From nobody Thu Oct 1 00:49:59 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C2B041B2B56; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 00:49:54 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.45 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.45 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, MIME_CHARSET_FARAWAY=2.45, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 gj0dIgICNmqP; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 00:49:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pa0-x22c.google.com (mail-pa0-x22c.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c03::22c]) (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 104271B2B54; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 00:49:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: by padhy16 with SMTP id hy16so66984459pad.1; Thu, 01 Oct 2015 00:49:52 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=EfMXioFBowWbTmJeaQTNM3/ANznU/8baCHQq6j/FBPo=; b=sL32K6fo8llb4GxTtvJqfVOgNGBVF3S8CflYpGQwUwPmnaHTRT/Oz/SFXKfEUs/w9u ydNsdTYKaajofOvhp2MJ9IaR/vWzhjTRTwymwDspkveytVdptskss+K81AJTYsPB4T3c PueGXiW2Z+d5fElqehhzM4tXZIfDXqCdMldxVmmiDo/H9sJ7piPfDmkPZ80rX0Lcrxwf ZqvovYkuYXnJ2y9ihpgZGH0GBr53QQ/ZiCwJUSfUB7rNKTnjLKGz6RtZMk2RodgLmJbD cfLGrmOzKstFJchgpIKf4zRYJt990Bpv1cf9GzMyshYIHnmCMckh8bpL9zbJOKN9KxMO 2EWQ== X-Received: by 10.66.139.231 with SMTP id rb7mr10332854pab.5.1443685792673; Thu, 01 Oct 2015 00:49:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.109] ([58.217.245.77]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id c16sm4842712pbu.37.2015.10.01.00.49.51 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Thu, 01 Oct 2015 00:49:51 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=cp936 Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) From: Lizhong X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (13A344) In-Reply-To: <560C51E9.60804@cs.tcd.ie> Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2015 15:50:00 +0800 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <8F6B7F8D-C5A6-445F-9E71-45642600E2E4@gmail.com> References: <20150930124330.1948.32154.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <560C51E9.60804@cs.tcd.ie> To: Stephen Farrell Archived-At: Cc: "mpls@ietf.org" , draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-relay-reply , The IESG , mpls-chairs Subject: Re: [mpls] Stephen Farrell's No Objection on draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-relay-reply-10: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2015 07:49:54 -0000 Stephen, George, Thanks, will update accordingly. Regards Lizhong > =D4=DA 2015=C4=EA10=D4=C21=C8=D5=A3=AC05:19=A3=ACStephen Farrell =D0=B4=B5=C0=A3=BA >=20 >=20 >=20 >> On 30/09/15 19:50, George Swallow (swallow) wrote: >> Lizhong, Stephen, >>=20 >> Perhaps less in more! >>=20 >>=20 >> Destination Address Offset: the offset in octets from the top-of-stack >> to the destination address entry. >=20 > That might be better yes. Maybe with a forward pointer to the 4.x > sections that clarify it. >=20 > S >=20 >>=20 >>=20 >> Lizhong =A8C >>=20 >> There are several places in the draft where the term "destination address= =A1=B1 should be "destination address entry=A1=B1 >>=20 >> It would also be good to add a column to the table on page 6 indicating t= he size of each entry >>=20 >> Null 4 >>=20 >> IPv4 8 >>=20 >> IPv6 20 >>=20 >> George >>=20 >> From: Lizhong Jin > >> Date: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 at 11:57 AM >> To: Stephen Farrell > >> Cc: The IESG >, mpls-chairs >, draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-relay-r= eply >, "mpls@ietf.org" > >> Subject: Re: Stephen Farrell's No Objection on draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-r= elay-reply-10: (with COMMENT) >>=20 >> Hi Stephen, >> See inline below. Thanks. >>=20 >> Lizhong >>=20 >> On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 8:43 PM, Stephen Farrell > wrote: >> Stephen Farrell has entered the following ballot position for >> draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-relay-reply-10: No Objection >>=20 >> 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.) >>=20 >>=20 >> Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html= >> for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. >>=20 >>=20 >> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-relay-reply/ >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> COMMENT: >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>=20 >>=20 >> - 3.2: The description of the destination address offset isn't >> clear to me. If this is some common thing in MPLS though, that's >> fine. If not, maybe it'd be worth being clearer here. >> (It does become clear later though, so this is a nit.) >>=20 >> [Lizhong] I read several times, and try to make it more clear as below: >>=20 >> Destination Address Offset: an offset (octets) to indicate the >> position of the Relayed Address Entry which is also the >>=20 >> destination address of the Reply or Relayed Reply message. >>=20 >> E.g., to point the first entry on the top of the Stack of >>=20 >> Relayed Addresses will have offset of 0, and to point to >>=20 >> the second entry will have offset of the length of the first entry. >>=20 >>=20 From nobody Thu Oct 1 01:06:22 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 69E391B2BA1; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 01:06:21 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.902 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.902 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 s6IMn4yiAAuD; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 01:06:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from na01-by2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-by2on0135.outbound.protection.outlook.com [207.46.100.135]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 24AAD1B2B91; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 01:06:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from BN3PR0501MB1377.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.160.117.11) by BN3PR0501MB1380.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.160.117.139) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.280.20; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 08:06:14 +0000 Received: from BN3PR0501MB1377.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([10.160.117.11]) by BN3PR0501MB1377.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([10.160.117.11]) with mapi id 15.01.0280.017; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 08:06:14 +0000 From: Chandrasekar Ramachandran To: "mpls@ietf.org" , "mpls-chairs@ietf.org" , "draft-kompella-mpls-rmr@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [mpls] Poll to see if we have consensus to adopt draft-kompella-mpls-rmr as an MPLS wg dcument Thread-Index: AQHQ+d3inWuvDb3tA0GxDtoA+hfcEp5WOJqA Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2015 08:06:14 +0000 Message-ID: References: <56091F68.8050000@pi.nu> In-Reply-To: <56091F68.8050000@pi.nu> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=csekar@juniper.net; x-originating-ip: [116.197.184.13] x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; BN3PR0501MB1380; 5:qil3w9A4R1UX26QFzt9ivDax8cpizFxGVEnpBkpsYi+tIC0FFnvy8AgAM9UD33IA43MizcKjgD+YrZQ46sa1a+IhAUkySp31m0tKbGBcSzwH+uXP5T+GYMCnwcHYDvG3WUIiB4gTNiUvzgEtMJVerA==; 24:VWyK0bzAAmVLXzwBouAs3yV2xdc3WKgnHDIXGzN0so/7l4/z/C+mUNp9qGK/rLnBBia91hrsuxt7SkqUMV5YPxzWQu8WHYYvC1dw8z8n2jY=; 20:UWcihme4ouAP8qF++idi52YJzHN3yzVrDPu07lL571jIcpYUwpXWEdXdTY7OlbYQSA7Q3SPO6Kj93ooF15n67w== x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:BN3PR0501MB1380; x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:; x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(601004)(2401047)(5005006)(520078)(8121501046)(3002001); SRVR:BN3PR0501MB1380; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:BN3PR0501MB1380; x-forefront-prvs: 0716E70AB6 x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(6009001)(377454003)(252514010)(13464003)(199003)(189002)(122556002)(40100003)(5007970100001)(33656002)(230783001)(11100500001)(2501003)(5008740100001)(2201001)(10400500002)(86362001)(5004730100002)(5003600100002)(5002640100001)(106116001)(450100001)(106356001)(105586002)(99286002)(77156002)(62966003)(68736005)(46102003)(77096005)(87936001)(50986999)(15975445007)(102836002)(2950100001)(2900100001)(4001540100001)(81156007)(5001960100002)(5001860100001)(5001830100001)(97736004)(189998001)(5001770100001)(107886002)(92566002)(101416001)(76176999)(54356999)(19580395003)(76576001)(64706001)(66066001)(19580405001)(74316001)(42262002); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:BN3PR0501MB1380; H:BN3PR0501MB1377.namprd05.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; A:1; MX:1; LANG:en; received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: juniper.net does not designate permitted sender hosts) spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:23 spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: juniper.net X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 01 Oct 2015 08:06:14.4254 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: bea78b3c-4cdb-4130-854a-1d193232e5f4 X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BN3PR0501MB1380 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [mpls] Poll to see if we have consensus to adopt draft-kompella-mpls-rmr as an MPLS wg dcument X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2015 08:06:21 -0000 Support. > -----Original Message----- > From: mpls [mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Loa Andersson > Sent: Monday, September 28, 2015 4:37 PM > To: mpls@ietf.org; mpls-chairs@ietf.org; draft-kompella-mpls-rmr@ietf.org > Subject: [mpls] Poll to see if we have consensus to adopt draft-kompella- > mpls-rmr as an MPLS wg dcument >=20 > Working Group, >=20 > This is to start a two week poll on adopting draft-kompella-mpls-rmr-02 > as an MPLS working group document. >=20 > Please send your comments (support/not support) to the mpls working > group mailing list (mpls@ietf.org). Please give a technical > motivation for your support/not support, especially if you think that > the document should not be adopted as a working group document. >=20 > There is currently one IPR disclosure against this document. All the > authors has stated on the working group mailing that they are unaware of > any undisclosed IPRs that relates to this draft.. >=20 > However if you are on the the mpls working group mailing list and > aware of IPR that relates to this draft, the time to disclose > this is now. >=20 > This poll ends October 12, 2015. >=20 > /Loa > mpls wg co-chair >=20 > -- >=20 >=20 > Loa Andersson email: loa@mail01.huawei.com > Senior MPLS Expert loa@pi.nu > Huawei Technologies (consultant) phone: +46 739 81 21 64 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From nobody Thu Oct 1 02:43:04 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A87211A1A86 for ; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 02:43:03 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.276 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.276 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=0.723, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=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 zuvsVfuFulV1 for ; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 02:43:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-wi0-x22d.google.com (mail-wi0-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c05::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 389C91A1A80 for ; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 02:43:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: by wiclk2 with SMTP id lk2so24398613wic.0 for ; Thu, 01 Oct 2015 02:43:00 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:disposition-notification-to:date:from:reply-to :user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references:in-reply-to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=WGXbJRnMm96/AeR0JWuvYaHdzsIW/Ghs4KWG/AjcP90=; b=VtUSEbOv5euhi/r0C9SSSylHNZsURxrLhA9Dkr3e/uPh+2dArZH0hRxjchd0izT2PG 6bu2FF0njGA8pKmcJCKr/glQuGSQWK9kTAsaobPV1njy2sSje+ridMs41oHYql8+QA6b phNmQ92FKh0ze5FyRVcB1OH/nNf0Xz955B2/5bCi6yoovFumuk4h/P2m1lT3lakLwG4G n+mLqwrJx/tbc1scGFDzoLDNYmkBmYl4dZLyouXEGLmrSELQuqHBqTLWDlS1vPmL3YP5 2/uvpkgRfR3UiytXv+eKD7wEipXfDl/7OiLdTWEtiiWwle8AqDeH8TN2sZgDL3NSoGFV H0rA== X-Received: by 10.194.77.77 with SMTP id q13mr10782733wjw.79.1443692580726; Thu, 01 Oct 2015 02:43:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from McAsterix.local ([92.109.37.136]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id mc20sm2253884wic.16.2015.10.01.02.42.59 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 01 Oct 2015 02:42:59 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <560D0022.2050309@gmail.com> Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2015 11:42:58 +0200 From: Huub van Helvoort User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.10; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ross Callon , "mpls@ietf.org" References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Archived-At: Cc: "mpls-chairs@tools.ietf.org" Subject: Re: [mpls] Poll for adoption for draft-cheng-mpls-tp-shared-ring-protection-06 X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list Reply-To: huubatwork@gmail.com List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2015 09:43:03 -0000
Support.

Best regards, Huub.
-----------------

On 23-09-15 23:59, Ross Callon wrote:
This is to start a two week poll on adopting draft-cheng-mpls-tp-shared-ring-protection-06
as an MPLS working group document.
 
Please send your comments (support/not support) to the mpls working group
mailing list (mpls@ietf.org).
 
There are four IPR disclosures pertaining to the draft, which can be found at:
 
The authors and contributors have all indicated that they are not aware of any other IPR that
applies to this document (other than what is mentioned in the existing disclosures).
 
This poll for adoption will end Thursday October 8, 2015.
 
