGYRUJV4+ekfI4jNBjR2w87PTCC2qECYRO/rc4wQ9YISJ2c+YQGxRQSiJGZMPA02R1jAU2L3 pp9AcziAzhCXWPOGAyTMLKAnMeVqCyOELS+x/e0cZhBbSEBTYuua76wTGAVmIZk6C0nLLCQt CxiZVzFylBanluWmGxlsYgSG3zEJNt0djHteWh5ilOZgURLnDXK9ECAkkJ5YkpqdmlqQWhRf VJqTWnyIkYmDU6qBsVjSRLbe6opHy9N5Kbte5V/JfnO4VLBp2tmuKp7Q9rDH/2ac3zCzuSIz Sn/CVbEzqZ1Htsa9yOV6GG+5+8Ct9dNPLOs5H/Bg8az3R/kWPg7+vJC35dyGCQtWxzfN7a6s Pf5ajdX11y+3kKs+2cpPF7w4PO9dsE/3lhtmx/3fbt50wnVK9gZfqYdKLMUZiYZazEXFiQDb UIyWDQIAAA== Subject: [Int-area] Request to advance draft-ietf-intarea-nat-reveal-analysis-04.txt X-BeenThere: int-area@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Internet Area Mailing List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2013 04:46:31 -0000 Dear Internet ADs, The chairs of the intarea working group, on behalf of the working group, request that the following document be published as a Proposed Standard. Title : Analysis of Solution Candidates to Reveal a Host Identifier (HOST_ID) in Shared Address Deployments Draft name: draft-ietf-intarea-nat-reveal-analysis-04.txt Writeup ======= (1) What type of RFC is being requested (BCP, Proposed Standard, Internet Standard, Informational, Experimental, or Historic)? Why is this the proper type of RFC? Is this type of RFC indicated in the title page header? Informational. This document does not define any protocols. It provides an analysis of multiple solutions for identifying a host when it uses an IP address that is shared among multiple subscribers behind a Carrier Grade NAT. Hence we believe that an Informational document is appropriate. (2) The IESG approval announcement includes a Document Announcement Write-Up. Please provide such a Document Announcement Write-Up. Recent examples can be found in the "Action" announcements for approved documents. The approval announcement contains the following sections: Technical Summary: This document analyzes a set of solution candidates to mitigate some of the issues encountered when address sharing is used. In particular, this document focuses on means to reveal a host identifier (HOST_ID) when a Carrier Grade NAT (CGN) or application proxies are involved in the path. This host identifier must be unique to each host under the same shared IP address. Working Group Summary: The working group had active discussion on the draft and the current text of the draft is representative of the consensus of the working group. In particular, as a result of WG consensus, this version of the draft does not make any recommendations as to a preferred solution among those analyzed. Document Quality: The document has received adequate review. The Document Shepherd has no concerns about the depth or breadth of these reviews. This document does not define a protocol. Hence there are no implementations of this document. Personnel: Who is the Document Shepherd? Who is the Responsible Area Director? Suresh Krishnan is the document shepherd. Brian Haberman is the responsible AD. (3) Briefly describe the review of this document that was performed by the Document Shepherd. If this version of the document is not ready for publication, please explain why the document is being forwarded to the IESG. The document shepherd has reviewed the draft and finds that it is ready to advance to the IESG. All issues that were raised in the working group last calls have been addressed. (4) Does the document Shepherd have any concerns about the depth or breadth of the reviews that have been performed? No. The document shepherd has no such concerns. (5) Do portions of the document need review from a particular or from broader perspective, e.g., security, operational complexity, AAA, DNS, DHCP, XML, or internationalization? If so, describe the review that took place. Yes. I think the document could benefit from further review from people with Security and Privacy expertise. (6) Describe any specific concerns or issues that the Document Shepherd has with this document that the Responsible Area Director and/or the IESG should be aware of? For example, perhaps he or she is uncomfortable with certain parts of the document, or has concerns whether there really is a need for it. In any event, if the WG has discussed those issues and has indicated that it still wishes to advance the document, detail those concerns here. There is a general concern with the document that has been raised several times over the progress of the document through the WG. Specifically, there are several people who believe that deploying IPv6 would be a much better solution that any described in this document. While that is true, the fact remains that there are existing deployments of shared IPv4 addresses that could benefit from the analysis provided in the draft. (7) Has each author confirmed that any and all appropriate IPR disclosures required for full conformance with the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79 have