Thanks, Ross
  

-- 
*****************************************************************
              请记住，你是独一无二的，就像其他每一个人一样
From nobody Thu Oct 1 02:44:24 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 262751A0A85; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 02:44:23 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 udRKRlPlQJE2; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 02:44:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-wi0-x234.google.com (mail-wi0-x234.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c05::234]) (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 A58E01A1A86; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 02:44:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: by wicfx3 with SMTP id fx3so19905063wic.0; Thu, 01 Oct 2015 02:44:20 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:disposition-notification-to:date:from:reply-to :user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references:in-reply-to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=nRGKeo2Jo3rct2Z82jfr2oOqM8KeY6oVc199kthywPQ=; b=N4Vhb02O/q0bpIraSwPE0ngydYwr3NaQ2Hmis8KnK0fUj+m1jBHwyBW2GtUWyudhcW QMRTV/hix0moIFiSNkiyshJHK1cu1ccRe/why5zWZoHGKsm/m60riJFBQeF//BjSoOm7 XIQpZg20ZuCL5GUIduBDDh+F8PTCJK0Ij0EHb7c+WQ4YZzJOAeaRJM/RG1OUYw1TV+1D Oeyvv74q3rM1RfzEldr+MyRKTxG3iTnBkQAUss+mjSRknsAFMpc7TW7VaIfWYniJafHm +gmSMOVx7hZi94vb+thqizR1c6zh89Te6L+lm1U+wne+1db82/+Qsfd/IMvyNWVsPT6X Zi7A== X-Received: by 10.180.205.234 with SMTP id lj10mr2091987wic.49.1443692660235; Thu, 01 Oct 2015 02:44:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from McAsterix.local ([92.109.37.136]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id jc9sm2274756wic.6.2015.10.01.02.44.19 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 01 Oct 2015 02:44:19 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <560D0072.9080604@gmail.com> Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2015 11:44:18 +0200 From: Huub van Helvoort User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.10; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Loa Andersson , "mpls@ietf.org" , "mpls-chairs@ietf.org" References: <56091F68.8050000@pi.nu> In-Reply-To: <56091F68.8050000@pi.nu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [mpls] Poll to see if we have consensus to adopt draft-kompella-mpls-rmr as an MPLS wg dcument X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list Reply-To: huubatwork@gmail.com List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2015 09:44:23 -0000 Support. Best regards, Huub. ----------------- On 28-09-15 13:07, Loa Andersson wrote: > Working Group, > > This is to start a two week poll on adopting draft-kompella-mpls-rmr-02 > as an MPLS working group document. > > Please send your comments (support/not support) to the mpls working > group mailing list (mpls@ietf.org). Please give a technical > motivation for your support/not support, especially if you think that > the document should not be adopted as a working group document. > > There is currently one IPR disclosure against this document. All the > authors has stated on the working group mailing that they are unaware of > any undisclosed IPRs that relates to this draft.. > > However if you are on the the mpls working group mailing list and > aware of IPR that relates to this draft, the time to disclose > this is now. > > This poll ends October 12, 2015. > > /Loa > mpls wg co-chair > -- ***************************************************************** 请记住，你是独一无二的，就像其他每一个人一样 From nobody Thu Oct 1 05:23:45 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 900541ABD36; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 05:23:42 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.91 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham 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 NwCCHqXUiLzZ; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 05:23:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from p130.piuha.net (p130.piuha.net [193.234.218.130]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A83D1A92BB; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 05:23:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by p130.piuha.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9676C2CECD; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 15:23:38 +0300 (EEST) (envelope-from jari.arkko@piuha.net) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at piuha.net Received: from p130.piuha.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (p130.piuha.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id tAyMSGGZR48F; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 15:23:37 +0300 (EEST) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (p130.piuha.net [IPv6:2a00:1d50:2::130]) by p130.piuha.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C6122CC6B; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 15:23:37 +0300 (EEST) (envelope-from jari.arkko@piuha.net) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\)) Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_CA1FC9A7-501D-4DD4-BA7E-E62E73AC2CB3"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha512 X-Pgp-Agent: GPGMail 2.5.1 From: Jari Arkko In-Reply-To: <5608181D.3050600@joelhalpern.com> Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2015 15:23:36 +0300 Message-Id: <5E77CBBB-FE84-4423-B303-6B6AF1C3ADB9@piuha.net> References: <5608181D.3050600@joelhalpern.com> To: "Joel M. Halpern" X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.6) Archived-At: Cc: "mpls@ietf.org" , General Area Review Team , mahoney@nostrum.com, Lizhong Jin Subject: Re: [mpls] [Gen-art] Review: draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-relay-reply-10 X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2015 12:23:42 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_CA1FC9A7-501D-4DD4-BA7E-E62E73AC2CB3 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Thanks for your review, Joel, and thank you Lizhong for addressing the = comment. Jari --Apple-Mail=_CA1FC9A7-501D-4DD4-BA7E-E62E73AC2CB3 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Comment: GPGTools - https://gpgtools.org iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJWDSXIAAoJEM80gCTQU46qg4wP/15616injEUtnQhBKPEXgi/n dAxvh4VJOUqSPBcZl2yYwLR7Bu24T60uPw/+0FgW5+grjvOdi3yQE2LnziBUPsN8 utQ/8/PCBaP2oJUV1sh/1WrEDItkNjtWbkUw/ac1OAuMVqhM3KmzHaRY4kzzNuyM FymME2GkdU3sjTQtummLX6fCXD8uTl66hbqQYqjOEaO2S2IHmDys2/IgYEdZJMdS zuiH2QKn7UfVW941xCXfCzsCIR0egUL5wDsT9mCpjVi1wEIx86nxmlYsew3d5eU+ S3z3ptscxdct3SjqRIQ440tnSscvd0bfiMtl/TbTmSWgpohnarWG2j+uhKsw4Rea QHnfMsc4kPwT2tRJ2ukLhCMUtmm52HfIusdHNUszVgTC6OgWM8kiJxnC1IGvt+aM DyTAv7EL7j4fAdkqXuDAhpv681PXtiBlog9S8yEh9Gl8FXbHZ9NPtgU8nSAVEmUN VhlZch4JII+bzl8+daFMzUbz+P3A5MyzRT2fF9t3lZhPVHFk3Pl2an95eL8nv9xW PTiCEbuuYANNcw1mwqT1+Kdu4Ku+k/Ylil/NNwEKynIbJHpfmslnJ1w8zypcW5u0 KOTKa93seHed5aliC4ADPbq5Jkv7tnduDnxAuPOxlDVUTTSFFQ7xuQ6eEmaI5vWW N47Jty/D5kgeLJge7Sc1 =ILdr -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Apple-Mail=_CA1FC9A7-501D-4DD4-BA7E-E62E73AC2CB3-- From nobody Thu Oct 1 06:27:50 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 28C431A0015; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 06:27:49 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.211 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.211 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham 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 r_ocqac_NtAR; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 06:27:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [194.213.3.17]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D53B11A000D; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 06:27:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 172.18.7.190 (EHLO lhreml404-hub.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.7.190]) by lhrrg02-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.3.7-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id BYG28072; Thu, 01 Oct 2015 13:27:40 +0000 (GMT) Received: from LHREML504-MBS.china.huawei.com ([10.125.30.107]) by lhreml404-hub.china.huawei.com ([::1]) with mapi id 14.03.0235.001; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 14:27:38 +0100 From: Italo Busi To: Loa Andersson , "mpls@ietf.org" , "mpls-chairs@ietf.org" , "draft-kompella-mpls-rmr@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [mpls] Poll to see if we have consensus to adopt draft-kompella-mpls-rmr as an MPLS wg dcument Thread-Index: AQHQ/EzvfUY3gQ+7pEaBVDMKUyFosA== Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2015 13:27:36 +0000 Message-ID: <91E3A1BD737FDF4FA14118387FF6766B155C666A@lhreml504-mbs> References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.200.144.142] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Archived-At: Subject: Re: [mpls] Poll to see if we have consensus to adopt draft-kompella-mpls-rmr as an MPLS wg dcument X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2015 13:27:49 -0000 Yes, support Italo > Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2015 19:07:20 +0800 > From: Loa Andersson > To: "mpls@ietf.org" , "mpls-chairs@ietf.org" > , "draft-kompella-mpls-rmr@ietf.org" > > Subject: [mpls] Poll to see if we have consensus to adopt > draft-kompella-mpls-rmr as an MPLS wg dcument > Message-ID: <56091F68.8050000@pi.nu> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3Dutf-8; format=3Dflowed >=20 > Working Group, >=20 > This is to start a two week poll on adopting draft-kompella-mpls-rmr-02 > as an MPLS working group document. >=20 > Please send your comments (support/not support) to the mpls working > group mailing list (mpls@ietf.org). Please give a technical motivation > for your support/not support, especially if you think that the document > should not be adopted as a working group document. >=20 > There is currently one IPR disclosure against this document. All the > authors has stated on the working group mailing that they are unaware > of any undisclosed IPRs that relates to this draft.. >=20 > However if you are on the the mpls working group mailing list and aware > of IPR that relates to this draft, the time to disclose this is now. >=20 > This poll ends October 12, 2015. >=20 > /Loa > mpls wg co-chair >=20 > -- >=20 >=20 > Loa Andersson email: loa@mail01.huawei.com > Senior MPLS Expert loa@pi.nu > Huawei Technologies (consultant) phone: +46 739 81 21 64 >=20 >=20 >=20 > ------------------------------ >=20 > Message: 4 > Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2015 14:29:54 +0000 > From: Gregory Mirsky > To: Loa Andersson , "mpls@ietf.org" , > "mpls-chairs@ietf.org" , > "draft-kompella-mpls-rmr@ietf.org" rmr@ietf.org> > Subject: Re: [mpls] Poll to see if we have consensus to adopt > draft-kompella-mpls-rmr as an MPLS wg dcument > Message-ID: > <7347100B5761DC41A166AC17F22DF112218E5ECE@eusaamb103.ericsson.se> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3D"us-ascii" >=20 > yes/support >=20 > Regards, > Greg >=20 > -----Original Message----- > From: mpls [mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Loa Andersson > Sent: Monday, September 28, 2015 4:07 AM > To: mpls@ietf.org; mpls-chairs@ietf.org; draft-kompella-mpls- > rmr@ietf.org > Subject: [mpls] Poll to see if we have consensus to adopt draft- > kompella-mpls-rmr as an MPLS wg dcument >=20 > Working Group, >=20 > This is to start a two week poll on adopting draft-kompella-mpls-rmr-02 > as an MPLS working group document. >=20 > Please send your comments (support/not support) to the mpls working > group mailing list (mpls@ietf.org). Please give a technical motivation > for your support/not support, especially if you think that the document > should not be adopted as a working group document. >=20 > There is currently one IPR disclosure against this document. All the > authors has stated on the working group mailing that they are unaware > of any undisclosed IPRs that relates to this draft.. >=20 > However if you are on the the mpls working group mailing list and aware > of IPR that relates to this draft, the time to disclose this is now. >=20 > This poll ends October 12, 2015. >=20 > /Loa > mpls wg co-chair >=20 > -- >=20 >=20 > Loa Andersson email: loa@mail01.huawei.com > Senior MPLS Expert loa@pi.nu > Huawei Technologies (consultant) phone: +46 739 81 21 64 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls >=20 >=20 >=20 > ------------------------------ >=20 > Message: 5 > Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2015 07:45:14 -0700 > From: "Kathleen Moriarty" > To: "The IESG" > Cc: mpls@ietf.org, draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-relay-reply@ietf.org, > mpls-chairs@ietf.org > Subject: [mpls] Kathleen Moriarty's No Objection on > draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-relay-reply-10: (with COMMENT) > Message-ID: <20150928144514.27528.79571.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3D"utf-8" >=20 > Kathleen Moriarty has entered the following ballot position for > draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-relay-reply-10: No Objection >=20 > 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.) >=20 >=20 > Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss- > criteria.html > for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. >=20 >=20 > The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-relay-reply/ >=20 >=20 >=20 > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > COMMENT: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >=20 > Thanks for your work on this draft. The security review from 6 months > ago hasn't been fully addressed in the draft and I think it would be > helpful to do so. There were responses given on list, but > corresponding updates didn't happen for all of the comments. >=20 > https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/secdir/current/msg05301.html >=20 > For the first comment, the response was that this mechanism does not > deprecate use of "Echo Reply". The language in the first paragraph of > section 3 should be made clear on that point. >=20 > For the second comment: > s4.1: Is the outermost label allowed to be set to 255 to support > the > ?ping? mode or must it always be set to 1, 2, etc. to > support ?traceroute" > mode - as described in RFC 4379 s4.3? I know s5 is just an > example > but it really looks like this extension is just supposed to be for > fault > isolation. >=20 > The response via email says it is possible to set it to 255, could this > be made clear in the draft? >=20 > The third comment was addressed, thank you. >=20 > It was also good to see the security considerations cover path > discovery as well as DoS related attacks. Thanks for that! >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 > ------------------------------ >=20 > Message: 6 > Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2015 07:55:10 -0700 > From: "Alia Atlas" > To: "The IESG" > Cc: mpls@ietf.org, > draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-reply-mode-simple.shepherd@ietf.org, > mpls-chairs@ietf.org, > draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-reply-mode-simple@ietf.org, > draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-reply-mode-simple.ad@ietf.org, > rcallon@juniper.net > Subject: [mpls] Alia Atlas' Yes on > draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-reply-mode-simple-04: (with COMMENT) > Message-ID: <20150928145510.31971.547.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3D"utf-8" >=20 > Alia Atlas has entered the following ballot position for > draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-reply-mode-simple-04: Yes >=20 > 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.) >=20 >=20 > Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss- > criteria.html > for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. >=20 >=20 > The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-reply-mode- > simple/ >=20 >=20 >=20 > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > COMMENT: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >=20 > 1) Bottom of page 7: Please describe the meaning of the length field > in the TLV and whether there is any padding. Alternately (or as well) > - give a reference that defines these details. >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 > ------------------------------ >=20 > Message: 7 > Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2015 10:57:10 -0400 > From: "Andrew G. Malis" > To: Lizhong Jin > Cc: "rtg-ads@ietf.org" , "mpls@ietf.org" > , draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-relay- > reply.all@ietf.org, > IETF Discussion , "rtg-dir@ietf.org" dir@ietf.org> > Subject: Re: [mpls] Last Call: > (Relayed Echo Reply > mechanism for LSP Ping) to Proposed Standard > Message-ID: > 7ZnDfWmF=3DoEt4v43QSNQNdhS2vA@mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3D"utf-8" >=20 > Lizhong, >=20 > [Lizhong] I proposed to add the following, and waiting for his > confirmation. > > This stack grows downward, with relay node addresses further along > the > > LSP appearing lower down in the stack. Please refer to section 4.2 > for > > the relay node discovery mechanism. > > >=20 > If this is acceptable to Joel, I'm good with it as well. >=20 > Thanks, > Andy > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: > aedbc/attachment.html> >=20 > ------------------------------ >=20 > Message: 8 > Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2015 11:00:40 -0400 > From: "Andrew G. Malis" > To: Lizhong Jin > Cc: "rtg-ads@ietf.org" , "mpls@ietf.org" > , draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-relay- > reply.all@ietf.org, > IETF Discussion , "rtg-dir@ietf.org" dir@ietf.org> > Subject: Re: [mpls] Last Call: > (Relayed Echo Reply > mechanism for LSP Ping) to Proposed Standard > Message-ID: > OfKvFgrD_QQ@mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3D"utf-8" >=20 > Lizhong, >=20 > Responding to myself, I just saw Joel's email, so we're both good with > this addition. >=20 > Thanks, > Andy >=20 > On Mon, Sep 28, 2015 at 10:57 AM, Andrew G. Malis > wrote: >=20 > > Lizhong, > > > > [Lizhong] I proposed to add the following, and waiting for his > >> confirmation. > >> This stack grows downward, with relay node addresses further along > >> the LSP appearing lower down in the stack. Please refer to section > >> 4.2 for the relay node discovery mechanism. > >> > > > > If this is acceptable to Joel, I'm good with it as well. > > > > Thanks, > > Andy > > > > > > > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: > 42cb3/attachment.html> >=20 > ------------------------------ >=20 > Subject: Digest Footer >=20 > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls >=20 >=20 > ------------------------------ >=20 > End of mpls Digest, Vol 137, Issue 54 > ************************************* From nobody Thu Oct 1 07:06:45 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0FD471A6F2E; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 07:06:44 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.21 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.21 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham 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 T4ljxYJvvaI0; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 07:06:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-gw2-out.broadcom.com (mail-gw2-out.broadcom.com [216.31.210.63]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2ED651A6F2D; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 07:06:41 -0700 (PDT) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.17,617,1437462000"; d="scan'208";a="76524256" Received: from irvexchcas06.broadcom.com (HELO IRVEXCHCAS06.corp.ad.broadcom.com) ([10.9.208.53]) by mail-gw2-out.broadcom.com with ESMTP; 01 Oct 2015 07:33:32 -0700 Received: from SJEXCHCAS06.corp.ad.broadcom.com (10.16.203.14) by IRVEXCHCAS06.corp.ad.broadcom.com (10.9.208.53) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.235.1; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 07:06:30 -0700 Received: from SJEXCHMB12.corp.ad.broadcom.com ([fe80::bc15:c1e1:c29a:36f7]) by SJEXCHCAS06.corp.ad.broadcom.com ([::1]) with mapi id 14.03.0235.001; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 07:06:30 -0700 From: Shahram Davari To: Italo Busi Thread-Topic: [mpls] Poll to see if we have consensus to adopt draft-kompella-mpls-rmr as an MPLS wg dcument Thread-Index: AQHQ/EzvUDMYkZqn00iPlN0oZIhCn55WrCLV Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2015 14:06:29 +0000 Message-ID: <7C5724FE-716A-45B6-ACD3-4690B0797E9C@broadcom.com> References: , <91E3A1BD737FDF4FA14118387FF6766B155C666A@lhreml504-mbs> In-Reply-To: <91E3A1BD737FDF4FA14118387FF6766B155C666A@lhreml504-mbs> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: Cc: "mpls@ietf.org" , "mpls-chairs@ietf.org" , "draft-kompella-mpls-rmr@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [mpls] Poll to see if we have consensus to adopt draft-kompella-mpls-rmr as an MPLS wg dcument X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2015 14:06:44 -0000 I also Support this draft. Nicely done with almost no configuration. Regards, Shahram > On Oct 1, 2015, at 3:28 PM, Italo Busi wrote: >=20 > Yes, support >=20 > Italo >=20 >> Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2015 19:07:20 +0800 >> From: Loa Andersson >> To: "mpls@ietf.org" , "mpls-chairs@ietf.org" >> , "draft-kompella-mpls-rmr@ietf.org" >> >> Subject: [mpls] Poll to see if we have consensus to adopt >> draft-kompella-mpls-rmr as an MPLS wg dcument >> Message-ID: <56091F68.8050000@pi.nu> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3Dutf-8; format=3Dflowed >>=20 >> Working Group, >>=20 >> This is to start a two week poll on adopting draft-kompella-mpls-rmr-02 >> as an MPLS working group document. >>=20 >> Please send your comments (support/not support) to the mpls working >> group mailing list (mpls@ietf.org). Please give a technical motivation >> for your support/not support, especially if you think that the document >> should not be adopted as a working group document. >>=20 >> There is currently one IPR disclosure against this document. All the >> authors has stated on the working group mailing that they are unaware >> of any undisclosed IPRs that relates to this draft.. >>=20 >> However if you are on the the mpls working group mailing list and aware >> of IPR that relates to this draft, the time to disclose this is now. >>=20 >> This poll ends October 12, 2015. >>=20 >> /Loa >> mpls wg co-chair >>=20 >> -- >>=20 >>=20 >> Loa Andersson email: loa@mail01.huawei.com >> Senior MPLS Expert loa@pi.nu >> Huawei Technologies (consultant) phone: +46 739 81 21 64 >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >> ------------------------------ >>=20 >> Message: 4 >> Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2015 14:29:54 +0000 >> From: Gregory Mirsky >> To: Loa Andersson , "mpls@ietf.org" , >> "mpls-chairs@ietf.org" , >> "draft-kompella-mpls-rmr@ietf.org" > rmr@ietf.org> >> Subject: Re: [mpls] Poll to see if we have consensus to adopt >> draft-kompella-mpls-rmr as an MPLS wg dcument >> Message-ID: >> <7347100B5761DC41A166AC17F22DF112218E5ECE@eusaamb103.ericsson.se> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3D"us-ascii" >>=20 >> yes/support >>=20 >> Regards, >> Greg >>=20 >> -----Original Message----- >> From: mpls [mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Loa Andersson >> Sent: Monday, September 28, 2015 4:07 AM >> To: mpls@ietf.org; mpls-chairs@ietf.org; draft-kompella-mpls- >> rmr@ietf.org >> Subject: [mpls] Poll to see if we have consensus to adopt draft- >> kompella-mpls-rmr as an MPLS wg dcument >>=20 >> Working Group, >>=20 >> This is to start a two week poll on adopting draft-kompella-mpls-rmr-02 >> as an MPLS working group document. >>=20 >> Please send your comments (support/not support) to the mpls working >> group mailing list (mpls@ietf.org). Please give a technical motivation >> for your support/not support, especially if you think that the document >> should not be adopted as a working group document. >>=20 >> There is currently one IPR disclosure against this document. All the >> authors has stated on the working group mailing that they are unaware >> of any undisclosed IPRs that relates to this draft.. >>=20 >> However if you are on the the mpls working group mailing list and aware >> of IPR that relates to this draft, the time to disclose this is now. >>=20 >> This poll ends October 12, 2015. >>=20 >> /Loa >> mpls wg co-chair >>=20 >> -- >>=20 >>=20 >> Loa Andersson email: loa@mail01.huawei.com >> Senior MPLS Expert loa@pi.nu >> Huawei Technologies (consultant) phone: +46 739 81 21 64 >>=20 >> _______________________________________________ >> mpls mailing list >> mpls@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >> ------------------------------ >>=20 >> Message: 5 >> Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2015 07:45:14 -0700 >> From: "Kathleen Moriarty" >> To: "The IESG" >> Cc: mpls@ietf.org, draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-relay-reply@ietf.org, >> mpls-chairs@ietf.org >> Subject: [mpls] Kathleen Moriarty's No Objection on >> draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-relay-reply-10: (with COMMENT) >> Message-ID: <20150928144514.27528.79571.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3D"utf-8" >>=20 >> Kathleen Moriarty has entered the following ballot position for >> draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-relay-reply-10: No Objection >>=20 >> 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.) >>=20 >>=20 >> Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss- >> criteria.html >> for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. >>=20 >>=20 >> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-relay-reply/ >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> COMMENT: >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>=20 >> Thanks for your work on this draft. The security review from 6 months >> ago hasn't been fully addressed in the draft and I think it would be >> helpful to do so. There were responses given on list, but >> corresponding updates didn't happen for all of the comments. >>=20 >> https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/secdir/current/msg05301.html >>=20 >> For the first comment, the response was that this mechanism does not >> deprecate use of "Echo Reply". The language in the first paragraph of >> section 3 should be made clear on that point. >>=20 >> For the second comment: >> s4.1: Is the outermost label allowed to be set to 255 to support >> the >> ?ping? mode or must it always be set to 1, 2, etc. to >> support ?traceroute" >> mode - as described in RFC 4379 s4.3? I know s5 is just an >> example >> but it really looks like this extension is just supposed to be for >> fault >> isolation. >>=20 >> The response via email says it is possible to set it to 255, could this >> be made clear in the draft? >>=20 >> The third comment was addressed, thank you. >>=20 >> It was also good to see the security considerations cover path >> discovery as well as DoS related attacks. Thanks for that! >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >> ------------------------------ >>=20 >> Message: 6 >> Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2015 07:55:10 -0700 >> From: "Alia Atlas" >> To: "The IESG" >> Cc: mpls@ietf.org, >> draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-reply-mode-simple.shepherd@ietf.org, >> mpls-chairs@ietf.org, >> draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-reply-mode-simple@ietf.org, >> draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-reply-mode-simple.ad@ietf.org, >> rcallon@juniper.net >> Subject: [mpls] Alia Atlas' Yes on >> draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-reply-mode-simple-04: (with COMMENT) >> Message-ID: <20150928145510.31971.547.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3D"utf-8" >>=20 >> Alia Atlas has entered the following ballot position for >> draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-reply-mode-simple-04: Yes >>=20 >> 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.) >>=20 >>=20 >> Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss- >> criteria.html >> for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. >>=20 >>=20 >> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-reply-mode- >> simple/ >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> COMMENT: >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>=20 >> 1) Bottom of page 7: Please describe the meaning of the length field >> in the TLV and whether there is any padding. Alternately (or as well) >> - give a reference that defines these details. >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >> ------------------------------ >>=20 >> Message: 7 >> Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2015 10:57:10 -0400 >> From: "Andrew G. Malis" >> To: Lizhong Jin >> Cc: "rtg-ads@ietf.org" , "mpls@ietf.org" >> , draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-relay- >> reply.all@ietf.org, >> IETF Discussion , "rtg-dir@ietf.org" > dir@ietf.org> >> Subject: Re: [mpls] Last Call: >> (Relayed Echo Reply >> mechanism for LSP Ping) to Proposed Standard >> Message-ID: >> > 7ZnDfWmF=3DoEt4v43QSNQNdhS2vA@mail.gmail.com> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3D"utf-8" >>=20 >> Lizhong, >>=20 >> [Lizhong] I proposed to add the following, and waiting for his >> confirmation. >>> This stack grows downward, with relay node addresses further along >> the >>> LSP appearing lower down in the stack. Please refer to section 4.2 >> for >>> the relay node discovery mechanism. >>=20 >> If this is acceptable to Joel, I'm good with it as well. >>=20 >> Thanks, >> Andy >> -------------- next part -------------- >> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... >> URL: >> > aedbc/attachment.html> >>=20 >> ------------------------------ >>=20 >> Message: 8 >> Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2015 11:00:40 -0400 >> From: "Andrew G. Malis" >> To: Lizhong Jin >> Cc: "rtg-ads@ietf.org" , "mpls@ietf.org" >> , draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-relay- >> reply.all@ietf.org, >> IETF Discussion , "rtg-dir@ietf.org" > dir@ietf.org> >> Subject: Re: [mpls] Last Call: >> (Relayed Echo Reply >> mechanism for LSP Ping) to Proposed Standard >> Message-ID: >> > OfKvFgrD_QQ@mail.gmail.com> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3D"utf-8" >>=20 >> Lizhong, >>=20 >> Responding to myself, I just saw Joel's email, so we're both good with >> this addition. >>=20 >> Thanks, >> Andy >>=20 >> On Mon, Sep 28, 2015 at 10:57 AM, Andrew G. Malis >> wrote: >>=20 >>> Lizhong, >>>=20 >>> [Lizhong] I proposed to add the following, and waiting for his >>>> confirmation. >>>> This stack grows downward, with relay node addresses further along >>>> the LSP appearing lower down in the stack. Please refer to section >>>> 4.2 for the relay node discovery mechanism. >>>=20 >>> If this is acceptable to Joel, I'm good with it as well. >>>=20 >>> Thanks, >>> Andy >> -------------- next part -------------- >> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... >> URL: >> > 42cb3/attachment.html> >>=20 >> ------------------------------ >>=20 >> Subject: Digest Footer >>=20 >> _______________________________________________ >> mpls mailing list >> mpls@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls >>=20 >>=20 >> ------------------------------ >>=20 >> End of mpls Digest, Vol 137, Issue 54 >> ************************************* >=20 > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From nobody Thu Oct 1 11:58:09 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C38F41A884F; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 11:58:07 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.089 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.089 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham 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 PnVxLcgQZUaY; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 11:58:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtptc.telefonica.com (smtptc.telefonica.com [195.76.34.108]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 07B451A8850; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 11:58:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtptc.telefonica.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5B2173A0270; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 20:58:01 +0200 (CEST) Received: from ESTGVMSP114.EUROPE.telefonica.corp (unknown [10.92.4.9]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtptc.telefonica.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 369063A023C; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 20:58:01 +0200 (CEST) Received: from emea01-am1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (10.92.5.139) by tls.telefonica.com (10.93.6.55) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.235.1; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 20:58:00 +0200 Received: from AM3PR06MB1379.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com (10.163.187.13) by AM3PR06MB1380.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com (10.163.187.14) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.286.20; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 18:57:59 +0000 Received: from AM3PR06MB1379.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com ([10.163.187.13]) by AM3PR06MB1379.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com ([10.163.187.13]) with mapi id 15.01.0280.017; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 18:57:59 +0000 From: LUIS MIGUEL CONTRERAS MURILLO To: Loa Andersson , "mpls@ietf.org" , "mpls-chairs@ietf.org" , "draft-kompella-mpls-rmr@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: Poll to see if we have consensus to adopt draft-kompella-mpls-rmr as an MPLS wg dcument Thread-Index: AQHQ+d3l/dG0KnGTMkaL62Z4SF0kfZ5XAX+g Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2015 18:57:59 +0000 Message-ID: References: <56091F68.8050000@pi.nu> In-Reply-To: <56091F68.8050000@pi.nu> Accept-Language: es-ES, en-US Content-Language: es-ES X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=luismiguel.contrerasmurillo@telefonica.com; x-originating-ip: [81.43.250.214] x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; AM3PR06MB1380; 5:FKGldMntvdtF5Gj0TKX4VvcatAURGf5he4kDPtJ8idM1HlABacBJ7KONQtbqUTOEvMxcZKZEvClLu5znRpjztvTv8s1aJzayIdc5schaANr0nQAGLPx/50x0spAfsTll3Oa5o5fDcDVtsclMAsGWnQ==; 24:iXsZ27z+jy5Q2luemYVDRjtLwkwdadfhEb+f1tyGbVuHFPO3U9v0i+OBoPb2UQAwCN6HRKCr4FMQX49t9aw5eA9YdMZMfk52s4ANkeU1SDo=; 20:ks9TOr+UmzLD/njnHWJ45i1Wla6oTSoiY5TsUfK33JShGG6SpxK2qT1+znKsUrULJ1F1rjxh01yjhIFpEnEqgQ== x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:AM3PR06MB1380; x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:; x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(601004)(2401047)(8121501046)(520078)(5005006)(3002001); SRVR:AM3PR06MB1380; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:AM3PR06MB1380; x-forefront-prvs: 0716E70AB6 x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(6009001)(59124003)(53754006)(189002)(252514010)(199003)(68736005)(2201001)(77156002)(64706001)(46102003)(77096005)(2900100001)(86362001)(62966003)(92566002)(66066001)(102836002)(2950100001)(76576001)(5004730100002)(107886002)(2501003)(5003600100002)(5001960100002)(189998001)(5002640100001)(10400500002)(105586002)(19580405001)(19580395003)(106116001)(106356001)(50986999)(87936001)(101416001)(54356999)(33656002)(5007970100001)(230783001)(76176999)(5008740100001)(81156007)(40100003)(4001540100001)(5001860100001)(11100500001)(5001830100001)(5001770100001)(122556002)(97736004)(74316001)(9010500005); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:AM3PR06MB1380; H:AM3PR06MB1379.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; MX:1; A:1; LANG:en; received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: telefonica.com does not designate permitted sender hosts) spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:23 spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 01 Oct 2015 18:57:59.1540 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 9744600e-3e04-492e-baa1-25ec245c6f10 X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: AM3PR06MB1380 X-OriginatorOrg: telefonica.com X-TM-AS-MML: No Archived-At: Subject: Re: [mpls] Poll to see if we have consensus to adopt draft-kompella-mpls-rmr as an MPLS wg dcument X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2015 18:58:07 -0000 SGkgYWxsLA0KDQpBcyBjby1hdXRob3IgSSBzdXBwb3J0IHRoZSBhZG9wdGlvbi4gSSdtIG5vdCBh d2FyZSBvZiBhbnkgSVBSIGFwYXJ0IGZyb20gdGhhdCBhbHJlYWR5IGRpc2Nsb3NlZCBieSBKdW5p cGVyLg0KDQpCZXN0IHJlZ2FyZHMNCg0KTHVpcw0KDQpfX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fDQpMdWlzIE0uIENvbnRyZXJhcw0KDQpUZWNobm9sb2d5IGFuZCBQbGFubmluZw0K VHJhbnNwb3J0LCBJUCBhbmQgSW50ZXJjb25uZWN0aW9uIE5ldHdvcmtzDQpUZWxlZsOzbmljYSBJ K0QgLyBHbG9iYWwgQ1RPIHVuaXQgLyBUZWxlZsOzbmljYQ0KDQpEaXN0cml0byBUZWxlZsOzbmlj YSwgRWRpZmljaW8gU3VyIDMsIFBsYW50YSAzDQoyODA1MCBNYWRyaWQNCkVzcGHDsWEgLyBTcGFp bg0KDQpUOiArMzQgOTEgNDgzIDI3MDQgbmV3IC8gTTogKzM0IDYwOCA2NTAgNDE1DQpsdWlzbWln dWVsLmNvbnRyZXJhc211cmlsbG9AdGVsZWZvbmljYS5jb20NCg0KDQo+IC0tLS0tTWVuc2FqZSBv cmlnaW5hbC0tLS0tDQo+IERlOiBMb2EgQW5kZXJzc29uIFttYWlsdG86bG9hQHBpLm51XQ0KPiBF bnZpYWRvIGVsOiBsdW5lcywgMjggZGUgc2VwdGllbWJyZSBkZSAyMDE1IDEzOjA3DQo+IFBhcmE6 IG1wbHNAaWV0Zi5vcmc7IG1wbHMtY2hhaXJzQGlldGYub3JnOyBkcmFmdC1rb21wZWxsYS1tcGxz LQ0KPiBybXJAaWV0Zi5vcmcNCj4gQXN1bnRvOiBQb2xsIHRvIHNlZSBpZiB3ZSBoYXZlIGNvbnNl bnN1cyB0byBhZG9wdCBkcmFmdC1rb21wZWxsYS1tcGxzLXJtcg0KPiBhcyBhbiBNUExTIHdnIGRj dW1lbnQNCj4NCj4gV29ya2luZyBHcm91cCwNCj4NCj4gVGhpcyBpcyB0byBzdGFydCBhIHR3byB3 ZWVrIHBvbGwgb24gYWRvcHRpbmcgZHJhZnQta29tcGVsbGEtbXBscy1ybXItMDIgYXMgYW4NCj4g TVBMUyB3b3JraW5nIGdyb3VwIGRvY3VtZW50Lg0KPg0KPiBQbGVhc2Ugc2VuZCB5b3VyIGNvbW1l bnRzIChzdXBwb3J0L25vdCBzdXBwb3J0KSB0byB0aGUgbXBscyB3b3JraW5nDQo+IGdyb3VwIG1h aWxpbmcgbGlzdCAobXBsc0BpZXRmLm9yZykuIFBsZWFzZSBnaXZlIGEgdGVjaG5pY2FsIG1vdGl2 YXRpb24gZm9yIHlvdXINCj4gc3VwcG9ydC9ub3Qgc3VwcG9ydCwgZXNwZWNpYWxseSBpZiB5b3Ug dGhpbmsgdGhhdCB0aGUgZG9jdW1lbnQgc2hvdWxkIG5vdCBiZQ0KPiBhZG9wdGVkIGFzIGEgd29y a2luZyBncm91cCBkb2N1bWVudC4NCj4NCj4gVGhlcmUgaXMgY3VycmVudGx5IG9uZSBJUFIgZGlz Y2xvc3VyZSBhZ2FpbnN0IHRoaXMgZG9jdW1lbnQuIEFsbCB0aGUgYXV0aG9ycw0KPiBoYXMgc3Rh dGVkIG9uIHRoZSB3b3JraW5nIGdyb3VwIG1haWxpbmcgdGhhdCB0aGV5IGFyZSB1bmF3YXJlIG9m IGFueQ0KPiB1bmRpc2Nsb3NlZCBJUFJzIHRoYXQgcmVsYXRlcyB0byB0aGlzIGRyYWZ0Li4NCj4N Cj4gSG93ZXZlciBpZiB5b3UgYXJlIG9uIHRoZSB0aGUgbXBscyB3b3JraW5nIGdyb3VwIG1haWxp bmcgbGlzdCBhbmQgYXdhcmUgb2YNCj4gSVBSIHRoYXQgcmVsYXRlcyB0byB0aGlzIGRyYWZ0LCB0 aGUgdGltZSB0byBkaXNjbG9zZSB0aGlzIGlzIG5vdy4NCj4NCj4gVGhpcyBwb2xsIGVuZHMgT2N0 b2JlciAxMiwgMjAxNS4NCj4NCj4gL0xvYQ0KPiBtcGxzIHdnIGNvLWNoYWlyDQo+DQo+IC0tDQo+ DQo+DQo+IExvYSBBbmRlcnNzb24gICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICBlbWFpbDogbG9hQG1h aWwwMS5odWF3ZWkuY29tDQo+IFNlbmlvciBNUExTIEV4cGVydCAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgbG9hQHBpLm51DQo+IEh1YXdlaSBUZWNobm9sb2dpZXMgKGNvbnN1bHRhbnQpICAgICBw aG9uZTogKzQ2IDczOSA4MSAyMSA2NA0KDQpfX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f Xw0KDQpFc3RlIG1lbnNhamUgeSBzdXMgYWRqdW50b3Mgc2UgZGlyaWdlbiBleGNsdXNpdmFtZW50 ZSBhIHN1IGRlc3RpbmF0YXJpbywgcHVlZGUgY29udGVuZXIgaW5mb3JtYWNpw7NuIHByaXZpbGVn aWFkYSBvIGNvbmZpZGVuY2lhbCB5IGVzIHBhcmEgdXNvIGV4Y2x1c2l2byBkZSBsYSBwZXJzb25h IG8gZW50aWRhZCBkZSBkZXN0aW5vLiBTaSBubyBlcyB1c3RlZC4gZWwgZGVzdGluYXRhcmlvIGlu ZGljYWRvLCBxdWVkYSBub3RpZmljYWRvIGRlIHF1ZSBsYSBsZWN0dXJhLCB1dGlsaXphY2nDs24s IGRpdnVsZ2FjacOzbiB5L28gY29waWEgc2luIGF1dG9yaXphY2nDs24gcHVlZGUgZXN0YXIgcHJv aGliaWRhIGVuIHZpcnR1ZCBkZSBsYSBsZWdpc2xhY2nDs24gdmlnZW50ZS4gU2kgaGEgcmVjaWJp ZG8gZXN0ZSBtZW5zYWplIHBvciBlcnJvciwgbGUgcm9nYW1vcyBxdWUgbm9zIGxvIGNvbXVuaXF1 ZSBpbm1lZGlhdGFtZW50ZSBwb3IgZXN0YSBtaXNtYSB2w61hIHkgcHJvY2VkYSBhIHN1IGRlc3Ry dWNjacOzbi4NCg0KVGhlIGluZm9ybWF0aW9uIGNvbnRhaW5lZCBpbiB0aGlzIHRyYW5zbWlzc2lv biBpcyBwcml2aWxlZ2VkIGFuZCBjb25maWRlbnRpYWwgaW5mb3JtYXRpb24gaW50ZW5kZWQgb25s eSBmb3IgdGhlIHVzZSBvZiB0aGUgaW5kaXZpZHVhbCBvciBlbnRpdHkgbmFtZWQgYWJvdmUuIElm IHRoZSByZWFkZXIgb2YgdGhpcyBtZXNzYWdlIGlzIG5vdCB0aGUgaW50ZW5kZWQgcmVjaXBpZW50 LCB5b3UgYXJlIGhlcmVieSBub3RpZmllZCB0aGF0IGFueSBkaXNzZW1pbmF0aW9uLCBkaXN0cmli dXRpb24gb3IgY29weWluZyBvZiB0aGlzIGNvbW11bmljYXRpb24gaXMgc3RyaWN0bHkgcHJvaGli aXRlZC4gSWYgeW91IGhhdmUgcmVjZWl2ZWQgdGhpcyB0cmFuc21pc3Npb24gaW4gZXJyb3IsIGRv IG5vdCByZWFkIGl0LiBQbGVhc2UgaW1tZWRpYXRlbHkgcmVwbHkgdG8gdGhlIHNlbmRlciB0aGF0 IHlvdSBoYXZlIHJlY2VpdmVkIHRoaXMgY29tbXVuaWNhdGlvbiBpbiBlcnJvciBhbmQgdGhlbiBk ZWxldGUgaXQuDQoNCkVzdGEgbWVuc2FnZW0gZSBzZXVzIGFuZXhvcyBzZSBkaXJpZ2VtIGV4Y2x1 c2l2YW1lbnRlIGFvIHNldSBkZXN0aW5hdMOhcmlvLCBwb2RlIGNvbnRlciBpbmZvcm1hw6fDo28g cHJpdmlsZWdpYWRhIG91IGNvbmZpZGVuY2lhbCBlIMOpIHBhcmEgdXNvIGV4Y2x1c2l2byBkYSBw ZXNzb2Egb3UgZW50aWRhZGUgZGUgZGVzdGluby4gU2UgbsOjbyDDqSB2b3NzYSBzZW5ob3JpYSBv IGRlc3RpbmF0w6FyaW8gaW5kaWNhZG8sIGZpY2Egbm90aWZpY2FkbyBkZSBxdWUgYSBsZWl0dXJh LCB1dGlsaXphw6fDo28sIGRpdnVsZ2HDp8OjbyBlL291IGPDs3BpYSBzZW0gYXV0b3JpemHDp8Oj byBwb2RlIGVzdGFyIHByb2liaWRhIGVtIHZpcnR1ZGUgZGEgbGVnaXNsYcOnw6NvIHZpZ2VudGUu IFNlIHJlY2ViZXUgZXN0YSBtZW5zYWdlbSBwb3IgZXJybywgcm9nYW1vcy1saGUgcXVlIG5vcyBv IGNvbXVuaXF1ZSBpbWVkaWF0YW1lbnRlIHBvciBlc3RhIG1lc21hIHZpYSBlIHByb2NlZGEgYSBz dWEgZGVzdHJ1acOnw6NvDQo= From nobody Thu Oct 1 21:51:50 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 50E2B1A01F9; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 21:51:48 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.91 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham 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 mZdtL-g9cYXm; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 21:51:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pipi.pi.nu (pipi.pi.nu [83.168.239.141]) (using TLSv1.1 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0BC0C1A01F7; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 21:51:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.10] (unknown [112.205.86.58]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: loa@pi.nu) by pipi.pi.nu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9BA0C18013BE; Fri, 2 Oct 2015 06:51:39 +0200 (CEST) To: "mpls@ietf.org" From: Loa Andersson Message-ID: <560E0D4F.4070100@pi.nu> Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2015 12:51:27 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: Cc: Amanda Baber , "draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-mrt@ietf.org" , "mpls-chairs@ietf.org" Subject: [mpls] Early allocation of code points for draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-mrt X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 02 Oct 2015 04:51:48 -0000 Working Group, We have made early allocations of 5 code points for draft-ietf-mpls- ldp-mrt. Please find them: In the TLV Type Name Space (http://www.iana.org/assignments/ldp-namespaces): 0x050E MRT Capability TLV (TEMPORARY - registered 2015-10-01, expires 2016-10-01) [draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-mrt] In the Status Code Name Space (http://www.iana.org/assignments/ldp-namespaces): 0x00000034 0 MRT Capability negotiated without MT Capability (TEMPORARY - registered 2015-10-01, expires 2016-10-01) [draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-mrt] In the MPLS Multi-Topology Identifiers registry (http://www.iana.org/assignments/mpls-multi-topology-parameters): 3945 Rainbow MRT MPLS MT-ID (TEMPORARY - registered 2015-10-01, expires 2016-10-01) [draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-mrt] 3946 Default Profile MRT-Red MPLS MT-ID (TEMPORARY - registered 2015-10-01, expires 2016-10-01) [draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-mrt] 3947 Default Profile MRT-Blue MPLS MT-ID (TEMPORARY - registered 2015-10-01, expires 2016-10-01) [draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-mrt] Tnx to IANA (Amanda in particular) and Deborah for taking quick actions on this. Note: As you can see we want to mark the code points in the range of 3948-3995 in the Status Code Name Space: 3948-3995 Unassigned (for future MRT-related values) WE are not sure if we can do this in an early allocation, IANA is looking into this. /Loa -- Loa Andersson email: loa@mail01.huawei.com Senior MPLS Expert loa@pi.nu Huawei Technologies (consultant) phone: +46 739 81 21 64 From nobody Fri Oct 2 08:25:33 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4E2281B2C16; Fri, 2 Oct 2015 08:25:32 -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] autolearn=ham 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 JN4ZJviuaZb8; Fri, 2 Oct 2015 08:25:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EA3FF1B2C0F; Fri, 2 Oct 2015 08:25:30 -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: 6.4.1 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <20151002152530.24961.40716.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Fri, 02 Oct 2015 08:25:30 -0700 Archived-At: Cc: mpls@ietf.org Subject: [mpls] I-D Action: draft-ietf-mpls-self-ping-05.txt X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 02 Oct 2015 15:25:32 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Multiprotocol Label Switching Working Group of the IETF. Title : LSP Self-Ping Authors : Ron Bonica Ina Minei Michael Conn Dante Pacella Luis Tomotaki Filename : draft-ietf-mpls-self-ping-05.txt Pages : 12 Date : 2015-10-02 Abstract: When certain RSVP-TE optimizations are implemented, ingress LSRs can receive RSVP RESV messages before forwarding state has been installed on all downstream nodes. According to the RSVP-TE specification, the ingress LSR can forward traffic through an LSP as soon as it receives a RESV message. However, if the ingress LSR forwards traffic through the LSP before forwarding state has been installed on all downstream nodes, traffic can be lost. This document describes LSP Self-ping. When an ingress LSR receives an RESV message, it can invoke LSP Self-ping procedures to ensure that forwarding state has been installed on all downstream nodes. LSP Self-ping is a new protocol. It is not an extension of LSP Ping. Although LSP Ping and LSP Self-ping are named similarly, each is designed for a unique purpose. Each protocol listens on its own UDP port and executes its own procedures. LSP Self-ping is an extremely light-weight mechanism. It does not consume control plane resources on transit or egress LSRs. The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-mpls-self-ping/ There's also a htmlized version available at: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-mpls-self-ping-05 A diff from the previous version is available at: https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-mpls-self-ping-05 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 Oct 5 06:25:50 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4697A1ACD60; Mon, 5 Oct 2015 06:25:49 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -14.51 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.51 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham 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 2UEIF6SeJmqr; Mon, 5 Oct 2015 06:25:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from alln-iport-5.cisco.com (alln-iport-5.cisco.com [173.37.142.92]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A3EB51A03B3; Mon, 5 Oct 2015 06:25:46 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=4502; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1444051547; x=1445261147; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:mime-version; bh=KjLnsi5eNyNoEQaJUZ/4m8Jh64ZxheLxQUNgv/5TUTg=; b=CV9/Bll2AyA/6r8fMJfdReigTdOKsXz59VXaYCr2n531aiMx8DriOH0z eRk4ZXjj+XpSIf+molhUZy+8GMKlyHh7xLLiMwcrKJuALxzOCMXPAHPL5 /+Qc1ZcxD9ohh4UC+rl8464NvRa19YwFCfHHtZCPoG72nMz1cwjHvxrkm 4=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0AIAgCPeRJW/5ldJa1eglpNVG4GuWqEIgENgVohhXmBMjgUAQEBAQEBAX8LhCcEeRIBgQAnBA6IMw27cAEBAQEBAQEDAQEBAQEBAQEBFQSGc4oHBIQzBY0FiHcBd4QfiACBVoQ4kWaDbgEfAQFChAJxAYc4gQYBAQE X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.17,638,1437436800"; d="scan'208,217";a="194439036" Received: from rcdn-core-2.cisco.com ([173.37.93.153]) by alln-iport-5.cisco.com with ESMTP; 05 Oct 2015 13:25:46 +0000 Received: from XCH-RTP-002.cisco.com (xch-rtp-002.cisco.com [64.101.220.142]) by rcdn-core-2.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id t95DPjhK027995 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Mon, 5 Oct 2015 13:25:45 GMT Received: from xch-rtp-001.cisco.com (64.101.220.141) by XCH-RTP-002.cisco.com (64.101.220.142) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1104.5; Mon, 5 Oct 2015 09:25:44 -0400 Received: from xch-rtp-001.cisco.com ([64.101.220.141]) by XCH-RTP-001.cisco.com ([64.101.220.141]) with mapi id 15.00.1104.000; Mon, 5 Oct 2015 09:25:44 -0400 From: "Tarek Saad (tsaad)" To: "mpls@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: Building agenda for MPLS WG sessions - Yokohama IETF94 Thread-Index: AQHQ/3FWpb7FjQfoSUinH91WLmtwvg== Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2015 13:25:44 +0000 Message-ID: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.5.4.150722 x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1 x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted x-originating-ip: [10.86.247.199] Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_D237F29944F35tsaadciscocom_" MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: Cc: "mpls-chairs@ietf.org" Subject: [mpls] Building agenda for MPLS WG sessions - Yokohama IETF94 X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Oct 2015 13:25:49 -0000 --_000_D237F29944F35tsaadciscocom_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi all, We are starting to build the MPLS WG agenda for Yokohama IETF94. The prelim= inary agenda, is available at: https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/94/agenda.html The MPLS WG sessions are tentatively scheduled for: Wednesday, November 4, 2015 (JST), 9:00-11:30 Wednesday Morning session I and Thursday, November 5, 2015 (JST), 17:40-18:40 Thursday Afternoon session II= I Please send (reply to this e-mail and copy myself and the MPLS chairs) your= requests for a presentation slot. Indicate: draft name, speaker and desired duration (covering presentation += Q&As). Please send your requests by October 9th, 2015. If presenting, your slides will be due by November 1, 2015. Please send sli= des to the addresses above. Regards, Tarek and MPLS chairs --_000_D237F29944F35tsaadciscocom_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi all,

We are starting to build the MPLS WG= agenda for Yokohama IETF94. The preliminary agenda, is available= at:

The MPLS WG sessions are tentatively sche= duled for:
Wednesday, November 4, 2015 (JST),&n= bsp;9:00-11:30 Wednesday Morning session I
and
Thursday, November 5, 2015 (JST),&nb= sp;17:40-18:40 Thursday Afternoon session III

Please send (reply to this e-mail and cop= y myself and the MPLS chairs) your requests for a presentation slot. <= /font>
Indicate: draft name, speaker and desired= duration (covering presentation + Q&As).
Please send your requests by October 9th, 2015.

If presenting, your slides will be due by= November 1, 2015. Please send slides to the addresses above.

Regards,
Tarek and MPLS chairs


--_000_D237F29944F35tsaadciscocom_-- From nobody Mon Oct 5 06:57:52 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 044091ACDEB; Mon, 5 Oct 2015 06:57:50 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.91 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham 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 mIuZS2K5DXqf; Mon, 5 Oct 2015 06:57:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pipi.pi.nu (pipi.pi.nu [83.168.239.141]) (using TLSv1.1 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AEFCE1ACDE5; Mon, 5 Oct 2015 06:57:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.10] (unknown [49.149.195.95]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: loa@pi.nu) by pipi.pi.nu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A7D9818013BE; Mon, 5 Oct 2015 15:57:44 +0200 (CEST) From: Loa Andersson To: "mpls@ietf.org" Message-ID: <561281C8.3020404@pi.nu> Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2015 21:57:28 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: Cc: "draft-ietf-mpls-rfc6374-udp-return-path@tools.ietf.org" , "mpls-chairs@ietf.org" Subject: [mpls] preparing the shepherd wwrite-up for draft-ietf-mpls-rfc6374-udp-return-path X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Oct 2015 13:57:50 -0000 Working Group, We are preparing the Shepherd Write-Up for draft-ietf-mpls-rfc6374- udp-return-path. One question we need to answer is if we have know implementations and/or deployments of the specification. This mail starts an implementation poll on draft-ietf-mpls-rfc6374- udp-return-path. If you have an implementation or plan to implement the draft please respond to this mail. /Loa mpls wg co-chair -- Loa Andersson email: loa@mail01.huawei.com Senior MPLS Expert loa@pi.nu Huawei Technologies (consultant) phone: +46 739 81 21 64 From nobody Mon Oct 5 08:02:09 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C3C361ACED5 for ; Mon, 5 Oct 2015 08:02:07 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -14.511 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.511 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, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham 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 Hkqo2VQ_pz2f for ; Mon, 5 Oct 2015 08:02:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from alln-iport-8.cisco.com (alln-iport-8.cisco.com [173.37.142.95]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0D0CC1ACED4 for ; Mon, 5 Oct 2015 08:02:06 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=4460; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1444057326; x=1445266926; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to: content-id:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=za4fKZlCBqK40S84g0DX2njZfd0GJucehSqrjFHqFFo=; b=Hbgd9rNv8aL/HeLdeRmGxVKaSbELEodH6A3HuHbYle3MNvGlGNF8GhlI DzikP5mNZLkB4i+V9CEyfK7B1LwS2YF5RJK/p/1wlUb3nbZDB3PWd0wzz P3gYEWoAACQCTLYqsf8U7WUs7Kv5TbtCgWbHuT3dXoKPGmshw7SXDk83T I=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0DeAwACkBJW/4gNJK1UCoMnVG4GvgwBDYFaFwqFeQKBMDgUAQEBAQEBAX8LQQODYQEBBAEBATctBwsSAQg2NwslAgQOBQmIJQ28QwEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAReLcYQwXQIFhCwFjQWIdwGFFogAgVZHg3GND4EIg0+DbgEfAQFChAJxAYJJhC4lHIEGAQEB X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.17,639,1437436800"; d="scan'208";a="194637056" Received: from alln-core-3.cisco.com ([173.36.13.136]) by alln-iport-8.cisco.com with ESMTP; 05 Oct 2015 15:02:05 +0000 Received: from XCH-ALN-014.cisco.com (xch-aln-014.cisco.com [173.36.7.24]) by alln-core-3.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id t95F24h8027728 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Mon, 5 Oct 2015 15:02:04 GMT Received: from xch-rcd-015.cisco.com (173.37.102.25) by XCH-ALN-014.cisco.com (173.36.7.24) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1104.5; Mon, 5 Oct 2015 10:02:04 -0500 Received: from xch-rcd-015.cisco.com ([173.37.102.25]) by XCH-RCD-015.cisco.com ([173.37.102.25]) with mapi id 15.00.1104.000; Mon, 5 Oct 2015 10:02:04 -0500 From: "Nagendra Kumar Nainar (naikumar)" To: "mpls@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: I-D Action: draft-smack-mpls-rfc4379bis-05.txt Thread-Index: AQHQ/eaGNx46Olr+ZEe6ZO6z9H6RXp5dEoyA Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2015 15:02:04 +0000 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <20151003141920.12596.66926.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.3.8.130913 x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1 x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted x-originating-ip: [10.150.55.56] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <4F5E8EE1448C1346B290FFB12D14F84F@emea.cisco.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: Cc: "draft-smack-mpls-rfc4379bis@tools.ietf.org" Subject: Re: [mpls] I-D Action: draft-smack-mpls-rfc4379bis-05.txt X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Oct 2015 15:02:07 -0000 Hi All, Uptil this version, all Erratas on RFC4379 has been addressed and text were updated to reflect TC instead of EXP (RFC5462). As mentioned in Section 1.5 of draft-smack-mpls-rfc4379bis, the next step is to evaluate the RFCs that updates RFC4379 and identify the list to be incorporated in rfc4379bis. A summary of updates by RFC 6424: * Updates the validation procedure to include Stitching and Hierarchical LSPs. * Deprecates DSMAP defined in RFC4379 and replaces it with DDMAP. * Introduces a new TLV as FEC Stack Change Sub-TLV * Introduces 2 New return codes. * Check and include IANA considerations. Potential Update - Update the return code and DDMAP TLV in respective section, Remove (or Deprecate DSMAP), update the procedure with DDMAP reference in place of DSMAP, Update the procedure section 4.4, 4.5 and 4.6. A summary of updates by RFC 6425: * Extends the validation procedure for P2MP and MP2MP LSPs. * Introduces 4 new Target FEC Stack Sub-TLVs. * Introduces 2 new TLVs (and related Sub-TLVs) * Check and include IANA considerations. Potential Update - Per discussion with WG. A summary of updates by RFC 6426: * Extends the validation procedure for MPLS-TP with both IP based and non-IP (ACH) based encapsulation . * Introduces 2 new Target FEC Stack Sub-TLVs. * Introduces new Address types for DSMAP * Introduces 3 new TLVs. * Reserves a flag in Global Flags. * Check and include IANA considerations. Potential Update - Per discussion with WG. A summary of updates by RFC 6829: * Introduces 2 new Target FEC Stack Sub-TLVs for PW between IPv6 endpoints. * No changes in procedure. * Check and include IANA considerations. Potential Update - Include the Sub-TLVs in respective section. A summary of updates by RFC 7506: * Introduces a new option in IPv6 HbH extension header. * No changes in procedure. * Check and include IANA considerations. Potential Update - Include the same and update the header processing section. A summary of updates by RFC 7537: * Document to create IANA registries for name spaces defined in RFC4379 and 6424. * No changes in procedure. * Check and include IANA considerations. Potential Update - Include the same in IANA consideration. Since RFC 6829 and 7506 are straight forward, we will go ahead and include the same while we discuss on the other RFCs. Please share your thoughts and accordingly, we can include the relevant content to update the draft. Thanks, Nagendra On 10/3/15, 10:19 AM, "internet-drafts@ietf.org" wrote: > >A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts >directories. > > > Title : Detecting Multi-Protocol Label Switched (MPLS) >Data Plane Failures > Authors : Carlos Pignataro > Nagendra Kumar > Sam Aldrin > Mach(Guoyi) Chen > Filename : draft-smack-mpls-rfc4379bis-05.txt > Pages : 49 > Date : 2015-10-03 > >Abstract: > This document describes a simple and efficient mechanism that can be > used to detect data plane failures in Multi-Protocol Label Switching > (MPLS) Label Switched Paths (LSPs). There are two parts to this > document: information carried in an MPLS "echo request" and "echo > reply" for the purposes of fault detection and isolation, and > mechanisms for reliably sending the echo reply. > > This document obsoletes RFC 4379. > > >The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: >https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-smack-mpls-rfc4379bis/ > >There's also a htmlized version available at: >https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-smack-mpls-rfc4379bis-05 > >A diff from the previous version is available at: >https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=3Ddraft-smack-mpls-rfc4379bis-05 > > >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/ > >_______________________________________________ >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.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt From nobody Mon Oct 5 09:39:10 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E9881A1AB9; Mon, 5 Oct 2015 09:39:07 -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] autolearn=ham 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 9oEKsljDUHWR; Mon, 5 Oct 2015 09:39:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB2E61A1B4E; Mon, 5 Oct 2015 09:39:05 -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: 6.4.1 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <20151005163905.4945.73270.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Mon, 05 Oct 2015 09:39:05 -0700 Archived-At: Cc: mpls@ietf.org Subject: [mpls] I-D Action: draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-relay-reply-11.txt X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Oct 2015 16:39:07 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Multiprotocol Label Switching Working Group of the IETF. Title : Relayed Echo Reply mechanism for LSP Ping Authors : Jian Luo Lizhong Jin Thomas Nadeau George Swallow Filename : draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-relay-reply-11.txt Pages : 17 Date : 2015-10-05 Abstract: In some inter autonomous system (AS) and inter-area deployment scenarios for RFC 4379 "Label Switched Path (LSP) Ping and Traceroute", a replying Label Switching Router (LSR) may not have the available route to an initiator, and the Echo Reply message sent to the initiator would be discarded resulting in false negatives or complete failure of operation of LSP Ping and Traceroute. This document describes extensions to LSP Ping mechanism to enable the replying LSR to have the capability to relay the Echo Response by a set of routable intermediate nodes to the initiator. This document updates RFC 4379. The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-relay-reply/ There's also a htmlized version available at: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-relay-reply-11 A diff from the previous version is available at: https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-relay-reply-11 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 Oct 5 11:16:09 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9B6AE1B328D; Mon, 5 Oct 2015 11:16:07 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.899 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, TVD_SPACE_RATIO=0.001] autolearn=ham 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 Zp54XDSIijWf; Mon, 5 Oct 2015 11:16:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 919F61B329C; Mon, 5 Oct 2015 11:16:06 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: , , , X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.4.1 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <20151005181606.22806.89657.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Mon, 05 Oct 2015 11:16:06 -0700 From: IETF Secretariat Archived-At: Subject: [mpls] ID Tracker State Update Notice: X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Oct 2015 18:16:07 -0000 IESG state changed to AD Evaluation from Publication Requested ID Tracker URL: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-mpls-tp-oam-conf/ From nobody Mon Oct 5 11:22:39 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF7C71B32C3; Mon, 5 Oct 2015 11:22:37 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.578 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.578 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, IP_NOT_FRIENDLY=0.334, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=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 Z0ma2mjCjGpm; Mon, 5 Oct 2015 11:22:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from slice.pfrc.org (slice.pfrc.org [67.207.130.108]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4DECD1B32C2; Mon, 5 Oct 2015 11:22:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: by slice.pfrc.org (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 45F7C1E4DB; Mon, 5 Oct 2015 14:26:31 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2015 14:26:31 -0400 From: Jeffrey Haas To: rtg-bfd@ietf.org Message-ID: <20151005182631.GD5112@pfrc.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Archived-At: Cc: mpls@ietf.org Subject: [mpls] WGLC for draft-ietf-bfd-mpls-mib X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Oct 2015 18:22:38 -0000 BFD Working Group, (cc'ing MPLS) This begins an extended Working Group Last Call for draft-ietf-bfd-mpls-mib, BFD Management Information Base (MIB) extensions for MPLS and MPLS-TP Networks. The authors have indicated that this document is ready for advancement. Please indicate whether you believe this document is ready to proceed for publication by the IESG. Note that since this is a MIB, a MIB Doctor review will be requested as part of the publication process. Authors, please state whether this document carries any IPR considerations. -- Jeff From nobody Mon Oct 5 16:56:08 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A08A11B50FE; Mon, 5 Oct 2015 16:56:05 -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] autolearn=ham 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 uaZepoT3Zoei; Mon, 5 Oct 2015 16:56:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 193C91B50F4; Mon, 5 Oct 2015 16:56:04 -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: 6.4.1 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <20151005235604.5465.6569.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Mon, 05 Oct 2015 16:56:04 -0700 Archived-At: Cc: mpls@ietf.org Subject: [mpls] I-D Action: draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-mpls-tp-oam-conf-14.txt X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Oct 2015 23:56:05 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Multiprotocol Label Switching Working Group of the IETF. Title : Configuration of Proactive Operations, Administration, and Maintenance (OAM) Functions for MPLS-based Transport Networks using LSP Ping Authors : Elisa Bellagamba Gregory Mirsky Loa Andersson Pontus Skoldstrom Dave Ward John Drake Filename : draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-mpls-tp-oam-conf-14.txt Pages : 28 Date : 2015-10-05 Abstract: This specification describes the configuration of proactive MPLS-TP Operations, Administration, and Maintenance (OAM) Functions for a given Label Switched Path (LSP) using a set of TLVs that are carried by the LSP-Ping protocol. The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-mpls-tp-oam-conf/ There's also a htmlized version available at: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-mpls-tp-oam-conf-14 A diff from the previous version is available at: https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-mpls-tp-oam-conf-14 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 Oct 5 16:56:11 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DCA0F1B50F5; Mon, 5 Oct 2015 16:56:06 -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] autolearn=ham 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 aCPBhZo7bGUZ; Mon, 5 Oct 2015 16:56:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5EF341B50F6; Mon, 5 Oct 2015 16:56:04 -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: 6.4.1 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <20151005235604.5465.85646.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Mon, 05 Oct 2015 16:56:04 -0700 Archived-At: Subject: [mpls] New Version Notification - draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-mpls-tp-oam-conf-14.txt X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Oct 2015 23:56:07 -0000 A new version (-14) has been submitted for draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-mpls-tp-oam-conf: https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-mpls-tp-oam-conf-14.txt The IETF datatracker page for this Internet-Draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-mpls-tp-oam-conf/ Diff from previous version: https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-mpls-tp-oam-conf-14 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. IETF Secretariat. From nobody Tue Oct 6 02:55:48 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 15F331B3EDB for ; Tue, 6 Oct 2015 02:55:47 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.902 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.902 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 owFgGGCMFm4b for ; Tue, 6 Oct 2015 02:55:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from emea01-am1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-am1on0726.outbound.protection.outlook.com [IPv6:2a01:111:f400:fe00::726]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BC76F1B3EE4 for ; Tue, 6 Oct 2015 02:55:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from DB3PR03MB0780.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com (10.161.55.12) by DB3PR03MB0778.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com (10.161.54.28) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.286.20; Tue, 6 Oct 2015 09:55:20 +0000 Received: from DB3PR03MB0780.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com ([10.161.55.12]) by DB3PR03MB0780.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com ([10.161.55.12]) with mapi id 15.01.0286.019; Tue, 6 Oct 2015 09:55:20 +0000 From: Alexander Vainshtein To: "Nagendra Kumar Nainar (naikumar)" Thread-Topic: I-D Action: draft-smack-mpls-rfc4379bis-05.txt Thread-Index: AQHQ/eaJ0vBwG4qlSUiZz8Pr4t0q0J5dAcoAgAE7FkA= Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2015 09:55:19 +0000 Message-ID: References: <20151003141920.12596.66926.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=Alexander.Vainshtein@ecitele.com; x-originating-ip: [147.234.56.21] x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; DB3PR03MB0778; 5:tdWOH3Df8HvsWmCcgZJePlwGuxnHdE9GKWvg5Z+p/KLUR/d9+p2UrpbKXKcL78OuCh1Iwl49hOSL2hXvJswaZUoKZYFOpwM0JYUxQwBKsmm+fnvH8CzfRNTLUq7fmQ1Hz91V8uvSuv5nvifJ3d2j3w==; 24:JXMGkI9mBUsPBRPDDSjlFxIc8yrcvz7dz35vMZRXT6MGYFWjy0sR78oYiSEhx5QIwHxZoze0YoTF5wzrgWWJQdF2MgUJFFIdJO+S/Pm7TqQ=; 20:47YDL1Za5CwrlY4q78AaUKvIX4Ido9ZI3u5hr7O1/NWnUGhKc13ASXTYFbD0HfYmJmC9TudaXH6krIDUjiA+aw== x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:DB3PR03MB0778; x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:; x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(601004)(2401047)(8121501046)(520078)(5005006)(3002001); SRVR:DB3PR03MB0778; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:DB3PR03MB0778; x-forefront-prvs: 07215D0470 x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(6009001)(164054003)(199003)(377424004)(377454003)(53754006)(13464003)(24454002)(189002)(479174004)(252514010)(46102003)(5008740100001)(66066001)(81156007)(74316001)(105586002)(50986999)(54356999)(87936001)(76176999)(5003600100002)(122556002)(97736004)(64706001)(230783001)(40100003)(101416001)(86362001)(5007970100001)(76576001)(19580395003)(10400500002)(102836002)(106356001)(11100500001)(15975445007)(5001960100002)(106116001)(92566002)(2950100001)(33656002)(77096005)(19580405001)(2900100001)(110136002)(5004730100002)(189998001)(5002640100001); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:DB3PR03MB0778; H:DB3PR03MB0780.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; A:1; MX:1; LANG:en; received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: ecitele.com does not designate permitted sender hosts) spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:23 spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: ecitele.com X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 06 Oct 2015 09:55:19.8820 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 2c514a61-08de-4519-b4c0-921fef62c42a X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: DB3PR03MB0778 Archived-At: Cc: "draft-smack-mpls-rfc4379bis@tools.ietf.org" , "mpls@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [mpls] I-D Action: draft-smack-mpls-rfc4379bis-05.txt X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 06 Oct 2015 09:55:47 -0000 Nagendra, Lots of thanks for an excellent summary of expected future work. One minor comment: >From my POV the DSMAP TLV should be deprecated (by the DDMAP one) but not = removed altogether - in any case this is what RFC 6424 defines. My 2c, Sasha Office: +972-39266302 Cell: +972-549266302 Email: Alexander.Vainshtein@ecitele.com -----Original Message----- From: mpls [mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Nagendra Kumar Naina= r (naikumar) Sent: Monday, October 05, 2015 6:02 PM To: mpls@ietf.org Cc: draft-smack-mpls-rfc4379bis@tools.ietf.org Subject: Re: [mpls] I-D Action: draft-smack-mpls-rfc4379bis-05.txt Hi All, Uptil this version, all Erratas on RFC4379 has been addressed and text were= updated to reflect TC instead of EXP (RFC5462). As mentioned in Section 1.5 of draft-smack-mpls-rfc4379bis, the next step i= s to evaluate the RFCs that updates RFC4379 and identify the list to be inc= orporated in rfc4379bis. A summary of updates by RFC 6424: * Updates the validation procedure to include Stitching and Hierarchical LS= Ps. * Deprecates DSMAP defined in RFC4379 and replaces it with DDMAP. * Introduces a new TLV as FEC Stack Change Sub-TLV * Introduces 2 New return codes. * Check and include IANA considerations. Potential Update - Update the return code and DDMAP TLV in respective secti= on, Remove (or Deprecate DSMAP), update the procedure with DDMAP reference = in place of DSMAP, Update the procedure section 4.4, 4.5 and 4.6. A summary of updates by RFC 6425: * Extends the validation procedure for P2MP and MP2MP LSPs. * Introduces 4 new Target FEC Stack Sub-TLVs. * Introduces 2 new TLVs (and related Sub-TLVs) * Check and include IANA considerations. Potential Update - Per discussion with WG. A summary of updates by RFC 6426: * Extends the validation procedure for MPLS-TP with both IP based and non-I= P (ACH) based encapsulation . * Introduces 2 new Target FEC Stack Sub-TLVs. * Introduces new Address types for DSMAP * Introduces 3 new TLVs. * Reserves a flag in Global Flags. * Check and include IANA considerations. Potential Update - Per discussion with WG. A summary of updates by RFC 6829: * Introduces 2 new Target FEC Stack Sub-TLVs for PW between IPv6 endpoints. * No changes in procedure. * Check and include IANA considerations. Potential Update - Include the Sub-TLVs in respective section. A summary of updates by RFC 7506: * Introduces a new option in IPv6 HbH extension header. * No changes in procedure. * Check and include IANA considerations. Potential Update - Include the same and update the header processing sectio= n. A summary of updates by RFC 7537: * Document to create IANA registries for name spaces defined in RFC4379 and= 6424. * No changes in procedure. * Check and include IANA considerations. Potential Update - Include the same in IANA consideration. Since RFC 6829 and 7506 are straight forward, we will go ahead and include = the same while we discuss on the other RFCs. Please share your thoughts and= accordingly, we can include the relevant content to update the draft. Thanks, Nagendra On 10/3/15, 10:19 AM, "internet-drafts@ietf.org" wrote: > >A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts=20 >directories. > > > Title : Detecting Multi-Protocol Label Switched (MPLS) >Data Plane Failures > Authors : Carlos Pignataro > Nagendra Kumar > Sam Aldrin > Mach(Guoyi) Chen > Filename : draft-smack-mpls-rfc4379bis-05.txt > Pages : 49 > Date : 2015-10-03 > >Abstract: > This document describes a simple and efficient mechanism that can be > used to detect data plane failures in Multi-Protocol Label Switching > (MPLS) Label Switched Paths (LSPs). There are two parts to this > document: information carried in an MPLS "echo request" and "echo > reply" for the purposes of fault detection and isolation, and > mechanisms for reliably sending the echo reply. > > This document obsoletes RFC 4379. > > >The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: >https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-smack-mpls-rfc4379bis/ > >There's also a htmlized version available at: >https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-smack-mpls-rfc4379bis-05 > >A diff from the previous version is available at: >https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=3Ddraft-smack-mpls-rfc4379bis-05 > > >Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of=20 >submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at=20 >tools.ietf.org. > >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=20 >ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From nobody Tue Oct 6 05:43:58 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CE4E01B4055; Tue, 6 Oct 2015 05:43:57 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.899 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, TVD_SPACE_RATIO=0.001] autolearn=ham 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 9PToXM4C5LlM; Tue, 6 Oct 2015 05:43:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F27EC1AC407; Tue, 6 Oct 2015 05:43:56 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: , , , X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.4.1 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <20151006124356.27896.79615.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Tue, 06 Oct 2015 05:43:56 -0700 From: IETF Secretariat Archived-At: Subject: [mpls] ID Tracker State Update Notice: X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 06 Oct 2015 12:43:58 -0000 IESG state changed to Last Call Requested from AD Evaluation ID Tracker URL: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-mpls-tp-oam-conf/ From nobody Tue Oct 6 07:00:50 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9CAD31ACCE6; Tue, 6 Oct 2015 07:00:48 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -101.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=ham 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 rM5CkJ-lZdnd; Tue, 6 Oct 2015 07:00:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E9D21ACCE0; Tue, 6 Oct 2015 07:00:47 -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: 6.4.1 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Sender: Message-ID: <20151006140047.4541.23774.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Tue, 06 Oct 2015 07:00:47 -0700 Archived-At: Cc: mpls@ietf.org Subject: [mpls] Last Call: (Configuration of Proactive Operations, Administration, and Maintenance (OAM) Functions for MPLS-based Transport Networks using LSP Ping) to Proposed Standard X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Reply-To: ietf@ietf.org List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 06 Oct 2015 14:00:48 -0000 The IESG has received a request from the Multiprotocol Label Switching WG (mpls) to consider the following document: - 'Configuration of Proactive Operations, Administration, and Maintenance (OAM) Functions for MPLS-based Transport Networks using LSP Ping' 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 2015-10-20. Exceptionally, comments may be sent to iesg@ietf.org instead. In either case, please retain the beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting. Abstract This specification describes the configuration of proactive MPLS-TP Operations, Administration, and Maintenance (OAM) Functions for a given Label Switched Path (LSP) using a set of TLVs that are carried by the LSP-Ping protocol. The file can be obtained via https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-mpls-tp-oam-conf/ IESG discussion can be tracked via https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-mpls-tp-oam-conf/ballot/ No IPR declarations have been submitted directly on this I-D. From nobody Tue Oct 6 07:00:58 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F1361ACCE5; Tue, 6 Oct 2015 07:00:50 -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] autolearn=ham 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 QcqlPH6_L8Ba; Tue, 6 Oct 2015 07:00:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 96E791ACCE0; Tue, 6 Oct 2015 07:00:49 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: , , , X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.4.1 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <20151006140049.4541.67323.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Tue, 06 Oct 2015 07:00:49 -0700 From: IETF Secretariat Archived-At: Subject: [mpls] ID Tracker State Update Notice: X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 06 Oct 2015 14:00:50 -0000 Last call has been made for draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-mpls-tp-oam-conf and state has been changed to In Last Call ID Tracker URL: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-mpls-tp-oam-conf/ From nobody Tue Oct 6 12:34:34 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0933B1B31CA; Tue, 6 Oct 2015 12:34:33 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.901 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 TtiwgRYVThgI; Tue, 6 Oct 2015 12:34:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from na01-bn1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-bn1on0776.outbound.protection.outlook.com [IPv6:2a01:111:f400:fc10::776]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 76DDE1B31C7; Tue, 6 Oct 2015 12:34:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from DM2PR05MB573.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.141.159.16) by DM2PR05MB573.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.141.159.16) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.280.20; Tue, 6 Oct 2015 19:34:08 +0000 Received: from DM2PR05MB573.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([10.141.159.16]) by DM2PR05MB573.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([10.141.159.16]) with mapi id 15.01.0280.017; Tue, 6 Oct 2015 19:34:08 +0000 From: Ross Callon To: "mpls@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: Poll for adoption for draft-vainshtein-mpls-gal-tc-ttl-handling-03 Thread-Index: AQHRAG34vYWZ0jGiBkSo2yhyQIWXIw== Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2015 19:34:08 +0000 Message-ID: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=rcallon@juniper.net; x-originating-ip: [66.129.241.11] x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; DM2PR05MB573; 5:mNiZWHbPF7xRwIZFaUqbK1U/ZWTtiYWN0DS5guIh4L6iIlAgdcdongLj7s1wlsx/JGgsUSs4qqEurTXZSInemMgLfxH8/Vl2vimg3tfjdx+F89oatHzw8aFFtgvr57G8R5Jb6/rPGCYivDGal97wIA==; 24:XEQcTkLyySpmsGfz6NK2R2MxhHtBBw5ZCD6kf7Jj+OvCJO+GeCYADvRIE0zo3Zf7mG2s4EedNAVr5ygCwJIM6SIgHnqyF00B11+U+nxBxIg=; 20:xng8/p8bbIotzTbbXlK+Dk+FmzWyDDGThB/jEr/55/r3rMNH8kamx5J+apWQdRm+5ky2nu+gk3cWbvayAjx5xw== x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:DM2PR05MB573; x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:(108003899814671); x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(601004)(2401047)(5005006)(520078)(8121501046)(3002001); SRVR:DM2PR05MB573; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:DM2PR05MB573; x-forefront-prvs: 07215D0470 x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(164054003)(189002)(199003)(106116001)(46102003)(86362001)(40100003)(11100500001)(33656002)(105586002)(5002640100001)(122556002)(189998001)(92566002)(5008740100001)(5001960100002)(81156007)(5004730100002)(110136002)(15975445007)(16236675004)(2900100001)(50986999)(101416001)(5007970100001)(97736004)(64706001)(77096005)(54356999)(19300405004)(229853001)(10400500002)(19580405001)(5003600100002)(99286002)(230783001)(2351001)(450100001)(76576001)(87936001)(102836002)(19580395003)(18717965001)(19625215002)(106356001)(2501003)(74316001)(66066001); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:DM2PR05MB573; H:DM2PR05MB573.namprd05.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; MX:1; A:1; LANG:en; received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: juniper.net does not designate permitted sender hosts) spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:23 spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_DM2PR05MB573B5850562684270CBC22FA5370DM2PR05MB573namprd_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: juniper.net X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 06 Oct 2015 19:34:08.5354 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: bea78b3c-4cdb-4130-854a-1d193232e5f4 X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: DM2PR05MB573 Archived-At: Cc: "mpls-chairs@ietf.org" Subject: [mpls] Poll for adoption for draft-vainshtein-mpls-gal-tc-ttl-handling-03 X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 06 Oct 2015 19:34:33 -0000 --_000_DM2PR05MB573B5850562684270CBC22FA5370DM2PR05MB573namprd_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable This is to start a two week poll on adopting draft-vainshtein-mpls-gal-tc-t= tl-handling-03 as an MPLS working group document. Please send your comments (support/not support) to the mpls working group mailing list (mpls@ietf.org). There are no IPR disclosures pertaining to the draft. The authors have all = indicated that they are not aware of any IPR that applies to this document. This poll for adoption will end Wednesday October 21, 2015. Thanks, Ross --_000_DM2PR05MB573B5850562684270CBC22FA5370DM2PR05MB573namprd_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

This is to start a two week poll on ado= pting draft-vainshtein-mpls-gal-tc-ttl-handling-03

as an MPLS working group document.=

 

Please send your comments (support/not = support) to the mpls working group

mailing list (mpls@ietf.org).

 

There are no IPR disclosures pertaining= to the draft. The authors have all indicated that

they are not aware of any IPR that appl= ies to this document.

 

This poll for adoption will end Wednesd= ay October 21, 2015.

 

Thanks, Ross

 

--_000_DM2PR05MB573B5850562684270CBC22FA5370DM2PR05MB573namprd_-- From nobody Tue Oct 6 12:38:50 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 064011B31FB; Tue, 6 Oct 2015 12:38:49 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.901 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 deO4ML2j5vuF; Tue, 6 Oct 2015 12:38:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from na01-bn1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-bn1on0797.outbound.protection.outlook.com [IPv6:2a01:111:f400:fc10::797]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6578A1B31F5; Tue, 6 Oct 2015 12:38:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from DM2PR05MB573.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.141.159.16) by DM2PR05MB574.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.141.159.22) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.280.20; Tue, 6 Oct 2015 19:38:25 +0000 Received: from DM2PR05MB573.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([10.141.159.16]) by DM2PR05MB573.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([10.141.159.16]) with mapi id 15.01.0280.017; Tue, 6 Oct 2015 19:38:25 +0000 From: Ross Callon To: "mpls@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: Poll for adoption for draft-vainshtein-mpls-gal-tc-ttl-handling-03 Thread-Index: AQHRAG34vYWZ0jGiBkSo2yhyQIWXI55e20ng Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2015 19:38:25 +0000 Message-ID: References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=rcallon@juniper.net; x-originating-ip: [66.129.241.11] x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; DM2PR05MB574; 5:kDm0iviI2/Z2T1l+h42vPInry19ol5IK8w+50peyyCsIS26Zq/DB9s1mAru93NNEVI+SFMc1ojf2XgGRJ38flGOk9TxmqxzhU3st3/mM5MonM+7+t50a+GYB9/vIxjb/37Og4KEgnvNnY5ZUJtgapQ==; 24:BFDPLYpbCym7wZO2u0xS2XbKeJpl+F1TC6Cw62iwpl1biKJR4GTjtGjfCCyGw4KZvBN3gj5h7oe3994tRdS6CrK/B+NCs6oMGJoCXqtz0H8=; 20:U+Rx6ZVwfan9CWTfjU7YLGKH/mJ5LwbQMsIVO14cZ2MXtzZ/TUADraRe2GCXmlLEm1dqRkQxs7KXFUSr5GkZ8w== x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:DM2PR05MB574; x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:(108003899814671); x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(601004)(2401047)(520078)(8121501046)(5005006)(3002001); SRVR:DM2PR05MB574; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:DM2PR05MB574; x-forefront-prvs: 07215D0470 x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(377454003)(199003)(52034003)(189002)(164054003)(5008740100001)(54356999)(105586002)(19580395003)(10400500002)(18717965001)(5003600100002)(77096005)(2351001)(64706001)(87936001)(99286002)(97736004)(92566002)(19609705001)(86362001)(102836002)(106116001)(106356001)(2501003)(76576001)(19625215002)(33656002)(230783001)(19580405001)(16236675004)(11100500001)(76176999)(19300405004)(189998001)(450100001)(5007970100001)(66066001)(19617315012)(2950100001)(5002640100001)(74316001)(81156007)(2900100001)(5004730100002)(110136002)(15975445007)(122556002)(50986999)(40100003)(5001960100002)(101416001)(46102003); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:DM2PR05MB574; H:DM2PR05MB573.namprd05.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; A:1; MX:1; LANG:en; received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: juniper.net does not designate permitted sender hosts) spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:23 spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_DM2PR05MB573F11B26AA62B501091021A5370DM2PR05MB573namprd_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: juniper.net X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 06 Oct 2015 19:38:25.3655 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: bea78b3c-4cdb-4130-854a-1d193232e5f4 X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: DM2PR05MB574 Archived-At: Cc: "mpls-chairs@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [mpls] Poll for adoption for draft-vainshtein-mpls-gal-tc-ttl-handling-03 X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 06 Oct 2015 19:38:49 -0000 --_000_DM2PR05MB573F11B26AA62B501091021A5370DM2PR05MB573namprd_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable By the way, when I go to the tools web site (tools.ietf.org) I only find th= e -02 and earlier versions of this draft. The correct -03 version can be fo= und on the datatracker, at: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-vainshtein-mpls-gal-tc-ttl-handling/ Ross From: Ross Callon [mailto:rcallon@juniper.net] Sent: Tuesday, October 06, 2015 3:34 PM To: mpls@ietf.org Cc: mpls-chairs@ietf.org Subject: Poll for adoption for draft-vainshtein-mpls-gal-tc-ttl-handling-03 This is to start a two week poll on adopting draft-vainshtein-mpls-gal-tc-t= tl-handling-03 as an MPLS working group document. Please send your comments (support/not support) to the mpls working group mailing list (mpls@ietf.org). There are no IPR disclosures pertaining to the draft. The authors have all = indicated that they are not aware of any IPR that applies to this document. This poll for adoption will end Wednesday October 21, 2015. Thanks, Ross --_000_DM2PR05MB573F11B26AA62B501091021A5370DM2PR05MB573namprd_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

By the way, when I go to = the tools web site (tools.ietf.org) I only find the -02 and earlier version= s of this draft. The correct -03 version can be found on the datatracker, at:

https://data= tracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-vainshtein-mpls-gal-tc-ttl-handling/

 <= /p>

Ross

 <= /p>

From: Ross Cal= lon [mailto:rcallon@juniper.net]
Sent: Tuesday, October 06, 2015 3:34 PM
To: mpls@ietf.org
Cc: mpls-chairs@ietf.org
Subject: Poll for adoption for draft-vainshtein-mpls-gal-tc-ttl-hand= ling-03

 

This is to start a two week poll on ado= pting draft-vainshtein-mpls-gal-tc-ttl-handling-03

as an MPLS working group document.=

 

Please send your comments (support/not = support) to the mpls working group

mailing list (mpls@ietf.org).