already been filed. If not, explain why? Yes. (8) Has an IPR disclosure been filed that references this document? If so, summarize any WG discussion and conclusion regarding the IPR disclosures. No. (9) How solid is the WG consensus behind this document? Does it represent the strong concurrence of a few individuals, with others being silent, or does the WG as a whole understand and agree with it? The WG consensus behind this document has been pretty stable but not very strong. In particular, the WG consensus flipped completely at one point in the process to not include a recommendation in the draft. Prior consensus was to include a recommendation. This happened between versions -02 and -03. (10) Has anyone threatened an appeal or otherwise indicated extreme discontent? If so, please summarise the areas of conflict in separate email messages to the Responsible Area Director. (It should be in a separate email because this questionnaire is publicly available.) No. (11) Identify any ID nits the Document Shepherd has found in this document. (See http://www.ietf.org/tools/idnits/ and the Internet-Drafts Checklist). Boilerplate checks are not enough; this check needs to be thorough. No errors were found on the ID nits check. There are newer versions of some of the drafts in the references. This will be updated whenever a newer version of the draft is published. (12) Describe how the document meets any required formal review criteria, such as the MIB Doctor, media type, and URI type reviews. N/A (13) Have all references within this document been identified as either normative or informative? Yes. (14) Are there normative references to documents that are not ready for advancement or are otherwise in an unclear state? If such normative references exist, what is the plan for their completion? No. (15) Are there downward normative references references (see RFC 3967)? If so, list these downward references to support the Area Director in the Last Call procedure. No. (16) Will publication of this document change the status of any existing RFCs? Are those RFCs listed on the title page header, listed in the abstract, and discussed in the introduction? If the RFCs are not listed in the Abstract and Introduction, explain why, and point to the part of the document where the relationship of this document to the other RFCs is discussed. If this information is not in the document, explain why the WG considers it unnecessary. No. (17) Describe the Document Shepherd's review of the IANA considerations section, especially with regard to its consistency with the body of the document. Confirm that all protocol extensions that the document makes are associated with the appropriate reservations in IANA registries. Confirm that any referenced IANA registries have been clearly identified. Confirm that newly created IANA registries include a detailed specification of the initial contents for the registry, that allocations procedures for future registrations are defined, and a reasonable name for the new registry has been suggested (see RFC 5226). The document requests no IANA actions. (18) List any new IANA registries that require Expert Review for future allocations. Provide any public guidance that the IESG would find useful in selecting the IANA Experts for these new registries. N/A (19) Describe reviews and automated checks performed by the Document Shepherd to validate sections of the document written in a formal language, such as XML code, BNF rules, MIB definitions, etc. N/A Thanks Suresh From jshire@hyduke.com Thu Jan 24 23:17:02 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: int-area@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: int-area@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C0D6921F8A6E; Thu, 24 Jan 2013 23:17:02 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.437 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.437 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_NET=0.611, RDNS_NONE=0.1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id lF7wzxN2pjaH; Thu, 24 Jan 2013 23:17:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.hyduke.net (unknown [204.29.213.36]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F31CF21F8A50; Thu, 24 Jan 2013 23:17:01 -0800 (PST) Received: from nsk1mx01.hyduke.net (192.168.9.68) by nsk1mx02.hyduke.net (192.168.10.49) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 8.1.436.0; Fri, 25 Jan 2013 00:16:54 -0700 Received: from nsk1mx01.hyduke.net ([::1]) by nsk1mx01.hyduke.net ([::1]) with mapi; Fri, 25 Jan 2013 00:16:51 -0700 From: Joshua Shire To: "mohamed.boucadair@orange.com" , "fmc@ietf.org" , "int-area@ietf.org" Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2013 00:16:50 -0700 Thread-Topic: draft-boucadair-intarea-host-identifier-scenarios Thread-Index: Ac3RJ5IJWlBw2c21SWyfVVEqMDvBzQADOsDgCmXM38A= Message-ID: <766674E1C71A494B93E5386B430740DB787D6A@nsk1mx01.hyduke.net> References: <94C682931C08B048B7A8645303FDC9F36E99E2D9FA@PUEXCB1B.nanterre.francetelecom.fr> In-Reply-To: <94C682931C08B048B7A8645303FDC9F36E99E2D9FA@PUEXCB1B.nanterre.francetelecom.fr> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-TM-AS-Product-Ver: SMEX-8.0.0.4125-6.800.1017-19586.000 X-TM-AS-Result: No--20.421000-4.000000-31 X-TM-AS-User-Approved-Sender: No X-TM-AS-User-Blocked-Sender: No Cc: "draft-boucadair-intarea-host-identifier-scenarios@tools.ietf.org" Subject: Re: [Int-area] draft-boucadair-intarea-host-identifier-scenarios X-BeenThere: int-area@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Internet Area Mailing List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2013 07:17:02 -0000 Hello, I do not believe a pointer to http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-intarea= -nat-reveal-analysis-04#section-3 will be satisfactory for the security co= nsiderations section.=20 http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3552.txt states that when writing a security co= nsiderations section, the process "...should be approached as an effort to = perform "due diligence" in describing all known or foreseeable risks and th= reats to potential implementers and users." Normally we see RFCs describing= more applied topics such as protocols, so the specific language and exampl= es given in the above mentioned RFC may not seem directly applicable. Howev= er, "in spirit", the document seems clear in requiring all RFCs to examine = in detail their potential security impact. As I'm sure we're all aware, some of the use cases identified are purposefu= lly implemented to maintain the confidentiality of a client's identity (e.g= . NAT to obfuscate the structure of an enterprise network, Open-Wifi to con= ceal the identity of a client under threat of persecution [or prosecution],= etc.).=20 Thus, in identifying these scenarios as sharing the "issue" of host identif= ication, the author would seem to be required to discuss the potential secu= rity implications of treating the lack of host identification as such, rath= er than a desirable feature. Thanks, Joshua Shire Information Systems Manager Hyduke Energy Services Inc. -----Original Message----- From: int-area-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:int-area-bounces@ietf.org] On Behal= f Of mohamed.boucadair@orange.com Sent: Monday, December 03, 2012 2:08 AM To: fmc@ietf.org; int-area@ietf.org Cc: draft-boucadair-intarea-host-identifier-scenarios@tools.ietf.org Subject: [Int-area] draft-boucadair-intarea-host-identifier-scenarios Dear all, We submitted an updated version of this draft to list use cases which encou= nter the issue of host identification. The following use cases are discusse= d in the draft: (1) Carrier Grade NAT (CGN) (2) A+P (e.g., MAP ) (3) Application Proxies (4) Provider Wi-Fi (5) Policy and Charging Architectures (6) Cellular Networks (7) Femtocells (8) Overlay Networks (e.g., CDNs) The document does not include any solution-specific discussion. Its main go= al is to identify the use cases and describe them.=20 If you think your use case is not included in this version, please share it= with us.=20 Comments are welcome.=20 Cheers, Med -----Message d'origine----- De : i-d-announce-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:i-d-announce-bounces@ietf.org] D= e la part de internet-drafts@ietf.org Envoy=E9 : lundi 3 d=E9cembre 2012 08= :26 =C0 : i-d-announce@ietf.org Objet : I-D Action: draft-boucadair-intarea= -host-identifier-scenarios-02.txt A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts director= ies. Title : Host Identification: Use Cases Author(s) : Mohamed Boucadair David Binet Sophie Durel Tirumaleswar Reddy Brandon Williams Filename : draft-boucadair-intarea-host-identifier-scenarios-02.txt Pages : 14 Date : 2012-12-02 Abstract: This document describes a set of scenarios in which host identification is required. The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-boucadair-intarea-host-identifier-sc= enarios There's also a htmlized version available at: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-boucadair-intarea-host-identifier-scenario= s-02 A diff from the previous version is available at: http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=3Ddraft-boucadair-intarea-host-identifier-= scenarios-02 Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ _______________________________________________ I-D-Announce mailing list I-D-Announce@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce Internet-Draft directories: http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html or ftp://ftp.ie= tf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt _______________________________________________ Int-area mailing list Int-area@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area