 

There are no IPR disclosures pertaining= to the draft. The authors have all indicated that

they are not aware of any IPR that appl= ies to this document.

 

This poll for adoption will end Wednesd= ay October 21, 2015.

 

Thanks, Ross

 

--_000_DM2PR05MB573F11B26AA62B501091021A5370DM2PR05MB573namprd_-- From nobody Tue Oct 6 12:48:34 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 48A1F1B3237; Tue, 6 Oct 2015 12:48:32 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -101.199 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.199 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_05=-0.5, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=ham 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 QsMR1OXofZkO; Tue, 6 Oct 2015 12:48:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from asmtp5.iomartmail.com (asmtp5.iomartmail.com [62.128.201.176]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 008C81B3227; Tue, 6 Oct 2015 12:48:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from asmtp5.iomartmail.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by asmtp5.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id t96JmQGH028972; Tue, 6 Oct 2015 20:48:26 +0100 Received: from 950129200 ([195.235.52.106]) (authenticated bits=0) by asmtp5.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id t96JmPYQ028950 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 6 Oct 2015 20:48:25 +0100 From: "Adrian Farrel" To: "'Ross Callon'" , Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2015 20:48:24 +0100 Message-ID: <067701d1006f$f7430730$e5c91590$@olddog.co.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0678_01D10078.590A7C70" X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0 Thread-Index: AdEAb/TgCX9OKiJkQdaUgtah7YNF9Q== Content-Language: en-gb X-TM-AS-MML: disable X-TM-AS-Product-Ver: IMSS-7.1.0.1679-8.0.0.1202-21864.000 X-TM-AS-Result: No--23.524-10.0-31-10 X-imss-scan-details: No--23.524-10.0-31-10 X-TMASE-MatchedRID: B0+RG8xpjtQR9y8WJPyXEN35+5/2RxqmIfZjRfGTydhtw+n+iKWyyPfr EgZtObk7YRGEI8d4KkH4yftWE8lQtWcjqh/h55+5V9LwT29+rzaHxi2fvkKUM0ENV4Lwnu7BeKS LTNSCXqq+8hhCHdJO8nUjWttcZxLr5mMeg8RfsnWvnWBILruGlSDPOgHqOrGC/ZNsWvQIY4PrsK EHnvlV0Z/uoyVOwl9i4ObUnReXQWVbwfTXIdSuF+YAh37ZsBDC8N9iKSAkgue1eX0jEQ9c6nczZ LcxWammJaVXJb4ySQwk5h2xCdJzXZHy7oM4lvOnjALcv7p/CuXfVqwz+Cynace0H7LMCFcVwRq4 tsfhpBwOxu2s7fdNV4sWCfP6Gmv5dbSgks66AoGPVEZA4HZW+f0ZphLMH+yHol3uZzZ1GLegSjO tq5sfafHqAX4A3hCO4F7lBGYh+K8/Btxv8I1Q6XC8PJ2EFS7IIBcsXIuEvlbkZ1myTXKoFyqh5c Uye3iVIm6fKcuFyK8oR0K3DJ8mwtZXwwpvfhGVFlT/KggLyj0lWygvtTclwOKYpwtG+wHVRq7Na FmiCIDOQf/S1XvtED2KHN8dcRYEU3mQhmdh4RhjiC4p+/AIFjMffNZYCk3D+5+93dPb6/fS0MbW fFpgANcSdEdWDENR9Oswsnn5skgUhfC/ipzRk6WEP0jL4hXDIgQH9fS2CAaVOHAvZwDoXVHXxCn NdK1OOEQxmwckb1sREgUSZUhFFlOi9a5lapaRb/5HBZ6dvRjKIGMaZvT020Ijuk0uJKN95GpADF tYP37i8zVgXoAltuoKEDqVJEm+tD9qpBlNF8ogBwKKRHe+r8/AlmfZIpinliIndAZlidARn5W5s 9hLyiJP4dqx5W0LgVI4LE6XOR8= Archived-At: Cc: mpls-chairs@ietf.org Subject: Re: [mpls] Poll for adoption for draft-vainshtein-mpls-gal-tc-ttl-handling-03 X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list Reply-To: adrian@olddog.co.uk List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 06 Oct 2015 19:48:32 -0000 This is a multipart message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0678_01D10078.590A7C70 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit It has become customary for co-authors of drafts to write emails saying "Support" in these circumstances. In this case, as a co-author, I think the draft is more than ready for adoption by the working group. It clearly fits within the charter, has been discussed quite a bit on the list resulting in a number of updates, has been reviewed by the MPLS-RT with corresponding updates, and is (I think) pretty well cooked. Of course, I'd be happy to see more comments and clarifications, and I think that giving the WG control over the content of the document would be the best way to ensure consensus on what it says. I hope that we can adopt soon, and move to WG last call shortly thereafter. I believe that the WG will need to address two administrative points: - Is it Standards track or informational? - Does it formally Update RFC 5586? I think both of these questions can be addressed as a separate matter from adoption, and I hope the chairs can help us make the correct decision. Thanks, Adrian From: mpls [mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Ross Callon Sent: 06 October 2015 20:34 To: mpls@ietf.org Cc: mpls-chairs@ietf.org Subject: [mpls] Poll for adoption for draft-vainshtein-mpls-gal-tc-ttl-handling-03 This is to start a two week poll on adopting draft-vainshtein-mpls-gal-tc-ttl-handling-03 as an MPLS working group document. Please send your comments (support/not support) to the mpls working group mailing list (mpls@ietf.org). There are no IPR disclosures pertaining to the draft. The authors have all indicated that they are not aware of any IPR that applies to this document. This poll for adoption will end Wednesday October 21, 2015. Thanks, Ross ------=_NextPart_000_0678_01D10078.590A7C70 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

It has become customary for = co-authors of drafts to write emails saying "Support" in these = circumstances.

 

In this case, as a co-author, = I think the draft is more than ready for adoption by the working group. = It clearly fits within the charter, has been discussed quite a bit on = the list resulting in a number of updates, has been reviewed by the = MPLS-RT with corresponding updates, and is (I think) pretty well = cooked.

 

Of course, I'd be happy to see = more comments and clarifications, and I think that giving the WG control = over the content of the document would be the best way = to ensure consensus on what it says. I hope that we can adopt soon, and = move to WG last call shortly thereafter.

 

I believe that the WG = will need to address two administrative points:

- Is it Standards = track or informational?

- Does it formally = Update RFC 5586?

 

I think both of these = questions can be addressed as a separate matter from adoption, and I = hope the chairs can help us make the correct = decision.

 

Thanks,

Adrian

 

From: mpls = [mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Ross = Callon
Sent: 06 October 2015 20:34
To: = mpls@ietf.org
Cc: mpls-chairs@ietf.org
Subject: = [mpls] Poll for adoption for = draft-vainshtein-mpls-gal-tc-ttl-handling-03

<= /div>

 

This is to start a two week poll on adopting = draft-vainshtein-mpls-gal-tc-ttl-handling-03

<= div>

as an MPLS working group = document.

 

Please send your comments (support/not support) to the mpls = working group

mailing list (mpls@ietf.org).

 

There are no IPR disclosures pertaining to the draft. The = authors have all indicated that

they are not aware of any IPR that applies to this = document.

 

This poll for adoption will end Wednesday October 21, 2015. =

 

Thanks, Ross

 

------=_NextPart_000_0678_01D10078.590A7C70-- From nobody Tue Oct 6 13:12:21 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B0C8D1B32A3; Tue, 6 Oct 2015 13:12:19 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 pRzaNxNdJTgI; Tue, 6 Oct 2015 13:12:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-wi0-x22d.google.com (mail-wi0-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c05::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 CBE1E1B329C; Tue, 6 Oct 2015 13:12:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: by wiclk2 with SMTP id lk2so184086066wic.0; Tue, 06 Oct 2015 13:12:15 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; bh=is07IYOrR3BcMqJplxUUrcENfl1YwwKOk6SXsKEeyHY=; b=sXowTc6oQL23bqNTAyEf5we8Q8Fz2ZnLefEQCxM/SzCx/q40ko1jyBYgFwn/U/gL7+ S5Q/792Wjwg+mZGENchQjiPWW0M1vy7qSK9XJCf4+xBDDpNrsuNGFYevuv/b+Lp7r8o+ TKnV7QKvIf6VKbkkOlZYWXtHYyzMAK83MHrx0ML6jVj6Lx60ZWf8cRSjyyIJZsJ+oNf5 CEV8HQmpTjCzRdxZ0N1FRkSVk58xw1dK3afO3WSdLG+E1D8dFLtlF5x7wO8bRGs2EatE st4zvVMLRn726EMYYckwWVxnVyuGaIVo5vi5FGRCS0ogjPhFz3XV5d/1fxuJbqR8SErv b+vQ== X-Received: by 10.194.62.46 with SMTP id v14mr9832077wjr.112.1444162335266; Tue, 06 Oct 2015 13:12:15 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.28.9.212 with HTTP; Tue, 6 Oct 2015 13:11:55 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <067701d1006f$f7430730$e5c91590$@olddog.co.uk> References: <067701d1006f$f7430730$e5c91590$@olddog.co.uk> From: "Andrew G. Malis" Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2015 16:11:55 -0400 Message-ID: To: Adrian Farrel Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7ba9845cfddce60521753eda Archived-At: Cc: Ross Callon , "mpls@ietf.org" , mpls-chairs@ietf.org Subject: Re: [mpls] Poll for adoption for draft-vainshtein-mpls-gal-tc-ttl-handling-03 X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 06 Oct 2015 20:12:19 -0000 --047d7ba9845cfddce60521753eda Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 I'm NOT an author :-) and I support MPLS WG adoption as an MPLS WG member. I would like to add that I also support the draft as a PALS WG co-chair, as it clarifies procedures when the GAL is used in PWs. I also have opinions on the other questions Adrian poses in his email, but those can wait until after WG adoption. Cheers, Andy On Tue, Oct 6, 2015 at 3:48 PM, Adrian Farrel wrote: > It has become customary for co-authors of drafts to write emails saying > "Support" in these circumstances. > > > > In this case, as a co-author, I think the draft is more than ready for > adoption by the working group. It clearly fits within the charter, has been > discussed quite a bit on the list resulting in a number of updates, has > been reviewed by the MPLS-RT with corresponding updates, and is (I think) > pretty well cooked. > > > > Of course, I'd be happy to see more comments and clarifications, and I > think that giving the WG control over the content of the document would > be the best way to ensure consensus on what it says. I hope that we can > adopt soon, and move to WG last call shortly thereafter. > > > > I believe that the WG will need to address two administrative points: > > - Is it Standards track or informational? > > - Does it formally Update RFC 5586? > > > > I think both of these questions can be addressed as a separate matter from > adoption, and I hope the chairs can help us make the correct decision. > > > > Thanks, > > Adrian > > > > *From:* mpls [mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org] *On Behalf Of *Ross Callon > *Sent:* 06 October 2015 20:34 > *To:* mpls@ietf.org > *Cc:* mpls-chairs@ietf.org > *Subject:* [mpls] Poll for adoption for > draft-vainshtein-mpls-gal-tc-ttl-handling-03 > > > > This is to start a two week poll on adopting > draft-vainshtein-mpls-gal-tc-ttl-handling-03 > > as an MPLS working group document. > > > > Please send your comments (support/not support) to the mpls working group > > mailing list (mpls@ietf.org). > > > > There are no IPR disclosures pertaining to the draft. The authors have all > indicated that > > they are not aware of any IPR that applies to this document. > > > > This poll for adoption will end Wednesday October 21, 2015. > > > > Thanks, Ross > > > > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > > --047d7ba9845cfddce60521753eda Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I'm NOT an author :-) and I support MPLS WG adoption a= s an MPLS WG member. I would like to add that I also support the draft as a= PALS WG co-chair, as it clarifies procedures when the GAL is used in PWs.<= div>
I also have opinions on the other questions Adrian poses= in his email, but those can wait until after WG adoption.

Cheers,
Andy


On Tue, Oct 6, 2015 at 3:48 PM, Ad= rian Farrel <adrian@olddog.co.uk> wrote:
It has become customary for= co-authors of drafts to write emails saying "Support" in these c= ircumstances.

=C2=A0

In this case, as a co-author, I think the draft is more = than ready for adoption by the working group. It clearly fits within the ch= arter, has been discussed quite a bit on the list resulting in a number of = updates, has been reviewed by the MPLS-RT with corresponding updates, and i= s (I think) pretty well cooked.

=C2=A0

Of course, I'd be happy to see mor= e comments and clarifications, and I think that giving the WG control over = the content of the document would be the best way to ensur= e consensus on what it says. I hope that we can adopt soon, and move to WG = last call shortly thereafter.

=C2=A0

I believe that the WG will need to address two administrative points:

- Is it Standards trac= k or informational?

- Does it formally Update RFC 5586?

=C2=A0

<= span style=3D"font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:= #1f497d">I think both of these questions can be addressed as a separate mat= ter from adoption, and I hope the chairs can help us make the correct decis= ion.

=C2=A0=

Thanks,

Adrian

=C2=A0<= /p>

From: mpls [mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org] On= Behalf Of Ross Callon
Sent: 06 October 2015 20:34
To:<= /b> mpls@ietf.orgCc: mpls-= chairs@ietf.org
Subject: [mpls] Poll for adoption for draft-v= ainshtein-mpls-gal-tc-ttl-handling-03

<= span class=3D"">

=C2=A0

This is to start a two week pol= l on adopting draft-vainshtein-mpls-gal-tc-ttl-handling-03

as an= MPLS working group document.

=C2=A0

<= /div>

Please send yo= ur comments (support/not support) to the mpls working group <= /span>

mai= ling list (mpls@ietf.org= ).

=C2=A0

There are no IPR disclosures pertaining= to the draft. The authors have all indicated that

they are not aware of a= ny IPR that applies to this document.

=C2=A0

This pol= l for adoption will end Wednesday October 21, 2015.

=C2=A0

Thanks, Ross

=C2=A0<= u>


________________= _______________________________
mpls mailing list
mpls@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls


--047d7ba9845cfddce60521753eda-- From nobody Tue Oct 6 17:38:03 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 76CE81B2FC0 for ; Tue, 6 Oct 2015 17:38:02 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -14.511 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.511 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, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham 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 zLrHi1B1nZYH for ; Tue, 6 Oct 2015 17:37:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from alln-iport-8.cisco.com (alln-iport-8.cisco.com [173.37.142.95]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7F5041B2FC6 for ; Tue, 6 Oct 2015 17:37:59 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=5610; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1444178279; x=1445387879; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to: content-id:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=4xI7qO7CCsX9ozBA3IV80IZZ0/399MeYBKspwWPP7JA=; b=IgWqb+k4QvFdJovkJjya3NYVjARH6ZDuKlhXs1PfFQ0/xu+Iq0hiq6AF HmNvSNNYuBicmEy7DUtK+ANvyGoq0XrbtY4HpZG5xAmRoFaxmf7k//zOo diPNsQ66thXLCjZjKEncxEHchlDtK3vBqt/i14KZoKLFzyYZUny/Ed+Ta Y=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0DyAwADaBRW/5xdJa1UCoMnVG4GviIBDYFaFwqFeQKBOTgUAQEBAQEBAYEKQQODYAEBAQQBAQE3LQcLDAIEAQgRBAEBAR4JHRELFAkIAgQOBQmIJQ3AYAEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBARcEi22EKgYLASYrAgUCBIQoBY0IiHwBhReHf4FXSINxjRaBCoNPg24BHwEBQoQCcQGCSYQsBxcHHIEGAQEB X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.17,646,1437436800"; d="scan'208";a="195208620" Received: from rcdn-core-5.cisco.com ([173.37.93.156]) by alln-iport-8.cisco.com with ESMTP; 07 Oct 2015 00:37:58 +0000 Received: from XCH-RCD-013.cisco.com (xch-rcd-013.cisco.com [173.37.102.23]) by rcdn-core-5.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id t970bwAw021038 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Wed, 7 Oct 2015 00:37:58 GMT Received: from xch-rcd-015.cisco.com (173.37.102.25) by XCH-RCD-013.cisco.com (173.37.102.23) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1104.5; Tue, 6 Oct 2015 19:37:57 -0500 Received: from xch-rcd-015.cisco.com ([173.37.102.25]) by XCH-RCD-015.cisco.com ([173.37.102.25]) with mapi id 15.00.1104.000; Tue, 6 Oct 2015 19:37:57 -0500 From: "Nagendra Kumar Nainar (naikumar)" To: Alexander Vainshtein Thread-Topic: I-D Action: draft-smack-mpls-rfc4379bis-05.txt Thread-Index: AQHQ/eaGNx46Olr+ZEe6ZO6z9H6RXp5dEoyAgAF/sICAALOGAA== Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2015 00:37:57 +0000 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.3.8.130913 x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1 x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted x-originating-ip: [10.82.222.233] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <2D82D2919AAC944F81B1AEAC678CA0F7@emea.cisco.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: Cc: "draft-smack-mpls-rfc4379bis@tools.ietf.org" , "mpls@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [mpls] I-D Action: draft-smack-mpls-rfc4379bis-05.txt X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 07 Oct 2015 00:38:02 -0000 Hi Sasha, Yea, we will mark it as deprecated and replace the references to DDMAP. Thanks, Nagendra On 10/6/15, 5:55 AM, "Alexander Vainshtein" wrote: >Nagendra, >Lots of thanks for an excellent summary of expected future work. > >One minor comment: >From my POV the DSMAP TLV should be deprecated (by the DDMAP one) but >not removed altogether - in any case this is what RFC 6424 defines. > >My 2c, >Sasha > >Office: +972-39266302 >Cell: +972-549266302 >Email: Alexander.Vainshtein@ecitele.com > >-----Original Message----- >From: mpls [mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Nagendra Kumar >Nainar (naikumar) >Sent: Monday, October 05, 2015 6:02 PM >To: mpls@ietf.org >Cc: draft-smack-mpls-rfc4379bis@tools.ietf.org >Subject: Re: [mpls] I-D Action: draft-smack-mpls-rfc4379bis-05.txt > >Hi All, > >Uptil this version, all Erratas on RFC4379 has been addressed and text >were updated to reflect TC instead of EXP (RFC5462). > >As mentioned in Section 1.5 of draft-smack-mpls-rfc4379bis, the next step >is to evaluate the RFCs that updates RFC4379 and identify the list to be >incorporated in rfc4379bis. > > >A summary of updates by RFC 6424: > >* Updates the validation procedure to include Stitching and Hierarchical >LSPs. >* Deprecates DSMAP defined in RFC4379 and replaces it with DDMAP. >* Introduces a new TLV as FEC Stack Change Sub-TLV >* Introduces 2 New return codes. >* Check and include IANA considerations. > >Potential Update - Update the return code and DDMAP TLV in respective >section, Remove (or Deprecate DSMAP), update the procedure with DDMAP >reference in place of DSMAP, Update the procedure section 4.4, 4.5 and >4.6. > >A summary of updates by RFC 6425: > >* Extends the validation procedure for P2MP and MP2MP LSPs. >* Introduces 4 new Target FEC Stack Sub-TLVs. >* Introduces 2 new TLVs (and related Sub-TLVs) >* Check and include IANA considerations. > > >Potential Update - Per discussion with WG. > >A summary of updates by RFC 6426: > >* Extends the validation procedure for MPLS-TP with both IP based and >non-IP (ACH) based encapsulation . >* Introduces 2 new Target FEC Stack Sub-TLVs. >* Introduces new Address types for DSMAP >* Introduces 3 new TLVs. >* Reserves a flag in Global Flags. >* Check and include IANA considerations. > > > >Potential Update - Per discussion with WG. > >A summary of updates by RFC 6829: > >* Introduces 2 new Target FEC Stack Sub-TLVs for PW between IPv6 >endpoints. >* No changes in procedure. >* Check and include IANA considerations. > > > >Potential Update - Include the Sub-TLVs in respective section. > >A summary of updates by RFC 7506: > >* Introduces a new option in IPv6 HbH extension header. >* No changes in procedure. >* Check and include IANA considerations. > > > >Potential Update - Include the same and update the header processing >section. > >A summary of updates by RFC 7537: > >* Document to create IANA registries for name spaces defined in RFC4379 >and 6424. >* No changes in procedure. >* Check and include IANA considerations. > > > >Potential Update - Include the same in IANA consideration. > >Since RFC 6829 and 7506 are straight forward, we will go ahead and >include the same while we discuss on the other RFCs. Please share your >thoughts and accordingly, we can include the relevant content to update >the draft. > >Thanks, >Nagendra > > > >On 10/3/15, 10:19 AM, "internet-drafts@ietf.org" > wrote: > >> >>A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts >>directories. >> >> >> Title : Detecting Multi-Protocol Label Switched (MPLS) >>Data Plane Failures >> Authors : Carlos Pignataro >> Nagendra Kumar >> Sam Aldrin >> Mach(Guoyi) Chen >> Filename : draft-smack-mpls-rfc4379bis-05.txt >> Pages : 49 >> Date : 2015-10-03 >> >>Abstract: >> This document describes a simple and efficient mechanism that can be >> used to detect data plane failures in Multi-Protocol Label Switching >> (MPLS) Label Switched Paths (LSPs). There are two parts to this >> document: information carried in an MPLS "echo request" and "echo >> reply" for the purposes of fault detection and isolation, and >> mechanisms for reliably sending the echo reply. >> >> This document obsoletes RFC 4379. >> >> >>The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: >>https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-smack-mpls-rfc4379bis/ >> >>There's also a htmlized version available at: >>https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-smack-mpls-rfc4379bis-05 >> >>A diff from the previous version is available at: >>https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=3Ddraft-smack-mpls-rfc4379bis-05 >> >> >>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/ >> >>_______________________________________________ >>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.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt > >_______________________________________________ >mpls mailing list >mpls@ietf.org >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From nobody Tue Oct 6 18:45:06 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3481C1B310D for ; Tue, 6 Oct 2015 18:45:06 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -14.511 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.511 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, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham 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 CN5wM2bNUFyi for ; Tue, 6 Oct 2015 18:45:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rcdn-iport-4.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-4.cisco.com [173.37.86.75]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B2E1C1B42AC for ; Tue, 6 Oct 2015 18:45:04 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1995; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1444182304; x=1445391904; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:content-id: content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=PV+YIpUPMCt9AuA2XHh+/CLxqjg6BZUEt7dW1+bQWQc=; b=CKBYlTZeBOOuDos+7qTtOlcU0oOmcmzBoZesgPpUQWYU7tt6KWtbZt/j LMA7vDq8AmLAyQZdwOs3NNEV5nIVnUEwlg+3zopbtaakIPhw1FqovuL/0 Lxiej+xwecVC5qoaPIK7AxvaHJorxKkKK0XykFKCUqbkJQu63PZvA/JRc I=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0DyAQDudxRW/4cNJK1egydUbga+JQENgVoXCoV5AoE5OBQBAQEBAQEBfwuEJwEBBAEBATctBx0BCDY3CxsBBgMCBBMJiCUNnDqkJQEBAQEBAQEDAQEBAQEBAQEBGYtxhQ8FhC4FlgUBhReHf4FXSINxjRqBC4c9AR8BAUKEAnEBhmWBBgEBAQ X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.17,646,1437436800"; d="scan'208";a="35099560" Received: from alln-core-2.cisco.com ([173.36.13.135]) by rcdn-iport-4.cisco.com with ESMTP; 07 Oct 2015 01:45:03 +0000 Received: from XCH-RCD-015.cisco.com (xch-rcd-015.cisco.com [173.37.102.25]) by alln-core-2.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id t971j3Ig001226 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL) for ; Wed, 7 Oct 2015 01:45:03 GMT Received: from xch-rcd-015.cisco.com (173.37.102.25) by XCH-RCD-015.cisco.com (173.37.102.25) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1104.5; Tue, 6 Oct 2015 20:45:03 -0500 Received: from xch-rcd-015.cisco.com ([173.37.102.25]) by XCH-RCD-015.cisco.com ([173.37.102.25]) with mapi id 15.00.1104.000; Tue, 6 Oct 2015 20:45:03 -0500 From: "Nagendra Kumar Nainar (naikumar)" To: "mpls@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: I-D Action: draft-smack-mpls-rfc4379bis-06.txt Thread-Index: AQHRAKFN+LGmKnNq7kq05KsfDeOj8p5fUw2A Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2015 01:45:02 +0000 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <20151007014123.6244.96904.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.3.8.130913 x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1 x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted x-originating-ip: [10.82.222.233] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: Subject: [mpls] FW: I-D Action: draft-smack-mpls-rfc4379bis-06.txt X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 07 Oct 2015 01:45:06 -0000 Hi WG, This version incorporates the update from RFC6829. Thanks, Nagendra On 10/6/15, 9:41 PM, "internet-drafts@ietf.org" wrote: > >A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts >directories. > > > Title : Detecting Multi-Protocol Label Switched (MPLS) >Data Plane Failures > Authors : Carlos Pignataro > Nagendra Kumar > Sam Aldrin > Mach(Guoyi) Chen > Filename : draft-smack-mpls-rfc4379bis-06.txt > Pages : 50 > Date : 2015-10-06 > >Abstract: > This document describes a simple and efficient mechanism that can be > used to detect data plane failures in Multi-Protocol Label Switching > (MPLS) Label Switched Paths (LSPs). There are two parts to this > document: information carried in an MPLS "echo request" and "echo > reply" for the purposes of fault detection and isolation, and > mechanisms for reliably sending the echo reply. > > This document obsoletes RFC 4379. > > >The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: >https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-smack-mpls-rfc4379bis/ > >There's also a htmlized version available at: >https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-smack-mpls-rfc4379bis-06 > >A diff from the previous version is available at: >https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=3Ddraft-smack-mpls-rfc4379bis-06 > > >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/ > >_______________________________________________ >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.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt From nobody Tue Oct 6 20:58:24 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 90C111A87D4; Tue, 6 Oct 2015 20:58:23 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.91 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham 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 BVD92kT7eGNh; Tue, 6 Oct 2015 20:58:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pipi.pi.nu (pipi.pi.nu [83.168.239.141]) (using TLSv1.1 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 24CE01A87D2; Tue, 6 Oct 2015 20:58:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.10] (unknown [49.149.195.95]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: loa@pi.nu) by pipi.pi.nu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id DE49118013DA; Wed, 7 Oct 2015 05:58:17 +0200 (CEST) To: adrian@olddog.co.uk, 'Ross Callon' , mpls@ietf.org References: <067701d1006f$f7430730$e5c91590$@olddog.co.uk> From: Loa Andersson Message-ID: <56149846.8040900@pi.nu> Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2015 11:57:58 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <067701d1006f$f7430730$e5c91590$@olddog.co.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: Cc: mpls-chairs@ietf.org Subject: Re: [mpls] Poll for adoption for draft-vainshtein-mpls-gal-tc-ttl-handling-03 X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 07 Oct 2015 03:58:23 -0000 Folks, I'm also a co-author, I've tried to communicate to co-authors that it is not necessary for them to send the support mail; so I won't do it. It should be obvious that a co-author support adoption of a document that he has asked to be adopted :). On the other hand I agree with Adrian about the his other comments, being both a co-chair and a co-author I will be a bit careful giving chair-advice to myself. This is not a formal recuse, I'll do whatever necessary, but clearly Ross as document shepherd has the lead here. About separataing the issues Adrian brings up. Yes that is correct, the MPLS wg has the tradition that the first version of the working group document is the same as the document we polled, modulo the administrative information. So yes we will separate and address those issues in version -01 of the document. /Loa On 2015-10-07 03:48, Adrian Farrel wrote: > It has become customary for co-authors of drafts to write emails saying > "Support" in these circumstances. > > In this case, as a co-author, I think the draft is more than ready for > adoption by the working group. It clearly fits within the charter, has > been discussed quite a bit on the list resulting in a number of updates, > has been reviewed by the MPLS-RT with corresponding updates, and is (I > think) pretty well cooked. > > Of course, I'd be happy to see more comments and clarifications, and I > think that giving the WG control over the content of the document would > be the best way to ensure consensus on what it says. I hope that we can > adopt soon, and move to WG last call shortly thereafter. > > I believe that the WG will need to address two administrative points: > > - Is it Standards track or informational? > > - Does it formally Update RFC 5586? > > I think both of these questions can be addressed as a separate matter > from adoption, and I hope the chairs can help us make the correct decision. > > Thanks, > > Adrian > > *From:*mpls [mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org] *On Behalf Of *Ross Callon > *Sent:* 06 October 2015 20:34 > *To:* mpls@ietf.org > *Cc:* mpls-chairs@ietf.org > *Subject:* [mpls] Poll for adoption for > draft-vainshtein-mpls-gal-tc-ttl-handling-03 > > This is to start a two week poll on adopting > draft-vainshtein-mpls-gal-tc-ttl-handling-03 > > as an MPLS working group document. > > Please send your comments (support/not support) to the mpls working group > > mailing list (mpls@ietf.org ). > > There are no IPR disclosures pertaining to the draft. The authors have > all indicated that > > they are not aware of any IPR that applies to this document. > > This poll for adoption will end Wednesday October 21, 2015. > > Thanks, Ross > > > > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > From nobody Tue Oct 6 22:42:28 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A3AE1A8A12 for ; Tue, 6 Oct 2015 22:42:27 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -14.51 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.51 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham 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 DoNkXtsaqNc7 for ; Tue, 6 Oct 2015 22:42:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rcdn-iport-8.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-8.cisco.com [173.37.86.79]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 83B1A1A8A0F for ; Tue, 6 Oct 2015 22:42:26 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=2358; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1444196546; x=1445406146; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:references:in-reply-to: mime-version; bh=BzAPYSC8qKrn/tsiNoRJzUZpuHq+4Vd6h2eppIKuDI8=; b=cu1OUvWkbIktCTA5WI1z4Asv2JDq1FkV1mxMEtavKnSlNqohnQj+a6rV +Ij0vt+L6Wj6mIxQ6KLTDQ+Xtn3gsdUrZy78FlDxgi2N9sqBAVj4hNpCk uXkI6lbQe2PEjV687xr/roCo9du1osRxVBlq0vG99mu3OZDa9RYsOTOV0 4=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0DvAQCarxRW/5FdJa1eglpNgUKrA5MoAQ2BWoYaAoE8OBQBAQEBAQEBgQqEJwEBBIEJAgEIBAE6BzIUEQEBBAESiC7BAwEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBGIZzghCCboQqEQFYgxqBFAWWBQGNFptzHwEBQoQCcYYsgUABAQE X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos; i="5.17,647,1437436800"; d="scan'208,217"; a="33329035" Received: from rcdn-core-9.cisco.com ([173.37.93.145]) by rcdn-iport-8.cisco.com with ESMTP; 07 Oct 2015 05:42:25 +0000 Received: from XCH-ALN-004.cisco.com (xch-aln-004.cisco.com [173.36.7.14]) by rcdn-core-9.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id t975gP3m001418 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Wed, 7 Oct 2015 05:42:25 GMT Received: from xch-aln-004.cisco.com (173.36.7.14) by XCH-ALN-004.cisco.com (173.36.7.14) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1104.5; Wed, 7 Oct 2015 00:42:25 -0500 Received: from xhc-aln-x13.cisco.com (173.36.12.87) by xch-aln-004.cisco.com (173.36.7.14) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1104.5 via Frontend Transport; Wed, 7 Oct 2015 00:42:25 -0500 Received: from xmb-rcd-x04.cisco.com ([169.254.8.230]) by xhc-aln-x13.cisco.com ([173.36.12.87]) with mapi id 14.03.0248.002; Wed, 7 Oct 2015 00:42:25 -0500 From: "Stewart Bryant (stbryant)" To: "mpls@ietf.org" , Adrian Farrel Thread-Topic: [mpls] Poll for adoption for draft-vainshtein-mpls-gal-tc-ttl-handling-03 Thread-Index: AdEAb/TgCX9OKiJkQdaUgtah7YNF9QAUvxdb Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2015 05:42:24 +0000 Message-ID: <94B27E27-0B09-48CD-9B0B-C8BAC1323029@cisco.com> References: <067701d1006f$f7430730$e5c91590$@olddog.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <067701d1006f$f7430730$e5c91590$@olddog.co.uk> Accept-Language: en-GB, en-US Content-Language: en-GB X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_94B27E270B0948CD9B0BC8BAC1323029ciscocom_" MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [mpls] Poll for adoption for draft-vainshtein-mpls-gal-tc-ttl-handling-03 X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 07 Oct 2015 05:42:27 -0000 --_000_94B27E270B0948CD9B0BC8BAC1323029ciscocom_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Adrian's email was the best author support email I have ever seen. The paragraph below is something we should remember during acceptance revie= ws. WG acceptance is about change of helm, not about perfection. Stewart Sent from my iPad On 6 Oct 2015, at 20:49, Adrian Farrel > wrote: Of course, I'd be happy to see more comments and clarifications, and I thin= k that giving the WG control over the content of the document would be the = best way to ensure consensus on what it says. I hope that we can adopt soon= , and move to WG last call shortly thereafter. --_000_94B27E270B0948CD9B0BC8BAC1323029ciscocom_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Adrian's email was the best author support email I have ever seen.

The paragraph below is something we should r= emember during acceptance reviews. WG acceptance is about change of helm, n= ot about perfection.

Stewart

Sent from my iPad

On 6 Oct 2015, at 20:49, Adrian Farrel <adrian@olddog.co.uk> wrote:

Of course, I'd be happy to see more comments and= clarifications, and I think that giving the WG control over the content of the document would be the best way to ensure consensus= on what it says. I hope that we can adopt soon, and move to WG last call shortly thereafter.
--_000_94B27E270B0948CD9B0BC8BAC1323029ciscocom_-- From nobody Wed Oct 7 00:40:54 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 929A21A8AE9; Wed, 7 Oct 2015 00:40:52 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -14.51 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.51 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham 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 g_3MABwWrgqS; Wed, 7 Oct 2015 00:40:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from aer-iport-1.cisco.com (aer-iport-1.cisco.com [173.38.203.51]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 654891A8AE4; Wed, 7 Oct 2015 00:40:50 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=4668; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1444203650; x=1445413250; h=reply-to:subject:references:to:cc:from:message-id:date: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=WLytvdYuUSX2pbR77fyH4ol4f6464q9YRCzK5z0jKl4=; b=hjOXFqgct2f6Kq3cvIiQB2gL8wRMY0xzrAFkoSAGw85rLt/L5PbQvloT Tv17iuVnuwA49Zx4WdyliJBKmIs4+bDHe3ZQJmHp5wDB46EupeuiVzto9 wU9mfDuYRVHDE0EUJGDC1G0MVgfs48j+/ZW5Nz6M6LHBXxJMDtE8ZQJf9 4=; X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.17,648,1437436800"; d="scan'208,217";a="630172845" Received: from aer-iport-nat.cisco.com (HELO aer-core-1.cisco.com) ([173.38.203.22]) by aer-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 07 Oct 2015 07:40:48 +0000 Received: from [10.55.98.184] (ams-stbryant-8817.cisco.com [10.55.98.184]) by aer-core-1.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id t977emXW032329; Wed, 7 Oct 2015 07:40:48 GMT References: To: Ross Callon , "mpls@ietf.org" From: Stewart Bryant Message-ID: <5614CC81.2000807@cisco.com> Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2015 08:40:49 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.10; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------090405040204050900070003" Archived-At: Cc: "mpls-chairs@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [mpls] Poll for adoption for draft-vainshtein-mpls-gal-tc-ttl-handling-03 X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list Reply-To: stbryant@cisco.com List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 07 Oct 2015 07:40:52 -0000 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------090405040204050900070003 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I have some concerns at the adoption of this draft. The text: When this LSE becomes the top entry in the label stack (because the previous label has been popped) some receiving implementations have attempted to interpret the fields and this has resulted in errors, packet drops, or poor performance. In particular, packets with an LSE with TTL set to zero have been dropped as "expired" while those with TTL set to one can be trapped to the generic (slow) MPLS exception handler with appropriate rate limiting before the GAL is noticed (which would otherwise result in trapping the packet to a fast OAM handler). This document clarifies the rules for setting and processing them in the Label Stack Entry that includes the GAL. Indicates that some implementations have bugs, and we don't normally publish RFCs to fix bugs. Any system that behaves as above is not complying with the base MPLS specifications, thus if we feel the need to publish an RFC as a reminder we should publish it for the general case. For example what do these implementations do if they see an entropy SPL, or a extended label SPL? Thus I think we should reject this draft, and craft a draft that fixed the problem in general with the GAL used as an example. As for the change in TTL value, the TTL value was discussed at the time. I am not sure whether the number should be high or low. Low was I think chosen in case some buggy implementation actually tried to forward the packet on the GAL. High is usually chosen so you can tell that the packet was forwarded and not sent direct, but that label is never supposed to be forwarded so the problem should never arise. Thus I am not sure if the original text really needs to change since a correctly implemented system will exhibit the correct behaviour. - Stewart --------------090405040204050900070003 Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
I have some concerns at the adoption of this draft.

The text:

   When this LSE becomes the top entry in the label stack (because the
   previous label has been popped) some receiving implementations have
   attempted to interpret the fields and this has resulted in errors,
   packet drops, or poor performance.  In particular, packets with an
   LSE with TTL set to zero have been dropped as "expired" while those
   with TTL set to one can be trapped to the generic (slow) MPLS
   exception handler with appropriate rate limiting before the GAL is
   noticed (which would otherwise result in trapping the packet to a
   fast OAM handler).  This document clarifies the rules for setting and
   processing them in the Label Stack Entry that includes the GAL.

Indicates that some implementations have bugs, and we don't normally
publish RFCs to fix bugs. Any system that behaves as above is not
complying with the base MPLS specifications, thus if we feel the need
to publish an RFC as a reminder we should publish it for the general case.
For example what do these implementations do if they see an entropy
SPL, or a extended label SPL?

Thus I think we should reject this draft, and craft a draft that fixed the
problem in general with the GAL used as an example.

As for the change in TTL value, the TTL value was discussed at the time.

I am not sure whether the number should be high or low. Low was I think
chosen in case some buggy implementation actually tried to forward the
packet on the GAL. High is usually chosen so you can tell that the packet
was forwarded and not sent direct, but that label is never supposed to be
forwarded so the problem should never arise.

Thus I am not sure if the original text really needs to change since a correctly
implemented system will exhibit the correct behaviour.

- Stewart
--------------090405040204050900070003-- From nobody Wed Oct 7 03:47:11 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 60A331B2DBD; Wed, 7 Oct 2015 03:47:10 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.909 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.909 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham 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 1idWeIQFr4Oh; Wed, 7 Oct 2015 03:47:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp-fr.alcatel-lucent.com (fr-hpida-esg-02.alcatel-lucent.com [135.245.210.21]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 24EDA1B2DBB; Wed, 7 Oct 2015 03:47:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fr712usmtp2.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (unknown [135.239.2.42]) by Websense Email Security Gateway with ESMTPS id 59824A60F2615; Wed, 7 Oct 2015 10:47:03 +0000 (GMT) Received: from FR711WXCHHUB01.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (fr711wxchhub01.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com [135.239.2.111]) by fr712usmtp2.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (GMO) with ESMTP id t97Al5qN007086 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Wed, 7 Oct 2015 12:47:05 +0200 Received: from Matthews-MacBook-Pro.local (135.239.27.38) by FR711WXCHHUB01.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (135.239.2.111) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.195.1; Wed, 7 Oct 2015 12:47:04 +0200 To: , Ross Callon , "mpls@ietf.org" References: <5614CC81.2000807@cisco.com> From: Matthew Bocci Message-ID: <5614F822.6020306@alcatel-lucent.com> Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2015 11:46:58 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.11; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <5614CC81.2000807@cisco.com> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------060505050000090703060202" X-Originating-IP: [135.239.27.38] Archived-At: Cc: "mpls-chairs@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [mpls] Poll for adoption for draft-vainshtein-mpls-gal-tc-ttl-handling-03 X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 07 Oct 2015 10:47:10 -0000 --------------060505050000090703060202 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I have similar concerns. I am not sure we should be changing the recommended TTL value to work around a speciifc implementation. I also recall that the value of 1 was chosen to prevent buggy implementations forwarding packets when the GAL is exposed. Matthew On 07/10/2015 08:40, Stewart Bryant wrote: > > I have some concerns at the adoption of this draft. > > The text: > > When this LSE becomes the top entry in the label stack (because the > previous label has been popped) some receiving implementations have > attempted to interpret the fields and this has resulted in errors, > packet drops, or poor performance. In particular, packets with an > LSE with TTL set to zero have been dropped as "expired" while those > with TTL set to one can be trapped to the generic (slow) MPLS > exception handler with appropriate rate limiting before the GAL is > noticed (which would otherwise result in trapping the packet to a > fast OAM handler). This document clarifies the rules for setting and > processing them in the Label Stack Entry that includes the GAL. > > Indicates that some implementations have bugs, and we don't normally > publish RFCs to fix bugs. Any system that behaves as above is not > complying with the base MPLS specifications, thus if we feel the need > to publish an RFC as a reminder we should publish it for the general case. > For example what do these implementations do if they see an entropy > SPL, or a extended label SPL? > > Thus I think we should reject this draft, and craft a draft that fixed the > problem in general with the GAL used as an example. > > As for the change in TTL value, the TTL value was discussed at the time. > > I am not sure whether the number should be high or low. Low was I think > chosen in case some buggy implementation actually tried to forward the > packet on the GAL. High is usually chosen so you can tell that the packet > was forwarded and not sent direct, but that label is never supposed to be > forwarded so the problem should never arise. > > Thus I am not sure if the original text really needs to change since a > correctly > implemented system will exhibit the correct behaviour. > > - Stewart > > > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls --------------060505050000090703060202 Content-Type: text/html; charset="windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I have similar concerns.

I am not sure we should be changing the recommended TTL value to work around a speciifc implementation. I also recall that the value of 1 was chosen to prevent buggy implementations forwarding packets when the GAL is exposed.

Matthew

On 07/10/2015 08:40, Stewart Bryant wrote:

I have some concerns at the adoption of this draft.

The text:

   When this LSE becomes the top entry in the label stack (because the
   previous label has been popped) some receiving implementations have
   attempted to interpret the fields and this has resulted in errors,
   packet drops, or poor performance.  In particular, packets with an
   LSE with TTL set to zero have been dropped as "expired" while those
   with TTL set to one can be trapped to the generic (slow) MPLS
   exception handler with appropriate rate limiting before the GAL is
   noticed (which would otherwise result in trapping the packet to a
   fast OAM handler).  This document clarifies the rules for setting and
   processing them in the Label Stack Entry that includes the GAL.

Indicates that some implementations have bugs, and we don't normally
publish RFCs to fix bugs. Any system that behaves as above is not
complying with the base MPLS specifications, thus if we feel the need
to publish an RFC as a reminder we should publish it for the general case.
For example what do these implementations do if they see an entropy
SPL, or a extended label SPL?

Thus I think we should reject this draft, and craft a draft that fixed the
problem in general with the GAL used as an example.

As for the change in TTL value, the TTL value was discussed at the time.

I am not sure whether the number should be high or low. Low was I think
chosen in case some buggy implementation actually tried to forward the
packet on the GAL. High is usually chosen so you can tell that the packet
was forwarded and not sent direct, but that label is never supposed to be
forwarded so the problem should never arise.

Thus I am not sure if the original text really needs to change since a correctly
implemented system will exhibit the correct behaviour.

- Stewart


_______________________________________________
mpls mailing list
mpls@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls

--------------060505050000090703060202-- From nobody Wed Oct 7 19:26:47 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 420181B2DB9; Wed, 7 Oct 2015 19:26:43 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.211 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.211 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham 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 35TGBh_NsuKf; Wed, 7 Oct 2015 19:26:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [194.213.3.17]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B50591B2E09; Wed, 7 Oct 2015 19:26:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 172.18.7.190 (EHLO lhreml403-hub.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.7.190]) by lhrrg02-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.3.7-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id BYM47585; Thu, 08 Oct 2015 02:26:37 +0000 (GMT) Received: from SZXEMA413-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.82.72.72) by lhreml403-hub.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.217) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.235.1; Thu, 8 Oct 2015 03:26:34 +0100 Received: from SZXEMA510-MBX.china.huawei.com ([169.254.3.229]) by SZXEMA413-HUB.china.huawei.com ([10.82.72.72]) with mapi id 14.03.0235.001; Thu, 8 Oct 2015 10:26:30 +0800 From: Mach Chen To: Alvaro Retana , The IESG Thread-Topic: [mpls] Alvaro Retana's No Objection on draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-reply-mode-simple-04: (with COMMENT) Thread-Index: AQHQ+6NP+IE2Gi+fpESyfG7P6Yr9bZ5g6W3w Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2015 02:26:30 +0000 Message-ID: References: <20150930171304.12864.30445.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> In-Reply-To: <20150930171304.12864.30445.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Accept-Language: en-US, zh-CN Content-Language: zh-CN X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.111.102.135] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Archived-At: Cc: "mpls@ietf.org" , "draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-reply-mode-simple.shepherd@ietf.org" , "mpls-chairs@ietf.org" , "draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-reply-mode-simple@ietf.org" , "draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-reply-mode-simple.ad@ietf.org" , "rcallon@juniper.net" Subject: Re: [mpls] Alvaro Retana's No Objection on draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-reply-mode-simple-04: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 08 Oct 2015 02:26:43 -0000 SGkgQWx2YXJvLA0KDQpUaGFua3MgZm9yIHlvdXIgY29tbWVudHMsIGFzIHlvdXIgc3VnZ2VzdGVk LCB3ZSB3aWxsIGFkZCBhIHBhcmFncmFwaCB0byBzZWN0aW9uIDMuMSwgaG9wZSB0aGlzIGFkZHJl c3NlcyB5b3VyIGNvbW1lbnRzLg0KDQpTcGVjaWZpYyB0byBzZWN0aW9uIDUuMSBvZiBbUkZDNzEx MF0sIHRoaXMgZG9jdW1lbnQgdXBkYXRlcyB0aGUgZmlyc3Qgc2VudGVuY2UgYXMgZm9sbG93czoN Cg0KICAgbyAgV2hlbiBzZW5kaW5nIGFuIGVjaG8gcmVxdWVzdCwgaW4gYWRkaXRpb24gdG8gdGhl IHJ1bGVzIGFuZA0KICAgICAgcHJvY2VkdXJlcyBkZWZpbmVkIGluIFNlY3Rpb24gNC4zIG9mIFtS RkM0Mzc5XSwgdGhlIFJlcGx5IE1vZGUgb2YNCiAgICAgIHRoZSBlY2hvIHJlcXVlc3QgTVVTVCBi ZSBzZXQgdG8gIlJlcGx5IHZpYSBTcGVjaWZpZWQgUGF0aCIsIGFuZCBhDQogICAgICBSZXBseSBQ YXRoIFRMViBTSE9VTEQgYmUgY2FycmllZCBpbiB0aGUgZWNobyByZXF1ZXN0IG1lc3NhZ2UNCiAg ICAgIGNvcnJlc3BvbmRpbmdseTsgaWYgdGhlIFJlcGx5IFBhdGggVExWIGlzIG5vdCBjYXJyaWVk LCB0aGVuIGl0DQogICAgICBpbmRpY2F0ZXMgdGhlIHJldmVyc2UgTFNQIGFzIHRoZSByZXBseSBw YXRoLg0KDQpCZXN0IHJlZ2FyZHMsDQpNYWNoDQoNCj4gLS0tLS1PcmlnaW5hbCBNZXNzYWdlLS0t LS0NCj4gRnJvbTogbXBscyBbbWFpbHRvOm1wbHMtYm91bmNlc0BpZXRmLm9yZ10gT24gQmVoYWxm IE9mIEFsdmFybyBSZXRhbmENCj4gU2VudDogVGh1cnNkYXksIE9jdG9iZXIgMDEsIDIwMTUgMTox MyBBTQ0KPiBUbzogVGhlIElFU0cNCj4gQ2M6IG1wbHNAaWV0Zi5vcmc7DQo+IGRyYWZ0LWlldGYt bXBscy1sc3AtcGluZy1yZXBseS1tb2RlLXNpbXBsZS5zaGVwaGVyZEBpZXRmLm9yZzsNCj4gbXBs cy1jaGFpcnNAaWV0Zi5vcmc7IGRyYWZ0LWlldGYtbXBscy1sc3AtcGluZy1yZXBseS1tb2RlLXNp bXBsZUBpZXRmLm9yZzsNCj4gZHJhZnQtaWV0Zi1tcGxzLWxzcC1waW5nLXJlcGx5LW1vZGUtc2lt cGxlLmFkQGlldGYub3JnOyByY2FsbG9uQGp1bmlwZXIubmV0DQo+IFN1YmplY3Q6IFttcGxzXSBB bHZhcm8gUmV0YW5hJ3MgTm8gT2JqZWN0aW9uIG9uDQo+IGRyYWZ0LWlldGYtbXBscy1sc3AtcGlu Zy1yZXBseS1tb2RlLXNpbXBsZS0wNDogKHdpdGggQ09NTUVOVCkNCj4gDQo+IEFsdmFybyBSZXRh bmEgaGFzIGVudGVyZWQgdGhlIGZvbGxvd2luZyBiYWxsb3QgcG9zaXRpb24gZm9yDQo+IGRyYWZ0 LWlldGYtbXBscy1sc3AtcGluZy1yZXBseS1tb2RlLXNpbXBsZS0wNDogTm8gT2JqZWN0aW9uDQo+ IA0KPiBXaGVuIHJlc3BvbmRpbmcsIHBsZWFzZSBrZWVwIHRoZSBzdWJqZWN0IGxpbmUgaW50YWN0 IGFuZCByZXBseSB0byBhbGwgZW1haWwNCj4gYWRkcmVzc2VzIGluY2x1ZGVkIGluIHRoZSBUbyBh bmQgQ0MgbGluZXMuIChGZWVsIGZyZWUgdG8gY3V0IHRoaXMgaW50cm9kdWN0b3J5DQo+IHBhcmFn cmFwaCwgaG93ZXZlci4pDQo+IA0KPiANCj4gUGxlYXNlIHJlZmVyIHRvIGh0dHBzOi8vd3d3Lmll dGYub3JnL2llc2cvc3RhdGVtZW50L2Rpc2N1c3MtY3JpdGVyaWEuaHRtbA0KPiBmb3IgbW9yZSBp bmZvcm1hdGlvbiBhYm91dCBJRVNHIERJU0NVU1MgYW5kIENPTU1FTlQgcG9zaXRpb25zLg0KPiAN Cj4gDQo+IFRoZSBkb2N1bWVudCwgYWxvbmcgd2l0aCBvdGhlciBiYWxsb3QgcG9zaXRpb25zLCBj YW4gYmUgZm91bmQgaGVyZToNCj4gaHR0cHM6Ly9kYXRhdHJhY2tlci5pZXRmLm9yZy9kb2MvZHJh ZnQtaWV0Zi1tcGxzLWxzcC1waW5nLXJlcGx5LW1vZGUtc2ltcGxlLw0KPiANCj4gDQo+IA0KPiAt LS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0t LS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tDQo+IENPTU1FTlQ6DQo+IC0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0t LS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0NCj4gDQo+IEkgc3VwcG9y dCB0aGUgcHVibGljYXRpb24sIGJ1dCBJIHdvdWxkIGxpa2UgdG8gc2VlIHRoZSB1cGRhdGUgdG8g UkZDNzExMCBjbGVhcmx5DQo+IGluZGljYXRlZCDigJQgc3BlY2lhbGx5IGJlY2F1c2UgdGhlIGNo YW5nZSBtb2RpZmllcyBhIOKAnE1VU1TigJ0NCj4gYmVoYXZpb3IuDQo+IA0KPiBTZWN0aW9uIDMu MS4gKFJlcGx5IHZpYSBTcGVjaWZpZWQgUGF0aCBVcGRhdGUpIHNheXMgdGhhdCB0aGUgInVzYWdl IG9mIHRoZQ0KPiAiUmVwbHkgdmlhIFNwZWNpZmllZCBQYXRoICg1KSIgd2l0aG91dCBpbmNsdXNp b24gb2YgYSAiUmVwbHkgUGF0aCBUTFYiIGlzIG5vDQo+IGxvbmdlciBpbnZhbGlk4oCdIOKAlCBi dXQgIlJlcGx5IHZpYSBTcGVjaWZpZWQgUGF0aCAoNSnigJ0gKHRoYXQgc3BlY2lmaWMgc3RyaW5n IG9mIHRleHQpDQo+IGRvZXNu4oCZdCBzaG93IHVwIGluIFJGQzcxMTAsIG5vciBkb2VzIHRoZSB3 b3JkIGludmFsaWQuICBJbiBkaWdnaW5nIGEgbGl0dGxlIGJpdCwNCj4gSSBjYW4gc2VlIHRoYXQg U2VjdGlvbiA1LjEuIChTZW5kaW5nIGFuIEVjaG8gUmVxdWVzdCkgb2YgUkZDNzExMCBzYXlzOiDi gJxXaGVuDQo+IHNlbmRpbmcgYW4gZWNobyByZXF1ZXN04oCmdGhlIFJlcGx5IE1vZGUgb2YgdGhl IGVjaG8gcmVxdWVzdCBNVVNUIGJlIHNldCB0bw0KPiAiUmVwbHkgdmlhIFNwZWNpZmllZCBQYXRo IiwgYW5kIGENCj4gUmVwbHkgUGF0aCBUTFYgTVVTVCBiZSBjYXJyaWVk4oCm4oCdICAgSW4gdGhl IGVuZCwgSeKAmW0gYXNzdW1pbmcgdGhhdCB0aGUNCj4gdXBkYXRlIHRvIFJGQzcxMTAgaXMgdG8g Y2hhbmdlIHRoYXQgdGV4dCBpbiA1LjEgdG8gc29tZXRoaW5nIGxpa2Ug4oCc4oCmdGhlIFRMVg0K PiBTSE9VTEQgYmUgY2FycmllZDsgaWYgaXQgaXNu4oCZdCB0aGVuIGl0IGluZGljYXRlcyB0aGUg cmV2ZXJzZSBMU1DigKbigJ0uDQo+IFBsZWFzZSBiZSBjbGVhci4NCj4gDQo+IA0KPiBfX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fXw0KPiBtcGxzIG1haWxpbmcg bGlzdA0KPiBtcGxzQGlldGYub3JnDQo+IGh0dHBzOi8vd3d3LmlldGYub3JnL21haWxtYW4vbGlz dGluZm8vbXBscw0K From nobody Wed Oct 7 19:35:07 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E2A941B2F41; Wed, 7 Oct 2015 19:35:06 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.211 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.211 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham 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 ukufa057ivIL; Wed, 7 Oct 2015 19:35:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [194.213.3.17]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9CC7C1B2F4C; Wed, 7 Oct 2015 19:35:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 172.18.7.190 (EHLO lhreml406-hub.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.7.190]) by lhrrg01-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.3.7-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id CCE97658; Thu, 08 Oct 2015 02:35:02 +0000 (GMT) Received: from SZXEMA414-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.82.72.73) by lhreml406-hub.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.243) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.235.1; Thu, 8 Oct 2015 03:35:01 +0100 Received: from SZXEMA510-MBX.china.huawei.com ([169.254.3.229]) by SZXEMA414-HUB.china.huawei.com ([10.82.72.73]) with mapi id 14.03.0235.001; Thu, 8 Oct 2015 10:34:56 +0800 From: Mach Chen To: Kathleen Moriarty Thread-Topic: Kathleen Moriarty's Discuss on draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-reply-mode-simple-04: (with DISCUSS) Thread-Index: AQHQ+smnXGeV7WAYuE6rs4dLRLhHFZ5UWBhg//9+moCAAIfXwIAAW2CAgAwzrUA= Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2015 02:34:56 +0000 Message-ID: References: <20150929151503.2931.97454.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <562A4F65-2A63-4D75-BCF6-6F6ECC77CC41@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US, zh-CN Content-Language: zh-CN X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.111.102.135] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Archived-At: Cc: "mpls@ietf.org" , "draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-reply-mode-simple.shepherd@ietf.org" , "draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-reply-mode-simple@ietf.org" , "mpls-chairs@ietf.org" , "draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-reply-mode-simple.ad@ietf.org" , The IESG , "rcallon@juniper.net" Subject: Re: [mpls] Kathleen Moriarty's Discuss on draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-reply-mode-simple-04: (with DISCUSS) X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 08 Oct 2015 02:35:07 -0000 SGkgS2F0aGxlZW4sDQoNClNvcnJ5IGZvciB0aGUgZGVsYXllZCByZXNwb25zZSwganVzdCByZXR1 cm5lZCBmcm9tIHRoZSBOYXRpb25hbCBEYXkgSG9saWRheXMhDQoNCldlIHdpbGwgdXBsb2FkIHRo ZSB1cGRhdGVkIGRvY3VtZW50IHRoYXQgYWRkcmVzc2VzIGFsbCByZWNlaXZlZCBESVNTQ1VTIGFu ZCBjb21tZW50cyBzbyBmYXIuDQoNClRoYW5rcywNCk1hY2gNCg0KPiAtLS0tLU9yaWdpbmFsIE1l c3NhZ2UtLS0tLQ0KPiBGcm9tOiBLYXRobGVlbiBNb3JpYXJ0eSBbbWFpbHRvOmthdGhsZWVuLm1v cmlhcnR5LmlldGZAZ21haWwuY29tXQ0KPiBTZW50OiBUaHVyc2RheSwgT2N0b2JlciAwMSwgMjAx NSAxMjoxMiBBTQ0KPiBUbzogTWFjaCBDaGVuDQo+IENjOiBUaGUgSUVTRzsgZHJhZnQtaWV0Zi1t cGxzLWxzcC1waW5nLXJlcGx5LW1vZGUtc2ltcGxlLnNoZXBoZXJkQGlldGYub3JnOw0KPiBtcGxz LWNoYWlyc0BpZXRmLm9yZzsgZHJhZnQtaWV0Zi1tcGxzLWxzcC1waW5nLXJlcGx5LW1vZGUtc2lt cGxlQGlldGYub3JnOw0KPiBkcmFmdC1pZXRmLW1wbHMtbHNwLXBpbmctcmVwbHktbW9kZS1zaW1w bGUuYWRAaWV0Zi5vcmc7IHJjYWxsb25AanVuaXBlci5uZXQ7DQo+IG1wbHNAaWV0Zi5vcmcNCj4g U3ViamVjdDogUmU6IEthdGhsZWVuIE1vcmlhcnR5J3MgRGlzY3VzcyBvbg0KPiBkcmFmdC1pZXRm LW1wbHMtbHNwLXBpbmctcmVwbHktbW9kZS1zaW1wbGUtMDQ6ICh3aXRoIERJU0NVU1MpDQo+IA0K PiBPbiBUdWUsIFNlcCAyOSwgMjAxNSBhdCAxMToxMyBQTSwgTWFjaCBDaGVuIDxtYWNoLmNoZW5A aHVhd2VpLmNvbT4NCj4gd3JvdGU6DQo+ID4gSGkgS2F0aGxlZW4sDQo+ID4NCj4gPiBUaGFua3Mg Zm9yIHlvdXIgcHJvbXB0IHJlc3BvbnNlIQ0KPiA+DQo+ID4gUGxlYXNlIHNlZSBteSByZXBseSBp bmxpbmUuLi4NCj4gPg0KPiA+PiAtLS0tLU9yaWdpbmFsIE1lc3NhZ2UtLS0tLQ0KPiA+PiBGcm9t OiBLYXRobGVlbiBNb3JpYXJ0eSBbbWFpbHRvOmthdGhsZWVuLm1vcmlhcnR5LmlldGZAZ21haWwu Y29tXQ0KPiA+PiBTZW50OiBXZWRuZXNkYXksIFNlcHRlbWJlciAzMCwgMjAxNSAxMDozOSBBTQ0K PiA+PiBUbzogTWFjaCBDaGVuDQo+ID4+IENjOiBUaGUgSUVTRzsNCj4gPj4gZHJhZnQtaWV0Zi1t cGxzLWxzcC1waW5nLXJlcGx5LW1vZGUtc2ltcGxlLnNoZXBoZXJkQGlldGYub3JnOw0KPiA+PiBt cGxzLWNoYWlyc0BpZXRmLm9yZzsNCj4gPj4gZHJhZnQtaWV0Zi1tcGxzLWxzcC1waW5nLXJlcGx5 LW1vZGUtc2ltcGxlQGlldGYub3JnOw0KPiA+PiBkcmFmdC1pZXRmLW1wbHMtbHNwLXBpbmctcmVw bHktbW9kZS1zaW1wbGUuYWRAaWV0Zi5vcmc7DQo+ID4+IHJjYWxsb25AanVuaXBlci5uZXQ7IG1w bHNAaWV0Zi5vcmcNCj4gPj4gU3ViamVjdDogUmU6IEthdGhsZWVuIE1vcmlhcnR5J3MgRGlzY3Vz cyBvbg0KPiA+PiBkcmFmdC1pZXRmLW1wbHMtbHNwLXBpbmctcmVwbHktbW9kZS1zaW1wbGUtMDQ6 ICh3aXRoIERJU0NVU1MpDQo+ID4+DQo+ID4+IEhpLA0KPiA+Pg0KPiA+PiBUaGFua3MgZm9yIHN1 Z2dlc3RpbmcgdGV4dCBxdWlja2x5IHRvIGFkZHJlc3MgdGhpcy4gIElubGluZQ0KPiA+Pg0KPiA+ PiBTZW50IGZyb20gbXkgaVBob25lDQo+ID4+DQo+ID4+ID4gT24gU2VwIDI5LCAyMDE1LCBhdCAx MDoyOCBQTSwgTWFjaCBDaGVuIDxtYWNoLmNoZW5AaHVhd2VpLmNvbT4NCj4gPj4gd3JvdGU6DQo+ ID4+ID4NCj4gPj4gPiBIaSBLYXRobGVlbiwNCj4gPj4gPg0KPiA+PiA+IFRoYW5rcyBmb3IgcmV2 aWV3aW5nIHRoZSBkcmFmdCBhbmQgdGhlIHN1Z2dlc3Rpb24hDQo+ID4+ID4NCj4gPj4gPiBSZWdh cmRpbmcgdGhlIERJU0NVU1MsIGhvdyBhYm91dCB0aGUgZm9sbG93aW5nIHVwZGF0ZT8NCj4gPj4g Pg0KPiA+PiA+IE9MRDoNCj4gPj4gPiBCZXlvbmQgdGhvc2Ugc3BlY2lmaWVkIGluIFtSRkM0Mzc5 XSBhbmQgW1JGQzcxMTBdLCB0aGVyZSBhcmUgbm8NCj4gPj4gPiBmdXJ0aGVyDQo+ID4+IHNlY3Vy aXR5IG1lYXN1cmVzIHJlcXVpcmVkLg0KPiA+PiA+DQo+ID4+ID4gTkVXOg0KPiA+PiA+IFRob3Nl IHNlY3VyaXR5IGNvbnNpZGVyYXRpb25zIHNwZWNpZmllZCBpbiBbUkZDNDM3OV0gYW5kIFtSRkM3 MTEwXQ0KPiA+PiA+IGFwcGx5IGZvcg0KPiA+PiB0aGlzIGRvY3VtZW50Lg0KPiA+PiA+IEluIGFk ZGl0aW9uLCB0aGlzIGRvY3VtZW50IGludHJvZHVjZXMgdGhlIFJlcGx5IE1vZGUgT3JkZXIgVExW LiBJdA0KPiA+PiA+IHByb3ZpZGVzIGENCj4gPj4gbmV3IHdheSBmb3IgYW4gdW5hdXRob3JpemVk IHNvdXJjZSB0byBnYXRoZXIgbW9yZSBuZXR3b3JrDQo+ID4+IGluZm9ybWF0aW9uLCBlc3BlY2lh bGx5IHRoZSBwb3RlbnRpYWwgcmV0dXJuIHBhdGgocykgaW5mb3JtYXRpb24gb2YNCj4gPj4gYW4g TFNQLiBUbyBwcm90ZWN0IGFnYWluc3QgdW5hdXRob3JpemVkIHNvdXJjZXMgdXNpbmcgTVBMUyBl Y2hvDQo+ID4+IHJlcXVlc3QgbWVzc2FnZXMgd2l0aCB0aGUgUmVwbHkgTW9kZSBPcmRlciBUTFYg dG8gb2J0YWluIG5ldHdvcmsNCj4gPj4gaW5mb3JtYXRpb24sIHNpbWlsYXIgdG8gW1JGQzQzNzld LCBpdCBpcyBSRUNPTU1FTkRFRCB0aGF0DQo+ID4+IGltcGxlbWVudGF0aW9ucyBwcm92aWRlIGEg bWVhbnMgb2YgY2hlY2tpbmcgdGhlIHNvdXJjZSBhZGRyZXNzZXMgb2YNCj4gPj4gTVBMUyBlY2hv IHJlcXVlc3QgbWVzc2FnZXMgYWdhaW5zdCBhbiBhY2Nlc3MgbGlzdCBiZWZvcmUgYWNjZXB0aW5n IHRoZQ0KPiBtZXNzYWdlLg0KPiA+Pg0KPiA+PiBJZiB0aGUgbWVzc2FnZSBpcyBub3QgZW5jcnlw dGVkLCB0aGlzIGNvbnRlbnQgaXMgc3RpbGwgZXhwb3NlZCBwb3RlbnRpYWxseSwNCj4gcmlnaHQ/ DQo+ID4NCj4gPiBZZXMsIGJ1dCBpdCBpcyBleHBvc2VkIHdpdGhpbiB0aGUgTVBMUyBkb21haW4u DQo+ID4NCj4gPj4gVGhpcyBoZWxwcywgYnV0IGFsc28gbWVudGlvbmluZyBsYWNrIG9mIGNvbmZp ZGVudGlhbGl0eSBwcm90ZWN0aW9uDQo+ID4+IG1pZ2h0IGJlIGhlbHBmdWwgdG9vLg0KPiA+DQo+ ID4gSSdtIG5vdCBzdXJlIHdoZXRoZXIgdGhpcyBpc3N1ZSBpcyBzcGVjaWZpYyB0byB0aGlzIGRv Y3VtZW50LCBzZWVtcyB0aGlzIGlzIGENCj4gY29tbW9uIGlzc3VlIGZvciBNUExTIE9BTSBhbmQg Y29udHJvbCBwbGFuZS4NCj4gPg0KPiA+IElmIHRoaXMgaXMgYSBjb25jZXJuLCBob3cgYWJvdXQg YWRkaW5nIHRoZSBmb2xsb3dpbmcgdGV4dDoNCj4gPiAiDQo+ID4gQW5vdGhlciBwb3RlbnRpYWwg c2VjdXJpdHkgaXNzdWUgaXMgdGhhdCB0aGUgTVBMUyBlY2hvIHJlcXVlc3QgYW5kDQo+ID4gICAg cmVwbHkgbWVzc2FnZXMgYXJlIG5vdCBlbmNyeXB0ZWQsIHRoZSBjb250ZW50IG9mIHRoZSBNUExT IGVjaG8NCj4gPiAgICByZXF1ZXN0IGFuZCByZXBseSBtZXNzYWdlcyBtYXkgYmUgcG90ZW50aWFs bHkgZXhwb3NlZC4gQWx0aG91Z2ggdGhlDQo+ID4gICAgZXhwb3N1cmUgaXMgd2l0aGluIHRoZSBN UExTIGRvbWFpbiwgaWYgc3VjaCBleHBvc3VyZSBpcyBhIGNvbmNlcm4sDQo+ID4gICAgc29tZSBl bmNyeXB0aW9uIG1lY2hhbmlzbXMgbWF5IGJlIGVtcGxveWVkLg0KPiA+ICINCj4gDQo+IFRoaXMg YWRkaXRpb25hbCB0ZXh0IHB1dHMgaW50IGhlIGNhdmVhdCB0aGF0IHlvdSBhcmUgY29uY2VybmVk IHdpdGggYW5kIGxpbWl0cw0KPiB0aGUgc2NvcGUgdG8gdGhlIE1QTFMgZG9tYWluLCBzbyBJIHRo aW5rIHRoYXQgaXMgaGVscGZ1bCBvbiBib3RoIGZyb250cy4gIFRoZQ0KPiB0d28gY29tYmluZWQg d291bGQgY292ZXIgYW55IGFkZGl0aW9uYWwgY29uc2lkZXJhdGlvbnMgZm9yIHRoaXMgZHJhZnQg bmljZWx5LA0KPiB0aGFuayB5b3UuDQo+IA0KPiBQbGVhc2UgbGV0IG1lIGtub3cgd2hlbiB0aGUg dXBkYXRlZCB0ZXh0IGhhcyBiZWVuIGluY29ycG9yYXRlZCBhbmQgSSB3aWxsDQo+IGNsZWFyLg0K PiANCj4gVGhhbmtzLA0KPiBLYXRobGVlbg0KPiA+DQo+ID4gQmVzdCByZWdhcmRzLA0KPiA+IE1h Y2gNCj4gPg0KPiA+Pg0KPiA+PiBUaGFuayB5b3UsDQo+ID4+IEthdGhsZWVuDQo+ID4+DQo+ID4+ ID4NCj4gPj4gPg0KPiA+PiA+IEJlc3QgcmVnYXJkcywNCj4gPj4gPiBNYWNoDQo+ID4+ID4NCj4g Pj4gPg0KPiA+PiA+PiAtLS0tLU9yaWdpbmFsIE1lc3NhZ2UtLS0tLQ0KPiA+PiA+PiBGcm9tOiBL YXRobGVlbiBNb3JpYXJ0eSBbbWFpbHRvOkthdGhsZWVuLk1vcmlhcnR5LmlldGZAZ21haWwuY29t XQ0KPiA+PiA+PiBTZW50OiBUdWVzZGF5LCBTZXB0ZW1iZXIgMjksIDIwMTUgMTE6MTUgUE0NCj4g Pj4gPj4gVG86IFRoZSBJRVNHDQo+ID4+ID4+IENjOiBkcmFmdC1pZXRmLW1wbHMtbHNwLXBpbmct cmVwbHktbW9kZS1zaW1wbGUuc2hlcGhlcmRAaWV0Zi5vcmc7DQo+ID4+ID4+IG1wbHMtY2hhaXJz QGlldGYub3JnOw0KPiA+PiA+PiBkcmFmdC1pZXRmLW1wbHMtbHNwLXBpbmctcmVwbHktbW9kZS1z aW1wbGVAaWV0Zi5vcmc7DQo+ID4+ID4+IGRyYWZ0LWlldGYtbXBscy1sc3AtcGluZy1yZXBseS1t b2RlLXNpbXBsZS5hZEBpZXRmLm9yZzsNCj4gPj4gPj4gcmNhbGxvbkBqdW5pcGVyLm5ldDsgbXBs c0BpZXRmLm9yZw0KPiA+PiA+PiBTdWJqZWN0OiBLYXRobGVlbiBNb3JpYXJ0eSdzIERpc2N1c3Mg b24NCj4gPj4gPj4gZHJhZnQtaWV0Zi1tcGxzLWxzcC1waW5nLXJlcGx5LW1vZGUtc2ltcGxlLTA0 OiAod2l0aCBESVNDVVNTKQ0KPiA+PiA+Pg0KPiA+PiA+PiBLYXRobGVlbiBNb3JpYXJ0eSBoYXMg ZW50ZXJlZCB0aGUgZm9sbG93aW5nIGJhbGxvdCBwb3NpdGlvbiBmb3INCj4gPj4gPj4gZHJhZnQt aWV0Zi1tcGxzLWxzcC1waW5nLXJlcGx5LW1vZGUtc2ltcGxlLTA0OiBEaXNjdXNzDQo+ID4+ID4+ DQo+ID4+ID4+IFdoZW4gcmVzcG9uZGluZywgcGxlYXNlIGtlZXAgdGhlIHN1YmplY3QgbGluZSBp bnRhY3QgYW5kIHJlcGx5IHRvDQo+ID4+ID4+IGFsbCBlbWFpbCBhZGRyZXNzZXMgaW5jbHVkZWQg aW4gdGhlIFRvIGFuZCBDQyBsaW5lcy4gKEZlZWwgZnJlZSB0bw0KPiA+PiA+PiBjdXQgdGhpcyBp bnRyb2R1Y3RvcnkgcGFyYWdyYXBoLCBob3dldmVyLikNCj4gPj4gPj4NCj4gPj4gPj4NCj4gPj4g Pj4gUGxlYXNlIHJlZmVyIHRvDQo+ID4+ID4+IGh0dHBzOi8vd3d3LmlldGYub3JnL2llc2cvc3Rh dGVtZW50L2Rpc2N1c3MtY3JpdGVyaWEuaHRtbA0KPiA+PiA+PiBmb3IgbW9yZSBpbmZvcm1hdGlv biBhYm91dCBJRVNHIERJU0NVU1MgYW5kIENPTU1FTlQgcG9zaXRpb25zLg0KPiA+PiA+Pg0KPiA+ PiA+Pg0KPiA+PiA+PiBUaGUgZG9jdW1lbnQsIGFsb25nIHdpdGggb3RoZXIgYmFsbG90IHBvc2l0 aW9ucywgY2FuIGJlIGZvdW5kIGhlcmU6DQo+ID4+ID4+IGh0dHBzOi8vZGF0YXRyYWNrZXIuaWV0 Zi5vcmcvZG9jL2RyYWZ0LWlldGYtbXBscy1sc3AtcGluZy1yZXBseS1tbw0KPiA+PiA+PiBkZS0N Cj4gPj4gPj4gc2ltcGxlLw0KPiA+PiA+Pg0KPiA+PiA+Pg0KPiA+PiA+Pg0KPiA+PiA+PiAtLS0t LS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0t LS0tLS0NCj4gPj4gPj4gLS0tDQo+ID4+ID4+IC0NCj4gPj4gPj4gRElTQ1VTUzoNCj4gPj4gPj4g LS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0t LS0tLS0tLS0tDQo+ID4+ID4+IC0tLQ0KPiA+PiA+PiAtDQo+ID4+ID4+DQo+ID4+ID4+IFRoaXMg c2hvdWxkIGJlIGVhc3kgdG8gcmVzb2x2ZS4gIFNJbmNlIHRoaXMgZHJhZnQgYWRkcyBhIG5ldw0K PiA+PiA+PiBjYXBhYmlsaXR5IHRvIGluY2x1ZGUgdGhlIHJldHVybiBwYXRoLCB0aGlzIHByb3Zp ZGVzIGFub3RoZXINCj4gPj4gPj4gYXR0YWNrIHZlY3RvciB0byBvYnNlcnZlIHBhdGggaW5mb3Jt YXRpb24gdGhhdCBjb3VsZCBiZSBwYXJ0IG9mDQo+ID4+ID4+IHJlY29ubmFpc3NhbmNlIGdhdGhl cmluZyB0byBsYXRlciBhdHRhY2sgdGhlIG5ldHdvcmsgb3IgcGF0aC4NCj4gPj4gPj4gV2hpbGUg dGhlIHJlZmVyZW5jZWQgUkZDNDM3OSBtZW50aW9ucyB0aGUgZm9sbG93aW5nIGluIHRoZQ0KPiA+ PiA+PiBzZWN1cml0eQ0KPiA+PiBjb25zaWRlcmF0aW9ucyBzZWN0aW9uOg0KPiA+PiA+Pg0KPiA+ PiA+PiAgIFRoZSB0aGlyZCBpcyBhbg0KPiA+PiA+PiAgIHVuYXV0aG9yaXplZCBzb3VyY2UgdXNp bmcgYW4gTFNQIHBpbmcgdG8gb2J0YWluIGluZm9ybWF0aW9uIGFib3V0IHRoZQ0KPiA+PiA+PiAg IG5ldHdvcmsuDQo+ID4+ID4+DQo+ID4+ID4+IFRoZSBlcXVpdmFsZW50IHNob3VsZCBiZSBhZGRl ZCBmb3IgdGhpcyBuZXcgY2FwYWJpbGl0eSBpbiB0aGlzDQo+ID4+ID4+IGRyYWZ0LCBzaW5jZSBu b3cgaXQncyBwb3NzaWJsZSB0byBnYXRoZXIgdGhlIHBhdGggaW5mb3JtYXRpb24gZnJvbSB0aGUg bmV3DQo+IGZlYXR1cmUuDQo+ID4+ID4NCj4gDQo+IA0KPiANCj4gLS0NCj4gDQo+IEJlc3QgcmVn YXJkcywNCj4gS2F0aGxlZW4NCg== From nobody Wed Oct 7 19:39:10 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B49C31B2FB1; Wed, 7 Oct 2015 19:39:05 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.211 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.211 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham 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 ovNYEYJBnrAR; Wed, 7 Oct 2015 19:39:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [194.213.3.17]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 317BD1B2FAF; Wed, 7 Oct 2015 19:39:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 172.18.7.190 (EHLO lhreml404-hub.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.7.190]) by lhrrg02-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.3.7-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id BYM48281; Thu, 08 Oct 2015 02:39:01 +0000 (GMT) Received: from SZXEMA412-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.82.72.71) by lhreml404-hub.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.218) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.235.1; Thu, 8 Oct 2015 03:39:01 +0100 Received: from SZXEMA510-MBX.china.huawei.com ([169.254.3.229]) by SZXEMA412-HUB.china.huawei.com ([10.82.72.71]) with mapi id 14.03.0235.001; Thu, 8 Oct 2015 10:38:52 +0800 From: Mach Chen To: Stephen Farrell , The IESG Thread-Topic: Stephen Farrell's No Objection on draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-reply-mode-simple-04: (with COMMENT) Thread-Index: AQHQ+4Pb7m3paz2xNE6LDRdzoL9yhJ5g7ZNQ Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2015 02:38:52 +0000 Message-ID: References: <20150930132801.29845.33235.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> In-Reply-To: <20150930132801.29845.33235.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Accept-Language: en-US, zh-CN Content-Language: zh-CN X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.111.102.135] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Archived-At: Cc: "mpls@ietf.org" , "draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-reply-mode-simple.shepherd@ietf.org" , "mpls-chairs@ietf.org" , "draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-reply-mode-simple@ietf.org" , "draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-reply-mode-simple.ad@ietf.org" , "rcallon@juniper.net" Subject: Re: [mpls] Stephen Farrell's No Objection on draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-reply-mode-simple-04: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 08 Oct 2015 02:39:05 -0000 SGkgU3RlcGhlbiwNCg0KVGhhbmtzIGZvciByZXZpZXdpbmcgdGhlIGRyYWZ0IGFuZCB0aGUgY29t bWVudHMsIGl0IHdpbGwgYmUgaW5jb3Jwb3JhdGVkIGluIHRoZSBsYXRlc3QgZHJhZnQgKHZlcnNp b24gNSkuDQoNCkJlc3QgcmVnYXJkcywNCk1hY2gNCg0KPiAtLS0tLU9yaWdpbmFsIE1lc3NhZ2Ut LS0tLQ0KPiBGcm9tOiBTdGVwaGVuIEZhcnJlbGwgW21haWx0bzpzdGVwaGVuLmZhcnJlbGxAY3Mu dGNkLmllXQ0KPiBTZW50OiBXZWRuZXNkYXksIFNlcHRlbWJlciAzMCwgMjAxNSA5OjI4IFBNDQo+ IFRvOiBUaGUgSUVTRw0KPiBDYzogZHJhZnQtaWV0Zi1tcGxzLWxzcC1waW5nLXJlcGx5LW1vZGUt c2ltcGxlLnNoZXBoZXJkQGlldGYub3JnOw0KPiBtcGxzLWNoYWlyc0BpZXRmLm9yZzsgZHJhZnQt aWV0Zi1tcGxzLWxzcC1waW5nLXJlcGx5LW1vZGUtc2ltcGxlQGlldGYub3JnOw0KPiBkcmFmdC1p ZXRmLW1wbHMtbHNwLXBpbmctcmVwbHktbW9kZS1zaW1wbGUuYWRAaWV0Zi5vcmc7IHJjYWxsb25A anVuaXBlci5uZXQ7DQo+IG1wbHNAaWV0Zi5vcmcNCj4gU3ViamVjdDogU3RlcGhlbiBGYXJyZWxs J3MgTm8gT2JqZWN0aW9uIG9uDQo+IGRyYWZ0LWlldGYtbXBscy1sc3AtcGluZy1yZXBseS1tb2Rl LXNpbXBsZS0wNDogKHdpdGggQ09NTUVOVCkNCj4gDQo+IFN0ZXBoZW4gRmFycmVsbCBoYXMgZW50 ZXJlZCB0aGUgZm9sbG93aW5nIGJhbGxvdCBwb3NpdGlvbiBmb3INCj4gZHJhZnQtaWV0Zi1tcGxz LWxzcC1waW5nLXJlcGx5LW1vZGUtc2ltcGxlLTA0OiBObyBPYmplY3Rpb24NCj4gDQo+IFdoZW4g cmVzcG9uZGluZywgcGxlYXNlIGtlZXAgdGhlIHN1YmplY3QgbGluZSBpbnRhY3QgYW5kIHJlcGx5 IHRvIGFsbCBlbWFpbA0KPiBhZGRyZXNzZXMgaW5jbHVkZWQgaW4gdGhlIFRvIGFuZCBDQyBsaW5l cy4gKEZlZWwgZnJlZSB0byBjdXQgdGhpcyBpbnRyb2R1Y3RvcnkNCj4gcGFyYWdyYXBoLCBob3dl dmVyLikNCj4gDQo+IA0KPiBQbGVhc2UgcmVmZXIgdG8gaHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuaWV0Zi5vcmcvaWVz Zy9zdGF0ZW1lbnQvZGlzY3Vzcy1jcml0ZXJpYS5odG1sDQo+IGZvciBtb3JlIGluZm9ybWF0aW9u IGFib3V0IElFU0cgRElTQ1VTUyBhbmQgQ09NTUVOVCBwb3NpdGlvbnMuDQo+IA0KPiANCj4gVGhl IGRvY3VtZW50LCBhbG9uZyB3aXRoIG90aGVyIGJhbGxvdCBwb3NpdGlvbnMsIGNhbiBiZSBmb3Vu ZCBoZXJlOg0KPiBodHRwczovL2RhdGF0cmFja2VyLmlldGYub3JnL2RvYy9kcmFmdC1pZXRmLW1w bHMtbHNwLXBpbmctcmVwbHktbW9kZS1zaW1wbGUvDQo+IA0KPiANCj4gDQo+IC0tLS0tLS0tLS0t LS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0t LS0NCj4gQ09NTUVOVDoNCj4gLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0t LS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLQ0KPiANCj4gdHlwbz8gInRoZSByZXZlcnNl IHRoZSByZXZlcnNlIExTUCINCj4gDQoNCg== From nobody Thu Oct 8 11:11:18 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8BED41B2D2B; Thu, 8 Oct 2015 11:11:16 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 7U6nLL77-Aak; Thu, 8 Oct 2015 11:11:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-wi0-x22b.google.com (mail-wi0-x22b.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c05::22b]) (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 247E51B2D2C; Thu, 8 Oct 2015 11:11:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: by wicfx3 with SMTP id fx3so36638694wic.0; Thu, 08 Oct 2015 11:11:12 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=5B04CGJ3WqAKXjv42uobylGQqD7tjQxBUGDjsygRTAQ=; b=VT9doEQJI6QNSvaEoDXSjBNbnQXQr60L08bBCLrAbj6wJO3djulB2lySUJhZWrcfMw rgxXfPiCu6qcEgQpTQ9UpBxxnlQRrrW3RnrcV9pqQUiZS+EWl/0A3ReAtFPifzDKm2sN 8Pp59UC9AyCzGvm1rIv7TF5uCtNpOzerEU6J9vNdG5SKUlSIjnLB8OYMLvGtJTBH2eCi k87cr9X+peMRsouWIcWmRxMDU8S/jllzrh+Yj0sIBOTDA6AxBZ5wxvguR0aG6sF6d0rs 84Lrlmld941sSnm38xtk3ANBwuAbEfYobhN40yIG1ngERzbC6NrnhzkaGkEpHjUL1+H+ u7MA== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.195.11.72 with SMTP id eg8mr10791822wjd.14.1444327872726; Thu, 08 Oct 2015 11:11:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.28.214.213 with HTTP; Thu, 8 Oct 2015 11:11:12 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <20150929151503.2931.97454.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <562A4F65-2A63-4D75-BCF6-6F6ECC77CC41@gmail.com> Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2015 14:11:12 -0400 Message-ID: From: Kathleen Moriarty To: Mach Chen Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Archived-At: Cc: "mpls@ietf.org" , "draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-reply-mode-simple.shepherd@ietf.org" , "draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-reply-mode-simple@ietf.org" , "mpls-chairs@ietf.org" , "draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-reply-mode-simple.ad@ietf.org" , The IESG , "rcallon@juniper.net" Subject: Re: [mpls] Kathleen Moriarty's Discuss on draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-reply-mode-simple-04: (with DISCUSS) X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 08 Oct 2015 18:11:16 -0000 On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at 10:34 PM, Mach Chen wrote: > Hi Kathleen, > > Sorry for the delayed response, just returned from the National Day Holidays! > > We will upload the updated document that addresses all received DISSCUS and comments so far. Thank you, I'll look for the update to come through. I hope you enjoyed your holidays! Kathleen > > Thanks, > Mach > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Kathleen Moriarty [mailto:kathleen.moriarty.ietf@gmail.com] >> Sent: Thursday, October 01, 2015 12:12 AM >> To: Mach Chen >> Cc: The IESG; draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-reply-mode-simple.shepherd@ietf.org; >> mpls-chairs@ietf.org; draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-reply-mode-simple@ietf.org; >> draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-reply-mode-simple.ad@ietf.org; rcallon@juniper.net; >> mpls@ietf.org >> Subject: Re: Kathleen Moriarty's Discuss on >> draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-reply-mode-simple-04: (with DISCUSS) >> >> On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 11:13 PM, Mach Chen >> wrote: >> > Hi Kathleen, >> > >> > Thanks for your prompt response! >> > >> > Please see my reply inline... >> > >> >> -----Original Message----- >> >> From: Kathleen Moriarty [mailto:kathleen.moriarty.ietf@gmail.com] >> >> Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 10:39 AM >> >> To: Mach Chen >> >> Cc: The IESG; >> >> draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-reply-mode-simple.shepherd@ietf.org; >> >> mpls-chairs@ietf.org; >> >> draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-reply-mode-simple@ietf.org; >> >> draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-reply-mode-simple.ad@ietf.org; >> >> rcallon@juniper.net; mpls@ietf.org >> >> Subject: Re: Kathleen Moriarty's Discuss on >> >> draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-reply-mode-simple-04: (with DISCUSS) >> >> >> >> Hi, >> >> >> >> Thanks for suggesting text quickly to address this. Inline >> >> >> >> Sent from my iPhone >> >> >> >> > On Sep 29, 2015, at 10:28 PM, Mach Chen >> >> wrote: >> >> > >> >> > Hi Kathleen, >> >> > >> >> > Thanks for reviewing the draft and the suggestion! >> >> > >> >> > Regarding the DISCUSS, how about the following update? >> >> > >> >> > OLD: >> >> > Beyond those specified in [RFC4379] and [RFC7110], there are no >> >> > further >> >> security measures required. >> >> > >> >> > NEW: >> >> > Those security considerations specified in [RFC4379] and [RFC7110] >> >> > apply for >> >> this document. >> >> > In addition, this document introduces the Reply Mode Order TLV. It >> >> > provides a >> >> new way for an unauthorized source to gather more network >> >> information, especially the potential return path(s) information of >> >> an LSP. To protect against unauthorized sources using MPLS echo >> >> request messages with the Reply Mode Order TLV to obtain network >> >> information, similar to [RFC4379], it is RECOMMENDED that >> >> implementations provide a means of checking the source addresses of >> >> MPLS echo request messages against an access list before accepting the >> message. >> >> >> >> If the message is not encrypted, this content is still exposed potentially, >> right? >> > >> > Yes, but it is exposed within the MPLS domain. >> > >> >> This helps, but also mentioning lack of confidentiality protection >> >> might be helpful too. >> > >> > I'm not sure whether this issue is specific to this document, seems this is a >> common issue for MPLS OAM and control plane. >> > >> > If this is a concern, how about adding the following text: >> > " >> > Another potential security issue is that the MPLS echo request and >> > reply messages are not encrypted, the content of the MPLS echo >> > request and reply messages may be potentially exposed. Although the >> > exposure is within the MPLS domain, if such exposure is a concern, >> > some encryption mechanisms may be employed. >> > " >> >> This additional text puts int he caveat that you are concerned with and limits >> the scope to the MPLS domain, so I think that is helpful on both fronts. The >> two combined would cover any additional considerations for this draft nicely, >> thank you. >> >> Please let me know when the updated text has been incorporated and I will >> clear. >> >> Thanks, >> Kathleen >> > >> > Best regards, >> > Mach >> > >> >> >> >> Thank you, >> >> Kathleen >> >> >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > Best regards, >> >> > Mach >> >> > >> >> > >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> >> >> From: Kathleen Moriarty [mailto:Kathleen.Moriarty.ietf@gmail.com] >> >> >> Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2015 11:15 PM >> >> >> To: The IESG >> >> >> Cc: draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-reply-mode-simple.shepherd@ietf.org; >> >> >> mpls-chairs@ietf.org; >> >> >> draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-reply-mode-simple@ietf.org; >> >> >> draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-reply-mode-simple.ad@ietf.org; >> >> >> rcallon@juniper.net; mpls@ietf.org >> >> >> Subject: Kathleen Moriarty's Discuss on >> >> >> draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-reply-mode-simple-04: (with DISCUSS) >> >> >> >> >> >> Kathleen Moriarty has entered the following ballot position for >> >> >> draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-reply-mode-simple-04: Discuss >> >> >> >> >> >> 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-mpls-lsp-ping-reply-mo >> >> >> de- >> >> >> simple/ >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> >> --- >> >> >> - >> >> >> DISCUSS: >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> >> --- >> >> >> - >> >> >> >> >> >> This should be easy to resolve. SInce this draft adds a new >> >> >> capability to include the return path, this provides another >> >> >> attack vector to observe path information that could be part of >> >> >> reconnaissance gathering to later attack the network or path. >> >> >> While the referenced RFC4379 mentions the following in the >> >> >> security >> >> considerations section: >> >> >> >> >> >> The third is an >> >> >> unauthorized source using an LSP ping to obtain information about the >> >> >> network. >> >> >> >> >> >> The equivalent should be added for this new capability in this >> >> >> draft, since now it's possible to gather the path information from the new >> feature. >> >> > >> >> >> >> -- >> >> Best regards, >> Kathleen -- Best regards, Kathleen From nobody Fri Oct 9 11:09:42 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 465A41B2C5C; Fri, 9 Oct 2015 11:09:40 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.901 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 pSvVb4Wqtxdm; Fri, 9 Oct 2015 11:09:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from na01-by2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-by2on0145.outbound.protection.outlook.com [207.46.100.145]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3D7F41B2C65; Fri, 9 Oct 2015 11:09:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from DM2PR05MB573.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.141.159.16) by DM2PR05MB576.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.141.159.26) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.293.16; Fri, 9 Oct 2015 18:09:35 +0000 Received: from DM2PR05MB573.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([10.141.159.16]) by DM2PR05MB573.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([10.141.159.16]) with mapi id 15.01.0293.007; Fri, 9 Oct 2015 18:09:35 +0000 From: Ross Callon To: "mpls@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [mpls] Poll for adoption for draft-cheng-mpls-tp-shared-ring-protection-06 Thread-Index: AdD2SyL7J+OCzdWXSnuJoTgsyMUWLQMcZ9Ng Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2015 18:09:35 +0000 Message-ID: References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=rcallon@juniper.net; x-originating-ip: [66.129.241.12] x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; DM2PR05MB576; 5:00YZf59D9iCXHtD2R01S6Bs2kuQ4xylyC3M87hXHsflNTCpPi8XSwycEu0pIArJiJMRLDrHbuFJIFEV0D5oXEd0xX/adMB3rjZxgLexxe4iPBNKnMZKaBxKOYmCex0ChC/pDYSajWkspM9zG5Lx3UQ==; 24:N6bhRKM/VKu70JbgUv3eQ5tERxByiPQ4nQAVI7g0KIuhtjaj8kFhA/mwZsz00/5oCel8v71pyiVDU+AJ7iHDk2c1Bw2tuOtDTLS6Lpo091M=; 20:3KJTdflVxXCe75clDgztnbhlr5e9XetK90u7ggXETdex0Pg4iTsUtbvOaqz4+Iu+gLoe+NuFEjQ+/up9lr6KSw== x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:DM2PR05MB576; x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:(108003899814671); x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(601004)(2401047)(8121501046)(520078)(5005006)(3002001); SRVR:DM2PR05MB576; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:DM2PR05MB576; x-forefront-prvs: 0724FCD4CD x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(164054003)(52044002)(199003)(377454003)(189002)(76176999)(87936001)(101416001)(16236675004)(50986999)(92566002)(33656002)(230783001)(64706001)(54356999)(19625215002)(2501003)(66066001)(2900100001)(40100003)(102836002)(5003600100002)(122556002)(450100001)(74316001)(15975445007)(77096005)(19609705001)(2950100001)(19300405004)(19617315012)(99286002)(46102003)(5002640100001)(2351001)(76576001)(189998001)(97736004)(5008740100001)(86362001)(5001960100002)(110136002)(18717965001)(5004730100002)(105586002)(11100500001)(106356001)(19580405001)(19580395003)(5007970100001)(81156007)(10400500002); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:DM2PR05MB576; H:DM2PR05MB573.namprd05.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; A:1; MX:1; LANG:en; received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: juniper.net does not designate permitted sender hosts) spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:23 spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_DM2PR05MB573D12DE397A9692D446C51A5340DM2PR05MB573namprd_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: juniper.net X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 09 Oct 2015 18:09:35.4903 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: bea78b3c-4cdb-4130-854a-1d193232e5f4 X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: DM2PR05MB576 Archived-At: Cc: "mpls-chairs@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [mpls] Poll for adoption for draft-cheng-mpls-tp-shared-ring-protection-06 X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 09 Oct 2015 18:09:40 -0000 --_000_DM2PR05MB573D12DE397A9692D446C51A5340DM2PR05MB573namprd_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable This poll has ended, and the document has been accepted as an MPLS working = group document. Authors: Please resubmit this draft as: draft-ietf-mpls-tp-shared-ring-prot= ection-00, with no changes other than the internet draft name and date. Once this is done you can feel free to handle any comments received followi= ng normal WG process. Thanks, Ross (as MPLS WG chair) From: mpls [mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Ross Callon Sent: Wednesday, September 23, 2015 6:00 PM To: mpls@ietf.org Cc: mpls-chairs@tools.ietf.org Subject: [mpls] Poll for adoption for draft-cheng-mpls-tp-shared-ring-prote= ction-06 This is to start a two week poll on adopting draft-cheng-mpls-tp-shared-rin= g-protection-06 as an MPLS working group document. Please send your comments (support/not support) to the mpls working group mailing list (mpls@ietf.org). There are four IPR disclosures pertaining to the draft, which can be found = at: https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/search/?submit=3Ddraft&id=3Ddraft-cheng-mp= ls-tp-shared-ring-protection The authors and contributors have all indicated that they are not aware of = any other IPR that applies to this document (other than what is mentioned in the existing disc= losures). This poll for adoption will end Thursday October 8, 2015. Thanks, Ross --_000_DM2PR05MB573D12DE397A9692D446C51A5340DM2PR05MB573namprd_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

This poll has ended, and = the document has been accepted as an MPLS working group document.

 <= /p>

Authors: Please resubmit = this draft as: draft-ietf-mpls-tp-shared-ring-protection-00, with no change= s other than the internet draft name and date.

 <= /p>

Once this is done you can= feel free to handle any comments received following normal WG process.

 <= /p>

Thanks, Ross

(as MPLS WG chair)

 <= /p>

From: mpls [ma= ilto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Ross Callon
Sent: Wednesday, September 23, 2015 6:00 PM
To: mpls@ietf.org
Cc: mpls-chairs@tools.ietf.org
Subject: [mpls] Poll for adoption for draft-cheng-mpls-tp-shared-rin= g-protection-06

 

This is to start a two week poll on ado= pting draft-cheng-mpls-tp-shared-ring-protection-06

as an MPLS working group document.=

 

Please send your comments (support/not = support) to the mpls working group

mailing list (mpls@ietf.org).

 

There are four IPR disclosures pertaini= ng to the draft, which can be found at:

 

The authors and contributors have all i= ndicated that they are not aware of any other IPR that

applies to this document (other than wh= at is mentioned in the existing disclosures).

 

This poll for adoption will end Thursda= y October 8, 2015.

 

Thanks, Ross

 

 

--_000_DM2PR05MB573D12DE397A9692D446C51A5340DM2PR05MB573namprd_-- From nobody Fri Oct 9 17:57:30 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 56E081B50CC; Fri, 9 Oct 2015 17:57:26 -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] autolearn=ham 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 dJncCaS_o3HW; Fri, 9 Oct 2015 17:57:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 27A991B50C4; Fri, 9 Oct 2015 17:57:25 -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: 6.4.2 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <20151010005725.11168.41433.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Fri, 09 Oct 2015 17:57:25 -0700 Archived-At: Cc: mpls@ietf.org Subject: [mpls] I-D Action: draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-reply-mode-simple-05.txt X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2015 00:57:26 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Multiprotocol Label Switching Working Group of the IETF. Title : Label Switched Path (LSP) Ping/Traceroute Reply Mode Simplification Authors : Nobo Akiya George Swallow Carlos Pignataro Loa Andersson Mach(Guoyi) Chen Filename : draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-reply-mode-simple-05.txt Pages : 16 Date : 2015-10-09 Abstract: The Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) Label Switched Path (LSP) Ping and Traceroute use the Reply Mode field to signal the method to be used in the MPLS echo reply. This document updates the procedures for the "Reply via Specified Path" Reply Mode, the value of this Reply Mode is 5. The update creates a simple way to indicate that the Reverse LSP should be used as return path. This document also adds an optional TLV which can carry ordered list of Reply Mode values. This document updates RFC7110. The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-reply-mode-simple/ There's also a htmlized version available at: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-reply-mode-simple-05 A diff from the previous version is available at: https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-reply-mode-simple-05 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 Fri Oct 9 19:40:22 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ABE701B535B; Fri, 9 Oct 2015 19:40:17 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.211 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.211 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham 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 bo_hkE2ifDTe; Fri, 9 Oct 2015 19:40:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [194.213.3.17]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7E0201B535A; Fri, 9 Oct 2015 19:40:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 172.18.7.190 (EHLO lhreml405-hub.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.7.190]) by lhrrg01-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.3.7-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id CCJ05502; Sat, 10 Oct 2015 02:40:11 +0000 (GMT) Received: from SZXEMA411-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.82.72.70) by lhreml405-hub.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.242) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.235.1; Sat, 10 Oct 2015 03:40:11 +0100 Received: from SZXEMA510-MBX.china.huawei.com ([169.254.3.229]) by szxema411-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.82.72.70]) with mapi id 14.03.0235.001; Sat, 10 Oct 2015 10:40:05 +0800 From: Mach Chen To: Kathleen Moriarty Thread-Topic: Kathleen Moriarty's Discuss on draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-reply-mode-simple-04: (with DISCUSS) Thread-Index: AQHQ+smnXGeV7WAYuE6rs4dLRLhHFZ5UWBhg//9+moCAAIfXwIAAW2CAgAwzrUCAAIAnAIACpaeQ Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2015 02:40:04 +0000 Message-ID: References: <20150929151503.2931.97454.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <562A4F65-2A63-4D75-BCF6-6F6ECC77CC41@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US, zh-CN Content-Language: zh-CN X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.111.102.135] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Archived-At: Cc: "mpls@ietf.org" , "draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-reply-mode-simple.shepherd@ietf.org" , "draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-reply-mode-simple@ietf.org" , "mpls-chairs@ietf.org" , "draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-reply-mode-simple.ad@ietf.org" , The IESG , "rcallon@juniper.net" Subject: Re: [mpls] Kathleen Moriarty's Discuss on draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-reply-mode-simple-04: (with DISCUSS) X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2015 02:40:17 -0000 SGkgS2F0aGxlZW4sIEFsdmFybywgU3RlcGhlbiBhbmQgb3RoZXJzLA0KDQpNYW55IHRoYW5rcyBm b3IgeW91ciB2YWx1YWJsZSBjb21tZW50cyBhbmQgc3VnZ2VzdGlvbnMhDQoNCldlIGhhdmUgdXBs b2FkZWQgdGhlIHZlcmlvbi0wNSB0aGF0IGFkZHJlc3NlcyBhbGwgdGhlIGNvbW1lbnRzIHJlY2Vp dmVkIHNvIGZhciwgcGxlYXNlIHRha2UgYSBsb29rIGF0IGl0Lg0KDQpCZXN0IHJlZ2FyZHMsDQpN YWNoDQoNClBTOiANCmh0dHBzOi8vdG9vbHMuaWV0Zi5vcmcvaHRtbC9kcmFmdC1pZXRmLW1wbHMt bHNwLXBpbmctcmVwbHktbW9kZS1zaW1wbGUtMDUNCg0KDQo+IC0tLS0tT3JpZ2luYWwgTWVzc2Fn ZS0tLS0tDQo+IEZyb206IEthdGhsZWVuIE1vcmlhcnR5IFttYWlsdG86a2F0aGxlZW4ubW9yaWFy dHkuaWV0ZkBnbWFpbC5jb21dDQo+IFNlbnQ6IEZyaWRheSwgT2N0b2JlciAwOSwgMjAxNSAyOjEx IEFNDQo+IFRvOiBNYWNoIENoZW4NCj4gQ2M6IFRoZSBJRVNHOyBkcmFmdC1pZXRmLW1wbHMtbHNw LXBpbmctcmVwbHktbW9kZS1zaW1wbGUuc2hlcGhlcmRAaWV0Zi5vcmc7DQo+IG1wbHMtY2hhaXJz QGlldGYub3JnOyBkcmFmdC1pZXRmLW1wbHMtbHNwLXBpbmctcmVwbHktbW9kZS1zaW1wbGVAaWV0 Zi5vcmc7DQo+IGRyYWZ0LWlldGYtbXBscy1sc3AtcGluZy1yZXBseS1tb2RlLXNpbXBsZS5hZEBp ZXRmLm9yZzsgcmNhbGxvbkBqdW5pcGVyLm5ldDsNCj4gbXBsc0BpZXRmLm9yZw0KPiBTdWJqZWN0 OiBSZTogS2F0aGxlZW4gTW9yaWFydHkncyBEaXNjdXNzIG9uDQo+IGRyYWZ0LWlldGYtbXBscy1s c3AtcGluZy1yZXBseS1tb2RlLXNpbXBsZS0wNDogKHdpdGggRElTQ1VTUykNCj4gDQo+IE9uIFdl ZCwgT2N0IDcsIDIwMTUgYXQgMTA6MzQgUE0sIE1hY2ggQ2hlbiA8bWFjaC5jaGVuQGh1YXdlaS5j b20+DQo+IHdyb3RlOg0KPiA+IEhpIEthdGhsZWVuLA0KPiA+DQo+ID4gU29ycnkgZm9yIHRoZSBk ZWxheWVkIHJlc3BvbnNlLCBqdXN0IHJldHVybmVkIGZyb20gdGhlIE5hdGlvbmFsIERheSBIb2xp ZGF5cyENCj4gPg0KPiA+IFdlIHdpbGwgdXBsb2FkIHRoZSB1cGRhdGVkIGRvY3VtZW50IHRoYXQg YWRkcmVzc2VzIGFsbCByZWNlaXZlZCBESVNTQ1VTDQo+IGFuZCBjb21tZW50cyBzbyBmYXIuDQo+ IA0KPiBUaGFuayB5b3UsIEknbGwgbG9vayBmb3IgdGhlIHVwZGF0ZSB0byBjb21lIHRocm91Z2gu ICBJIGhvcGUgeW91IGVuam95ZWQgeW91cg0KPiBob2xpZGF5cyENCj4gS2F0aGxlZW4NCj4gDQo+ IA0KPiA+DQo+ID4gVGhhbmtzLA0KPiA+IE1hY2gNCj4gPg0KPiA+PiAtLS0tLU9yaWdpbmFsIE1l c3NhZ2UtLS0tLQ0KPiA+PiBGcm9tOiBLYXRobGVlbiBNb3JpYXJ0eSBbbWFpbHRvOmthdGhsZWVu Lm1vcmlhcnR5LmlldGZAZ21haWwuY29tXQ0KPiA+PiBTZW50OiBUaHVyc2RheSwgT2N0b2JlciAw MSwgMjAxNSAxMjoxMiBBTQ0KPiA+PiBUbzogTWFjaCBDaGVuDQo+ID4+IENjOiBUaGUgSUVTRzsN Cj4gPj4gZHJhZnQtaWV0Zi1tcGxzLWxzcC1waW5nLXJlcGx5LW1vZGUtc2ltcGxlLnNoZXBoZXJk QGlldGYub3JnOw0KPiA+PiBtcGxzLWNoYWlyc0BpZXRmLm9yZzsNCj4gPj4gZHJhZnQtaWV0Zi1t cGxzLWxzcC1waW5nLXJlcGx5LW1vZGUtc2ltcGxlQGlldGYub3JnOw0KPiA+PiBkcmFmdC1pZXRm LW1wbHMtbHNwLXBpbmctcmVwbHktbW9kZS1zaW1wbGUuYWRAaWV0Zi5vcmc7DQo+ID4+IHJjYWxs b25AanVuaXBlci5uZXQ7IG1wbHNAaWV0Zi5vcmcNCj4gPj4gU3ViamVjdDogUmU6IEthdGhsZWVu IE1vcmlhcnR5J3MgRGlzY3VzcyBvbg0KPiA+PiBkcmFmdC1pZXRmLW1wbHMtbHNwLXBpbmctcmVw bHktbW9kZS1zaW1wbGUtMDQ6ICh3aXRoIERJU0NVU1MpDQo+ID4+DQo+ID4+IE9uIFR1ZSwgU2Vw IDI5LCAyMDE1IGF0IDExOjEzIFBNLCBNYWNoIENoZW4gPG1hY2guY2hlbkBodWF3ZWkuY29tPg0K PiA+PiB3cm90ZToNCj4gPj4gPiBIaSBLYXRobGVlbiwNCj4gPj4gPg0KPiA+PiA+IFRoYW5rcyBm b3IgeW91ciBwcm9tcHQgcmVzcG9uc2UhDQo+ID4+ID4NCj4gPj4gPiBQbGVhc2Ugc2VlIG15IHJl cGx5IGlubGluZS4uLg0KPiA+PiA+DQo+ID4+ID4+IC0tLS0tT3JpZ2luYWwgTWVzc2FnZS0tLS0t DQo+ID4+ID4+IEZyb206IEthdGhsZWVuIE1vcmlhcnR5IFttYWlsdG86a2F0aGxlZW4ubW9yaWFy dHkuaWV0ZkBnbWFpbC5jb21dDQo+ID4+ID4+IFNlbnQ6IFdlZG5lc2RheSwgU2VwdGVtYmVyIDMw LCAyMDE1IDEwOjM5IEFNDQo+ID4+ID4+IFRvOiBNYWNoIENoZW4NCj4gPj4gPj4gQ2M6IFRoZSBJ RVNHOw0KPiA+PiA+PiBkcmFmdC1pZXRmLW1wbHMtbHNwLXBpbmctcmVwbHktbW9kZS1zaW1wbGUu c2hlcGhlcmRAaWV0Zi5vcmc7DQo+ID4+ID4+IG1wbHMtY2hhaXJzQGlldGYub3JnOw0KPiA+PiA+ PiBkcmFmdC1pZXRmLW1wbHMtbHNwLXBpbmctcmVwbHktbW9kZS1zaW1wbGVAaWV0Zi5vcmc7DQo+ ID4+ID4+IGRyYWZ0LWlldGYtbXBscy1sc3AtcGluZy1yZXBseS1tb2RlLXNpbXBsZS5hZEBpZXRm Lm9yZzsNCj4gPj4gPj4gcmNhbGxvbkBqdW5pcGVyLm5ldDsgbXBsc0BpZXRmLm9yZw0KPiA+PiA+ PiBTdWJqZWN0OiBSZTogS2F0aGxlZW4gTW9yaWFydHkncyBEaXNjdXNzIG9uDQo+ID4+ID4+IGRy YWZ0LWlldGYtbXBscy1sc3AtcGluZy1yZXBseS1tb2RlLXNpbXBsZS0wNDogKHdpdGggRElTQ1VT UykNCj4gPj4gPj4NCj4gPj4gPj4gSGksDQo+ID4+ID4+DQo+ID4+ID4+IFRoYW5rcyBmb3Igc3Vn Z2VzdGluZyB0ZXh0IHF1aWNrbHkgdG8gYWRkcmVzcyB0aGlzLiAgSW5saW5lDQo+ID4+ID4+DQo+ ID4+ID4+IFNlbnQgZnJvbSBteSBpUGhvbmUNCj4gPj4gPj4NCj4gPj4gPj4gPiBPbiBTZXAgMjks IDIwMTUsIGF0IDEwOjI4IFBNLCBNYWNoIENoZW4gPG1hY2guY2hlbkBodWF3ZWkuY29tPg0KPiA+ PiA+PiB3cm90ZToNCj4gPj4gPj4gPg0KPiA+PiA+PiA+IEhpIEthdGhsZWVuLA0KPiA+PiA+PiA+ DQo+ID4+ID4+ID4gVGhhbmtzIGZvciByZXZpZXdpbmcgdGhlIGRyYWZ0IGFuZCB0aGUgc3VnZ2Vz dGlvbiENCj4gPj4gPj4gPg0KPiA+PiA+PiA+IFJlZ2FyZGluZyB0aGUgRElTQ1VTUywgaG93IGFi b3V0IHRoZSBmb2xsb3dpbmcgdXBkYXRlPw0KPiA+PiA+PiA+DQo+ID4+ID4+ID4gT0xEOg0KPiA+ PiA+PiA+IEJleW9uZCB0aG9zZSBzcGVjaWZpZWQgaW4gW1JGQzQzNzldIGFuZCBbUkZDNzExMF0s IHRoZXJlIGFyZSBubw0KPiA+PiA+PiA+IGZ1cnRoZXINCj4gPj4gPj4gc2VjdXJpdHkgbWVhc3Vy ZXMgcmVxdWlyZWQuDQo+ID4+ID4+ID4NCj4gPj4gPj4gPiBORVc6DQo+ID4+ID4+ID4gVGhvc2Ug c2VjdXJpdHkgY29uc2lkZXJhdGlvbnMgc3BlY2lmaWVkIGluIFtSRkM0Mzc5XSBhbmQNCj4gPj4g Pj4gPiBbUkZDNzExMF0gYXBwbHkgZm9yDQo+ID4+ID4+IHRoaXMgZG9jdW1lbnQuDQo+ID4+ID4+ ID4gSW4gYWRkaXRpb24sIHRoaXMgZG9jdW1lbnQgaW50cm9kdWNlcyB0aGUgUmVwbHkgTW9kZSBP cmRlciBUTFYuDQo+ID4+ID4+ID4gSXQgcHJvdmlkZXMgYQ0KPiA+PiA+PiBuZXcgd2F5IGZvciBh biB1bmF1dGhvcml6ZWQgc291cmNlIHRvIGdhdGhlciBtb3JlIG5ldHdvcmsNCj4gPj4gPj4gaW5m b3JtYXRpb24sIGVzcGVjaWFsbHkgdGhlIHBvdGVudGlhbCByZXR1cm4gcGF0aChzKSBpbmZvcm1h dGlvbg0KPiA+PiA+PiBvZiBhbiBMU1AuIFRvIHByb3RlY3QgYWdhaW5zdCB1bmF1dGhvcml6ZWQg c291cmNlcyB1c2luZyBNUExTIGVjaG8NCj4gPj4gPj4gcmVxdWVzdCBtZXNzYWdlcyB3aXRoIHRo ZSBSZXBseSBNb2RlIE9yZGVyIFRMViB0byBvYnRhaW4gbmV0d29yaw0KPiA+PiA+PiBpbmZvcm1h dGlvbiwgc2ltaWxhciB0byBbUkZDNDM3OV0sIGl0IGlzIFJFQ09NTUVOREVEIHRoYXQNCj4gPj4g Pj4gaW1wbGVtZW50YXRpb25zIHByb3ZpZGUgYSBtZWFucyBvZiBjaGVja2luZyB0aGUgc291cmNl IGFkZHJlc3Nlcw0KPiA+PiA+PiBvZiBNUExTIGVjaG8gcmVxdWVzdCBtZXNzYWdlcyBhZ2FpbnN0 IGFuIGFjY2VzcyBsaXN0IGJlZm9yZQ0KPiA+PiA+PiBhY2NlcHRpbmcgdGhlDQo+ID4+IG1lc3Nh Z2UuDQo+ID4+ID4+DQo+ID4+ID4+IElmIHRoZSBtZXNzYWdlIGlzIG5vdCBlbmNyeXB0ZWQsIHRo aXMgY29udGVudCBpcyBzdGlsbCBleHBvc2VkDQo+ID4+ID4+IHBvdGVudGlhbGx5LA0KPiA+PiBy aWdodD8NCj4gPj4gPg0KPiA+PiA+IFllcywgYnV0IGl0IGlzIGV4cG9zZWQgd2l0aGluIHRoZSBN UExTIGRvbWFpbi4NCj4gPj4gPg0KPiA+PiA+PiBUaGlzIGhlbHBzLCBidXQgYWxzbyBtZW50aW9u aW5nIGxhY2sgb2YgY29uZmlkZW50aWFsaXR5IHByb3RlY3Rpb24NCj4gPj4gPj4gbWlnaHQgYmUg aGVscGZ1bCB0b28uDQo+ID4+ID4NCj4gPj4gPiBJJ20gbm90IHN1cmUgd2hldGhlciB0aGlzIGlz c3VlIGlzIHNwZWNpZmljIHRvIHRoaXMgZG9jdW1lbnQsIHNlZW1zDQo+ID4+ID4gdGhpcyBpcyBh DQo+ID4+IGNvbW1vbiBpc3N1ZSBmb3IgTVBMUyBPQU0gYW5kIGNvbnRyb2wgcGxhbmUuDQo+ID4+ ID4NCj4gPj4gPiBJZiB0aGlzIGlzIGEgY29uY2VybiwgaG93IGFib3V0IGFkZGluZyB0aGUgZm9s bG93aW5nIHRleHQ6DQo+ID4+ID4gIg0KPiA+PiA+IEFub3RoZXIgcG90ZW50aWFsIHNlY3VyaXR5 IGlzc3VlIGlzIHRoYXQgdGhlIE1QTFMgZWNobyByZXF1ZXN0IGFuZA0KPiA+PiA+ICAgIHJlcGx5 IG1lc3NhZ2VzIGFyZSBub3QgZW5jcnlwdGVkLCB0aGUgY29udGVudCBvZiB0aGUgTVBMUyBlY2hv DQo+ID4+ID4gICAgcmVxdWVzdCBhbmQgcmVwbHkgbWVzc2FnZXMgbWF5IGJlIHBvdGVudGlhbGx5 IGV4cG9zZWQuIEFsdGhvdWdoIHRoZQ0KPiA+PiA+ICAgIGV4cG9zdXJlIGlzIHdpdGhpbiB0aGUg TVBMUyBkb21haW4sIGlmIHN1Y2ggZXhwb3N1cmUgaXMgYSBjb25jZXJuLA0KPiA+PiA+ICAgIHNv bWUgZW5jcnlwdGlvbiBtZWNoYW5pc21zIG1heSBiZSBlbXBsb3llZC4NCj4gPj4gPiAiDQo+ID4+ DQo+ID4+IFRoaXMgYWRkaXRpb25hbCB0ZXh0IHB1dHMgaW50IGhlIGNhdmVhdCB0aGF0IHlvdSBh cmUgY29uY2VybmVkIHdpdGgNCj4gPj4gYW5kIGxpbWl0cyB0aGUgc2NvcGUgdG8gdGhlIE1QTFMg ZG9tYWluLCBzbyBJIHRoaW5rIHRoYXQgaXMgaGVscGZ1bA0KPiA+PiBvbiBib3RoIGZyb250cy4g IFRoZSB0d28gY29tYmluZWQgd291bGQgY292ZXIgYW55IGFkZGl0aW9uYWwNCj4gPj4gY29uc2lk ZXJhdGlvbnMgZm9yIHRoaXMgZHJhZnQgbmljZWx5LCB0aGFuayB5b3UuDQo+ID4+DQo+ID4+IFBs ZWFzZSBsZXQgbWUga25vdyB3aGVuIHRoZSB1cGRhdGVkIHRleHQgaGFzIGJlZW4gaW5jb3Jwb3Jh dGVkIGFuZCBJDQo+ID4+IHdpbGwgY2xlYXIuDQo+ID4+DQo+ID4+IFRoYW5rcywNCj4gPj4gS2F0 aGxlZW4NCj4gPj4gPg0KPiA+PiA+IEJlc3QgcmVnYXJkcywNCj4gPj4gPiBNYWNoDQo+ID4+ID4N Cj4gPj4gPj4NCj4gPj4gPj4gVGhhbmsgeW91LA0KPiA+PiA+PiBLYXRobGVlbg0KPiA+PiA+Pg0K PiA+PiA+PiA+DQo+ID4+ID4+ID4NCj4gPj4gPj4gPiBCZXN0IHJlZ2FyZHMsDQo+ID4+ID4+ID4g TWFjaA0KPiA+PiA+PiA+DQo+ID4+ID4+ID4NCj4gPj4gPj4gPj4gLS0tLS1PcmlnaW5hbCBNZXNz YWdlLS0tLS0NCj4gPj4gPj4gPj4gRnJvbTogS2F0aGxlZW4gTW9yaWFydHkNCj4gPj4gPj4gPj4g W21haWx0bzpLYXRobGVlbi5Nb3JpYXJ0eS5pZXRmQGdtYWlsLmNvbV0NCj4gPj4gPj4gPj4gU2Vu dDogVHVlc2RheSwgU2VwdGVtYmVyIDI5LCAyMDE1IDExOjE1IFBNDQo+ID4+ID4+ID4+IFRvOiBU aGUgSUVTRw0KPiA+PiA+PiA+PiBDYzoNCj4gPj4gPj4gPj4gZHJhZnQtaWV0Zi1tcGxzLWxzcC1w aW5nLXJlcGx5LW1vZGUtc2ltcGxlLnNoZXBoZXJkQGlldGYub3JnOw0KPiA+PiA+PiA+PiBtcGxz LWNoYWlyc0BpZXRmLm9yZzsNCj4gPj4gPj4gPj4gZHJhZnQtaWV0Zi1tcGxzLWxzcC1waW5nLXJl cGx5LW1vZGUtc2ltcGxlQGlldGYub3JnOw0KPiA+PiA+PiA+PiBkcmFmdC1pZXRmLW1wbHMtbHNw LXBpbmctcmVwbHktbW9kZS1zaW1wbGUuYWRAaWV0Zi5vcmc7DQo+ID4+ID4+ID4+IHJjYWxsb25A anVuaXBlci5uZXQ7IG1wbHNAaWV0Zi5vcmcNCj4gPj4gPj4gPj4gU3ViamVjdDogS2F0aGxlZW4g TW9yaWFydHkncyBEaXNjdXNzIG9uDQo+ID4+ID4+ID4+IGRyYWZ0LWlldGYtbXBscy1sc3AtcGlu Zy1yZXBseS1tb2RlLXNpbXBsZS0wNDogKHdpdGggRElTQ1VTUykNCj4gPj4gPj4gPj4NCj4gPj4g Pj4gPj4gS2F0aGxlZW4gTW9yaWFydHkgaGFzIGVudGVyZWQgdGhlIGZvbGxvd2luZyBiYWxsb3Qg cG9zaXRpb24gZm9yDQo+ID4+ID4+ID4+IGRyYWZ0LWlldGYtbXBscy1sc3AtcGluZy1yZXBseS1t b2RlLXNpbXBsZS0wNDogRGlzY3Vzcw0KPiA+PiA+PiA+Pg0KPiA+PiA+PiA+PiBXaGVuIHJlc3Bv bmRpbmcsIHBsZWFzZSBrZWVwIHRoZSBzdWJqZWN0IGxpbmUgaW50YWN0IGFuZCByZXBseQ0KPiA+ PiA+PiA+PiB0byBhbGwgZW1haWwgYWRkcmVzc2VzIGluY2x1ZGVkIGluIHRoZSBUbyBhbmQgQ0Mg bGluZXMuIChGZWVsDQo+ID4+ID4+ID4+IGZyZWUgdG8gY3V0IHRoaXMgaW50cm9kdWN0b3J5IHBh cmFncmFwaCwgaG93ZXZlci4pDQo+ID4+ID4+ID4+DQo+ID4+ID4+ID4+DQo+ID4+ID4+ID4+IFBs ZWFzZSByZWZlciB0bw0KPiA+PiA+PiA+PiBodHRwczovL3d3dy5pZXRmLm9yZy9pZXNnL3N0YXRl bWVudC9kaXNjdXNzLWNyaXRlcmlhLmh0bWwNCj4gPj4gPj4gPj4gZm9yIG1vcmUgaW5mb3JtYXRp b24gYWJvdXQgSUVTRyBESVNDVVNTIGFuZCBDT01NRU5UIHBvc2l0aW9ucy4NCj4gPj4gPj4gPj4N Cj4gPj4gPj4gPj4NCj4gPj4gPj4gPj4gVGhlIGRvY3VtZW50LCBhbG9uZyB3aXRoIG90aGVyIGJh bGxvdCBwb3NpdGlvbnMsIGNhbiBiZSBmb3VuZCBoZXJlOg0KPiA+PiA+PiA+PiBodHRwczovL2Rh dGF0cmFja2VyLmlldGYub3JnL2RvYy9kcmFmdC1pZXRmLW1wbHMtbHNwLXBpbmctcmVwbHkNCj4g Pj4gPj4gPj4gLW1vDQo+ID4+ID4+ID4+IGRlLQ0KPiA+PiA+PiA+PiBzaW1wbGUvDQo+ID4+ID4+ ID4+DQo+ID4+ID4+ID4+DQo+ID4+ID4+ID4+DQo+ID4+ID4+ID4+IC0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0t LS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLQ0KPiA+PiA+PiA+ PiAtLS0NCj4gPj4gPj4gPj4gLS0tDQo+ID4+ID4+ID4+IC0NCj4gPj4gPj4gPj4gRElTQ1VTUzoN Cj4gPj4gPj4gPj4gLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0t LS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tDQo+ID4+ID4+ID4+IC0tLQ0KPiA+PiA+PiA+PiAtLS0NCj4gPj4g Pj4gPj4gLQ0KPiA+PiA+PiA+Pg0KPiA+PiA+PiA+PiBUaGlzIHNob3VsZCBiZSBlYXN5IHRvIHJl c29sdmUuICBTSW5jZSB0aGlzIGRyYWZ0IGFkZHMgYSBuZXcNCj4gPj4gPj4gPj4gY2FwYWJpbGl0 eSB0byBpbmNsdWRlIHRoZSByZXR1cm4gcGF0aCwgdGhpcyBwcm92aWRlcyBhbm90aGVyDQo+ID4+ ID4+ID4+IGF0dGFjayB2ZWN0b3IgdG8gb2JzZXJ2ZSBwYXRoIGluZm9ybWF0aW9uIHRoYXQgY291 bGQgYmUgcGFydCBvZg0KPiA+PiA+PiA+PiByZWNvbm5haXNzYW5jZSBnYXRoZXJpbmcgdG8gbGF0 ZXIgYXR0YWNrIHRoZSBuZXR3b3JrIG9yIHBhdGguDQo+ID4+ID4+ID4+IFdoaWxlIHRoZSByZWZl cmVuY2VkIFJGQzQzNzkgbWVudGlvbnMgdGhlIGZvbGxvd2luZyBpbiB0aGUNCj4gPj4gPj4gPj4g c2VjdXJpdHkNCj4gPj4gPj4gY29uc2lkZXJhdGlvbnMgc2VjdGlvbjoNCj4gPj4gPj4gPj4NCj4g Pj4gPj4gPj4gICBUaGUgdGhpcmQgaXMgYW4NCj4gPj4gPj4gPj4gICB1bmF1dGhvcml6ZWQgc291 cmNlIHVzaW5nIGFuIExTUCBwaW5nIHRvIG9idGFpbiBpbmZvcm1hdGlvbiBhYm91dA0KPiB0aGUN Cj4gPj4gPj4gPj4gICBuZXR3b3JrLg0KPiA+PiA+PiA+Pg0KPiA+PiA+PiA+PiBUaGUgZXF1aXZh bGVudCBzaG91bGQgYmUgYWRkZWQgZm9yIHRoaXMgbmV3IGNhcGFiaWxpdHkgaW4gdGhpcw0KPiA+ PiA+PiA+PiBkcmFmdCwgc2luY2Ugbm93IGl0J3MgcG9zc2libGUgdG8gZ2F0aGVyIHRoZSBwYXRo IGluZm9ybWF0aW9uDQo+ID4+ID4+ID4+IGZyb20gdGhlIG5ldw0KPiA+PiBmZWF0dXJlLg0KPiA+ PiA+PiA+DQo+ID4+DQo+ID4+DQo+ID4+DQo+ID4+IC0tDQo+ID4+DQo+ID4+IEJlc3QgcmVnYXJk cywNCj4gPj4gS2F0aGxlZW4NCj4gDQo+IA0KPiANCj4gLS0NCj4gDQo+IEJlc3QgcmVnYXJkcywN Cj4gS2F0aGxlZW4NCg== From nobody Fri Oct 9 19:46:29 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7BB111B5378; Fri, 9 Oct 2015 19:46:27 -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] autolearn=ham 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 b0kBIowMhl-E; Fri, 9 Oct 2015 19:46:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 750031B537D; Fri, 9 Oct 2015 19:46:24 -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: 6.4.2 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <20151010024624.12022.77827.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Fri, 09 Oct 2015 19:46:24 -0700 Archived-At: Cc: mpls@ietf.org Subject: [mpls] I-D Action: draft-ietf-mpls-tp-shared-ring-protection-00.txt X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2015 02:46:27 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Multiprotocol Label Switching Working Group of the IETF. Title : MPLS-TP Shared-Ring protection (MSRP) mechanism for ring topology Authors : Weiqiang Cheng Lei Wang Han Li Huub van Helvoort Kai Liu Jie Dong Jia He Fang Li Jian Yang Junfang Wang Filename : draft-ietf-mpls-tp-shared-ring-protection-00.txt Pages : 46 Date : 2015-10-09 Abstract: This document describes requirements, architecture and solutions for MPLS-TP Shared Ring Protection (MSRP) in the ring topology for point- to-point (P2P) services. The mechanism of MSRP is illustrated and how it satisfies the requirements for optimized ring protection in RFC 5654 is analyzed. This document also defines the Ring Protection Switch (RPS) Protocol which is used to coordinate the protection behavior of the nodes on MPLS ring. The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-mpls-tp-shared-ring-protection/ There's also a htmlized version available at: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-mpls-tp-shared-ring-protection-00 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 Sat Oct 10 20:04:19 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E60F1ACDD4; Sat, 10 Oct 2015 20:04:18 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.91 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham 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 4t8w8Lo8ItPO; Sat, 10 Oct 2015 20:04:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pipi.pi.nu (pipi.pi.nu [83.168.239.141]) (using TLSv1.1 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 40E861ACDD3; Sat, 10 Oct 2015 20:04:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.10] (unknown [49.149.195.95]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: loa@pi.nu) by pipi.pi.nu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 00F8F18013BE; Sun, 11 Oct 2015 05:04:13 +0200 (CEST) To: "mpls@ietf.org" From: Loa Andersson Message-ID: <5619D1A4.8050401@pi.nu> Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2015 11:04:04 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: Cc: "mpls-chairs@ietf.org" , "draft-chandra-mpls-ri-rsvp-frr@ietf.org" Subject: [mpls] IPR poll on draft-chandra-mpls-ri-rsvp-frr X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2015 03:04:18 -0000 Working Group, The authors of draft-chandra-mpls-ri-rsvp-frr has told us that the document is ready for working adoption. Before we start the wgap we will do an IPR poll. This mail starts the IPR poll. Are you aware of any IPR that applies to draft-chandra-mpls-ri-rsvp-frr? If so, has this IPR been disclosed in compliance with IETF IPR rules (see RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669 and 5378 for more details). There is one IPR disclosures filed against this document. If you are listed as a document author or contributor please respond to this email regardless of whether or not you are aware of any relevant IPR. *The response needs to be sent to the MPLS wg mailing list.* The document will not advance to the next stage until a response has been received from each author and contributor. If you are on the MPLS WG email list but are not listed as an author or contributor, then please explicitly respond only if you are aware of any IPR that has not yet been disclosed in conformance with IETF rules. /Loa mpls wg co-chair -- Loa Andersson email: loa@mail01.huawei.com Senior MPLS Expert loa@pi.nu Huawei Technologies (consultant) phone: +46 739 81 21 64 From nobody Sun Oct 11 10:19:53 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 409041B2B9A; Sun, 11 Oct 2015 10:19:51 -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] autolearn=ham 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 0jiMcvNoSPRb; Sun, 11 Oct 2015 10:19:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 00DB21B2B93; Sun, 11 Oct 2015 10:19:50 -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: 6.4.2 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <20151011171949.29653.53228.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2015 10:19:49 -0700 Archived-At: Cc: mpls@ietf.org Subject: [mpls] I-D Action: draft-smack-mpls-rfc4379bis-07.txt X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2015 17:19:51 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Multiprotocol Label Switching Working Group of the IETF. Title : Detecting Multi-Protocol Label Switched (MPLS) Data Plane Failures Authors : Carlos Pignataro Nagendra Kumar Sam Aldrin Mach(Guoyi) Chen Filename : draft-smack-mpls-rfc4379bis-07.txt Pages : 51 Date : 2015-10-11 Abstract: This document describes a simple and efficient mechanism that can be used to detect data plane failures in Multi-Protocol Label Switching (MPLS) Label Switched Paths (LSPs). There are two parts to this document: information carried in an MPLS "echo request" and "echo reply" for the purposes of fault detection and isolation, and mechanisms for reliably sending the echo reply. This document obsoletes RFC 4379. The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-smack-mpls-rfc4379bis/ There's also a htmlized version available at: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-smack-mpls-rfc4379bis-07 A diff from the previous version is available at: https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-smack-mpls-rfc4379bis-07 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 Sun Oct 11 10:22:52 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A62D11B2BA5 for ; Sun, 11 Oct 2015 10:22:51 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -14.511 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.511 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, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham 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 qBeU-xP8aseU for ; Sun, 11 Oct 2015 10:22:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from alln-iport-5.cisco.com (alln-iport-5.cisco.com [173.37.142.92]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 43E7D1B2BA4 for ; Sun, 11 Oct 2015 10:22:50 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1953; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1444584170; x=1445793770; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:content-id: content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=pzb8A8DsA548fp/ET917QialNEQn30BpnT0b4YW6aJk=; b=Gyx2ulTN0Gg5/zdWWBkGEVRLTLvjaPh82kAU5+KnsnaKhuG+krwcMtUT /RtV9HH5tte0mYsmEG1/EfdNLPmqzHM7h5PH5dR20BTFIrclG3u7+Ticr fzq8gBeiT/ueEYdnPs/qKd6ElMdgsKaPoxTVQV+68orTtHfANhjU1TaBS g=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0D0AgB9mhpW/4QNJK1egyZUbga9bAENgVoXCoJyggp/AoEYOBQBAQEBAQEBfwuEJwEBBAEBATctBx0BCDY3CyUCBBOILg2dK6MzAQEBAQEBAQMBAQEBAQEBARqLcYUUhC4FlhMBhRiIAYFYSINylXABHwEBQoQCcYZkgQYBAQE X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.17,667,1437436800"; d="scan'208";a="196654373" Received: from alln-core-10.cisco.com ([173.36.13.132]) by alln-iport-5.cisco.com with ESMTP; 11 Oct 2015 17:22:49 +0000 Received: from XCH-ALN-012.cisco.com (xch-aln-012.cisco.com [173.36.7.22]) by alln-core-10.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id t9BHMna3027165 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL) for ; Sun, 11 Oct 2015 17:22:49 GMT Received: from xch-rcd-015.cisco.com (173.37.102.25) by XCH-ALN-012.cisco.com (173.36.7.22) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1104.5; Sun, 11 Oct 2015 12:22:37 -0500 Received: from xch-rcd-015.cisco.com ([173.37.102.25]) by XCH-RCD-015.cisco.com ([173.37.102.25]) with mapi id 15.00.1104.000; Sun, 11 Oct 2015 12:22:37 -0500 From: "Nagendra Kumar Nainar (naikumar)" To: "mpls@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [mpls] I-D Action: draft-smack-mpls-rfc4379bis-07.txt Thread-Index: AQHRBEkKCSOy+oZNukKo41W0bn97Rp5mmxIA Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2015 17:22:37 +0000 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <20151011171949.29653.53228.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.3.8.130913 x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1 x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted x-originating-ip: [10.82.216.156] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [mpls] I-D Action: draft-smack-mpls-rfc4379bis-07.txt X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2015 17:22:51 -0000 Hi WG, This is a new version with updates from RFC7506. Thanks, Nagendra On 10/11/15, 1:19 PM, "internet-drafts@ietf.org" wrote: > >A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts >directories. > This draft is a work item of the Multiprotocol Label Switching Working >Group of the IETF. > > Title : Detecting Multi-Protocol Label Switched (MPLS) >Data Plane Failures > Authors : Carlos Pignataro > Nagendra Kumar > Sam Aldrin > Mach(Guoyi) Chen > Filename : draft-smack-mpls-rfc4379bis-07.txt > Pages : 51 > Date : 2015-10-11 > >Abstract: > This document describes a simple and efficient mechanism that can be > used to detect data plane failures in Multi-Protocol Label Switching > (MPLS) Label Switched Paths (LSPs). There are two parts to this > document: information carried in an MPLS "echo request" and "echo > reply" for the purposes of fault detection and isolation, and > mechanisms for reliably sending the echo reply. > > This document obsoletes RFC 4379. > > >The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: >https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-smack-mpls-rfc4379bis/ > >There's also a htmlized version available at: >https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-smack-mpls-rfc4379bis-07 > >A diff from the previous version is available at: >https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=3Ddraft-smack-mpls-rfc4379bis-07 > > >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/ > >_______________________________________________ >mpls mailing list >mpls@ietf.org >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From nobody Sun Oct 11 22:32:55 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D00BF1B316D for ; Sun, 11 Oct 2015 22:32:54 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.901 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 7pa_XtdN77sj for ; Sun, 11 Oct 2015 22:32:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from emea01-db3-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-db3on0787.outbound.protection.outlook.com [IPv6:2a01:111:f400:fe04::787]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E30431B316A for ; Sun, 11 Oct 2015 22:32:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from DB3PR03MB0780.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com (10.161.55.12) by DB3PR03MB0778.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com (10.161.54.28) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.293.16; Mon, 12 Oct 2015 05:32:26 +0000 Received: from DB3PR03MB0780.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com ([10.161.55.12]) by DB3PR03MB0780.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com ([10.161.55.12]) with mapi id 15.01.0293.007; Mon, 12 Oct 2015 05:32:26 +0000 From: Alexander Vainshtein To: "Nagendra Kumar Nainar (naikumar)" Thread-Topic: [mpls] I-D Action: draft-smack-mpls-rfc4379bis-07.txt Thread-Index: AQHRBEkRwB80wDQD2U6tcoxWr2tIQ55mikaAgADKZyk= Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2015 05:32:26 +0000 Message-ID: References: <20151011171949.29653.53228.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>, In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=Alexander.Vainshtein@ecitele.com; x-originating-ip: [5.153.9.203] x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; DB3PR03MB0778; 5:yX6DQISsjC1MYYrNkl6j592knO5sXTBn5riMFWJsQSRfOhxj82VxB5N/CAS36YrbBM1W+abVQB91ndKMC0NdPCoo5LBxY9eMFGzk+uzuFC1/zHFRspExxsBhCt3+7IqRi3z7qCDPHewV8xuS1MBgzQ==; 24:MxWmntHc0e7ndgf7iQp8jbFHABmeyI0eC0OOkx7o7EFAnezZHUPXTmuOA0A43IFtksPTXXD3fsZdrvFJbUYn2yqrnADMGeCW7R62GAB7bYA=; 20:EDBPPa8yLvFxssHn6HPcBuf0WE+dCRnhAzrLw8M/xwSMZp/vrGSFp4yA8FlaeZAQ2ZcLpu8lXOZYppNyE3xpPA== x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:DB3PR03MB0778; x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:(95692535739014); x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(601004)(2401047)(520078)(5005006)(8121501046)(3002001); SRVR:DB3PR03MB0778; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:DB3PR03MB0778; x-forefront-prvs: 0727122FC6 x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(6009001)(199003)(377454003)(24454002)(164054003)(189002)(377424004)(479174004)(2950100001)(105586002)(64706001)(2900100001)(5001960100002)(81156007)(5007970100001)(19580405001)(71446004)(19580395003)(77096005)(33656002)(15975445007)(102836002)(5004730100002)(5003600100002)(106116001)(11100500001)(87936001)(106356001)(97736004)(101416001)(4001150100001)(66066001)(76576001)(76176999)(74316001)(54356999)(40100003)(50986999)(92566002)(122556002)(110136002)(5001920100001)(5002640100001)(5008740100001)(10400500002)(230783001)(46102003)(189998001)(86362001); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:DB3PR03MB0778; H:DB3PR03MB0780.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; A:1; MX:1; LANG:en; received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: ecitele.com does not designate permitted sender hosts) spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:23 spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: ecitele.com X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 12 Oct 2015 05:32:26.2185 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 2c514a61-08de-4519-b4c0-921fef62c42a X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: DB3PR03MB0778 Archived-At: Cc: "mpls@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [mpls] I-D Action: draft-smack-mpls-rfc4379bis-07.txt X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2015 05:32:55 -0000 Nagendra, This is a good job. To the best of my recollection this was the last remain= ing update that did not require discussion with the WG. My guess (FWIW) is that the draft is ripe for adoption so that the WG can = start handling the updates that really require in-depth discussion as all t= he "easy" parts have been already cleared by the authors. Regards, Sasha ________________________________________ From: mpls on behalf of Nagendra Kumar Nainar (naik= umar) Sent: Sunday, October 11, 2015 8:22 PM To: mpls@ietf.org Subject: Re: [mpls] I-D Action: draft-smack-mpls-rfc4379bis-07.txt Hi WG, This is a new version with updates from RFC7506. Thanks, Nagendra On 10/11/15, 1:19 PM, "internet-drafts@ietf.org" wrote: > >A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts >directories. > This draft is a work item of the Multiprotocol Label Switching Working >Group of the IETF. > > Title : Detecting Multi-Protocol Label Switched (MPLS) >Data Plane Failures > Authors : Carlos Pignataro > Nagendra Kumar > Sam Aldrin > Mach(Guoyi) Chen > Filename : draft-smack-mpls-rfc4379bis-07.txt > Pages : 51 > Date : 2015-10-11 > >Abstract: > This document describes a simple and efficient mechanism that can be > used to detect data plane failures in Multi-Protocol Label Switching > (MPLS) Label Switched Paths (LSPs). There are two parts to this > document: information carried in an MPLS "echo request" and "echo > reply" for the purposes of fault detection and isolation, and > mechanisms for reliably sending the echo reply. > > This document obsoletes RFC 4379. > > >The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: >https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-smack-mpls-rfc4379bis/ > >There's also a htmlized version available at: >https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-smack-mpls-rfc4379bis-07 > >A diff from the previous version is available at: >https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=3Ddraft-smack-mpls-rfc4379bis-07 > > >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/ > >_______________________________________________ >mpls mailing list >mpls@ietf.org >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From nobody Mon Oct 12 23:04:42 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C3B61B38D9; Mon, 12 Oct 2015 23:04:41 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.902 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.902 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 25OoYGULSXn4; Mon, 12 Oct 2015 23:04:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from na01-bn1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-bn1bon0775.outbound.protection.outlook.com [IPv6:2a01:111:f400:fc10::1:775]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9AA271B38D6; Mon, 12 Oct 2015 23:04:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from BN3PR0501MB1377.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.160.117.11) by BN3PR0501MB1377.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.160.117.11) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.293.16; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 06:04:19 +0000 Received: from BN3PR0501MB1377.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([10.160.117.11]) by BN3PR0501MB1377.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([10.160.117.11]) with mapi id 15.01.0293.007; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 06:04:19 +0000 From: Chandrasekar Ramachandran To: Loa Andersson , "mpls@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: IPR poll on draft-chandra-mpls-ri-rsvp-frr Thread-Index: AQHRA9GHJKP6kX4AqUSSzaS6ow0zh55o7fqQ Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2015 06:04:19 +0000 Message-ID: References: <5619D1A4.8050401@pi.nu> In-Reply-To: <5619D1A4.8050401@pi.nu> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=csekar@juniper.net; x-originating-ip: [116.197.184.14] x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; BN3PR0501MB1377; 5:CNGsYs8PyO46pdiY+e/9k6b25hNLMv5ThLKxoPtqUQ9FcIZarrNbJ8DhCk8j65BD96ccyseBp0mDQPAeeXU1O/vpq4EGZEEULZT8HLVFsMLXgXoBfxxDkPxTINzdpHSjcgU4ezd7uLSM31UQM2le8w==; 24:g1CQ6Z3xGoVhlpeQpy4PcKUKzvhnozluiFOIbX00JtXViBT1Zliz2YzI2OmZl4G5HJQoeBYYl7lU6qv/YeuO3O2f5ZWqD0SctaQlzTkpfsg=; 20:8gTZvbJRH82ZA7/j55aeraofeErNhYMS6jS3ZXAdacMwE6LN7QJN8y2y5OSVSl56fzrV5gXhdmegCdI32hBcnw== x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:BN3PR0501MB1377; x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:(97927398514766); x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(601004)(2401047)(5005006)(520078)(8121501046)(3002001); SRVR:BN3PR0501MB1377; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:BN3PR0501MB1377; x-forefront-prvs: 07283408BE x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(6009001)(13464003)(199003)(252514010)(189002)(377454003)(40100003)(74316001)(122556002)(2501003)(105586002)(106116001)(99286002)(106356001)(92566002)(50986999)(97736004)(54356999)(81156007)(87936001)(11100500001)(33656002)(76176999)(5007970100001)(86362001)(19580405001)(189998001)(5001960100002)(5002640100001)(5003600100002)(64706001)(19580395003)(5001770100001)(5008740100001)(66066001)(46102003)(2900100001)(77096005)(10400500002)(101416001)(2950100001)(102836002)(76576001)(15975445007)(230783001)(5004730100002)(42262002); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:BN3PR0501MB1377; H:BN3PR0501MB1377.namprd05.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; A:1; MX:1; LANG:en; received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: juniper.net does not designate permitted sender hosts) spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:23 spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: juniper.net X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 13 Oct 2015 06:04:19.5643 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: bea78b3c-4cdb-4130-854a-1d193232e5f4 X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BN3PR0501MB1377 Archived-At: Cc: "mpls-chairs@ietf.org" , "draft-chandra-mpls-ri-rsvp-frr@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [mpls] IPR poll on draft-chandra-mpls-ri-rsvp-frr X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2015 06:04:41 -0000 VGhlcmUgaXMgYW4gSVBSIHRoYXQgaGFzIGFscmVhZHkgYmVlbiBkaXNjbG9zZWQgYXMgcGVyIHRo ZSBJUFIgcHJvY2VzcyAodXJsIGdpdmVuIGJlbG93KS4NCmh0dHBzOi8vZGF0YXRyYWNrZXIuaWV0 Zi5vcmcvaXByLzI1ODAvDQoNCkkgYW0gbm90IGF3YXJlIG9mIGFueSBJUFIsIHRoYXQgYXBwbGll cyB0byB0aGlzIGRyYWZ0LCBvdGhlciB0aGFuIHRoZSBvbmUgYWxyZWFkeSBkaXNjbG9zZWQuDQoN Cj4gLS0tLS1PcmlnaW5hbCBNZXNzYWdlLS0tLS0NCj4gRnJvbTogTG9hIEFuZGVyc3NvbiBbbWFp bHRvOmxvYUBwaS5udV0NCj4gU2VudDogU3VuZGF5LCBPY3RvYmVyIDExLCAyMDE1IDg6MzQgQU0N Cj4gVG86IG1wbHNAaWV0Zi5vcmcNCj4gQ2M6IG1wbHMtY2hhaXJzQGlldGYub3JnOyBkcmFmdC1j aGFuZHJhLW1wbHMtcmktcnN2cC1mcnJAaWV0Zi5vcmc7DQo+IEJSVU5HQVJELCBERUJPUkFIIEEg PGRiMzU0NkBhdHQuY29tPg0KPiBTdWJqZWN0OiBJUFIgcG9sbCBvbiBkcmFmdC1jaGFuZHJhLW1w bHMtcmktcnN2cC1mcnINCj4gDQo+IFdvcmtpbmcgR3JvdXAsDQo+IA0KPiBUaGUgYXV0aG9ycyBv ZiBkcmFmdC1jaGFuZHJhLW1wbHMtcmktcnN2cC1mcnIgaGFzIHRvbGQgdXMgdGhhdA0KPiB0aGUg ZG9jdW1lbnQgaXMgcmVhZHkgZm9yIHdvcmtpbmcgYWRvcHRpb24uDQo+IA0KPiBCZWZvcmUgd2Ug c3RhcnQgdGhlIHdnYXAgd2Ugd2lsbCBkbyBhbiBJUFIgcG9sbC4NCj4gDQo+IA0KPiBUaGlzIG1h aWwgc3RhcnRzIHRoZSBJUFIgcG9sbC4NCj4gDQo+IEFyZSB5b3UgYXdhcmUgb2YgYW55IElQUiB0 aGF0IGFwcGxpZXMgdG8gZHJhZnQtY2hhbmRyYS1tcGxzLXJpLXJzdnAtZnJyPw0KPiANCj4gSWYg c28sIGhhcyB0aGlzIElQUiBiZWVuIGRpc2Nsb3NlZCBpbiBjb21wbGlhbmNlIHdpdGggSUVURiBJ UFIgcnVsZXMNCj4gKHNlZSBSRkNzIDM5NzksIDQ4NzksIDM2NjkgYW5kIDUzNzggZm9yIG1vcmUg ZGV0YWlscykuDQo+IA0KPiBUaGVyZSBpcyBvbmUgSVBSIGRpc2Nsb3N1cmVzIGZpbGVkIGFnYWlu c3QgdGhpcyBkb2N1bWVudC4NCj4gDQo+IElmIHlvdSBhcmUgbGlzdGVkIGFzIGEgZG9jdW1lbnQg YXV0aG9yIG9yIGNvbnRyaWJ1dG9yIHBsZWFzZSByZXNwb25kIHRvDQo+IHRoaXMgZW1haWwgcmVn YXJkbGVzcyBvZiB3aGV0aGVyIG9yIG5vdCB5b3UgYXJlIGF3YXJlIG9mIGFueSByZWxldmFudA0K PiBJUFIuICpUaGUgcmVzcG9uc2UgbmVlZHMgdG8gYmUgc2VudCB0byB0aGUgTVBMUyB3ZyBtYWls aW5nIGxpc3QuKiBUaGUNCj4gZG9jdW1lbnQgd2lsbCBub3QgYWR2YW5jZSB0byB0aGUgbmV4dCBz dGFnZSB1bnRpbCBhIHJlc3BvbnNlIGhhcyBiZWVuDQo+IHJlY2VpdmVkIGZyb20gZWFjaCBhdXRo b3IgYW5kIGNvbnRyaWJ1dG9yLg0KPiANCj4gSWYgeW91IGFyZSBvbiB0aGUgTVBMUyBXRyBlbWFp bCBsaXN0IGJ1dCBhcmUgbm90IGxpc3RlZCBhcyBhbiBhdXRob3Igb3INCj4gY29udHJpYnV0b3Is IHRoZW4gcGxlYXNlIGV4cGxpY2l0bHkgcmVzcG9uZCBvbmx5IGlmIHlvdSBhcmUgYXdhcmUgb2Yg YW55DQo+IElQUiB0aGF0IGhhcyBub3QgeWV0IGJlZW4gZGlzY2xvc2VkIGluIGNvbmZvcm1hbmNl IHdpdGggSUVURiBydWxlcy4NCj4gDQo+IA0KPiAvTG9hDQo+IG1wbHMgd2cgY28tY2hhaXINCj4g LS0NCj4gDQo+IA0KPiBMb2EgQW5kZXJzc29uICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgZW1haWw6 IGxvYUBtYWlsMDEuaHVhd2VpLmNvbQ0KPiBTZW5pb3IgTVBMUyBFeHBlcnQgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgIGxvYUBwaS5udQ0KPiBIdWF3ZWkgVGVjaG5vbG9naWVzIChjb25zdWx0YW50 KSAgICAgcGhvbmU6ICs0NiA3MzkgODEgMjEgNjQNCg== From nobody Mon Oct 12 23:06:58 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 637E11B38F0; Mon, 12 Oct 2015 23:06:56 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 1Rt6AsJvAqLW; Mon, 12 Oct 2015 23:06:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-vk0-x22d.google.com (mail-vk0-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400c:c05::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 A1EE51B38DA; Mon, 12 Oct 2015 23:06:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: by vkaw128 with SMTP id w128so4297000vka.0; Mon, 12 Oct 2015 23:06:53 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=/YXKmX79hTwd6DMmXkqCKDhVwnuxekVKWKexvQESLqI=; b=C0XQMTCpSGa/y20Uh0hixlT3aUmJGfkz16TQG/QgjqntGSDwIlj8ay7vJk3g4arn1E hoElTxwon1TP79Fsl+lVWZyBmUeGtJBYqvEGSVr5H9O+6cbMzZoOOePTUHlxnGPe17Xe qI+SKl+U6kssMLxZdep8WyDYDDcXXepfnmnAuNXgXEQJ8skqDX7/Xlny+utrA8os5D0J DF7o1hkH2Z6gTOYDLyTcOBhogfyWFPL0Sz2hRL9TOWvzNxj8p+6koMJZRSwoWIyc6jdu +jzV4R0+5jybi4UiPVtkrTRw9yACLmu0kSziah6xCZ5nwntJG76zcnh4jV2k7T95QADp HVKw== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.31.146.133 with SMTP id u127mr20969325vkd.42.1444716413780; Mon, 12 Oct 2015 23:06:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.31.96.141 with HTTP; Mon, 12 Oct 2015 23:06:53 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <5619D1A4.8050401@pi.nu> References: <5619D1A4.8050401@pi.nu> Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2015 02:06:53 -0400 Message-ID: From: Vishnu Pavan Beeram To: Loa Andersson Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1143a862a50ce50521f64082 Archived-At: Cc: "mpls@ietf.org" , "mpls-chairs@ietf.org" , "draft-chandra-mpls-ri-rsvp-frr@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [mpls] IPR poll on draft-chandra-mpls-ri-rsvp-frr X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2015 06:06:56 -0000 --001a1143a862a50ce50521f64082 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Yes, I'm aware of an IPR that applies to draft-chandra-mpls-ri-rsvp-frr. (https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/2580/) And yes, this IPR has been disclosed in compliance with IETF IPR rules. Regards, -Pavan On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 11:04 PM, Loa Andersson wrote: > Working Group, > > The authors of draft-chandra-mpls-ri-rsvp-frr has told us that > the document is ready for working adoption. > > Before we start the wgap we will do an IPR poll. > > > This mail starts the IPR poll. > > Are you aware of any IPR that applies to draft-chandra-mpls-ri-rsvp-frr? > > If so, has this IPR been disclosed in compliance with IETF IPR rules > (see RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669 and 5378 for more details). > > There is one IPR disclosures filed against this document. > > If you are listed as a document author or contributor please respond to > this email regardless of whether or not you are aware of any relevant > IPR. *The response needs to be sent to the MPLS wg mailing list.* The > document will not advance to the next stage until a response has been > received from each author and contributor. > > If you are on the MPLS WG email list but are not listed as an author or > contributor, then please explicitly respond only if you are aware of any > IPR that has not yet been disclosed in conformance with IETF rules. > > > /Loa > mpls wg co-chair > -- > > > Loa Andersson email: loa@mail01.huawei.com > Senior MPLS Expert loa@pi.nu > Huawei Technologies (consultant) phone: +46 739 81 21 64 > > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > --001a1143a862a50ce50521f64082 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Yes, I'm aware of an IPR that applies t= o draft-chandra-mpls-ri-rsvp-frr.
(https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/2580/)

And= yes, this IPR has been disclosed in compliance with IETF IPR rules.
Regards,
-Pavan

On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 11:04 PM, Loa Andersson <loa@pi.nu= > wrote:
Working Group,

The authors of draft-chandra-mpls-ri-rsvp-frr has told us that
the document is ready for working adoption.

Before we start the wgap we will do an IPR poll.


This mail starts the IPR poll.

Are you aware of any IPR that applies to draft-chandra-mpls-ri-rsvp-frr?
If so, has this IPR been disclosed in compliance with IETF IPR rules
(see RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669 and 5378 for more details).

There is one IPR disclosures filed against this document.

If you are listed as a document author or contributor please respond to
this email regardless of whether or not you are aware of any relevant
IPR. *The response needs to be sent to the MPLS wg mailing list.* The
document will not advance to the next stage until a response has been
received from each author and contributor.

If you are on the MPLS WG email list but are not listed as an author or
contributor, then please explicitly respond only if you are aware of any IPR that has not yet been disclosed in conformance with IETF rules.


/Loa
mpls wg co-chair
--


Loa Andersson=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0= =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 email: loa@mail01.huawei.com
Senior MPLS Expert=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 = =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 loa@pi.nu
Huawei Technologies (consultant)=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0phone: +46 739= 81 21 64

_______________________________________________
mpls mailing list
mpls@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls

--001a1143a862a50ce50521f64082-- From nobody Tue Oct 13 07:56:50 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 119E51B4165; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 07:56:50 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.912 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.912 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham 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 lyGwRGwZ1QI4; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 07:56:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dscp.org (zinq.dscp.org [208.74.128.57]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AC86F1B3310; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 07:56:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.57.23.131] (unknown [209.136.236.87]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by dscp.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0F20E7C0B5F; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 07:56:43 -0700 (PDT) To: Loa Andersson , "mpls@ietf.org" References: <5619D1A4.8050401@pi.nu> From: Ebben Aries Message-ID: <561D1BAA.7000803@dscp.org> Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2015 08:56:42 -0600 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <5619D1A4.8050401@pi.nu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: Cc: "mpls-chairs@ietf.org" , "draft-chandra-mpls-ri-rsvp-frr@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [mpls] IPR poll on draft-chandra-mpls-ri-rsvp-frr X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2015 14:56:50 -0000 I am not aware of any IPR other than what is already disclosed /ebben On 10/10/2015 09:04 PM, Loa Andersson wrote: > Working Group, > > The authors of draft-chandra-mpls-ri-rsvp-frr has told us that > the document is ready for working adoption. > > Before we start the wgap we will do an IPR poll. > > > This mail starts the IPR poll. > > Are you aware of any IPR that applies to draft-chandra-mpls-ri-rsvp-frr? > > If so, has this IPR been disclosed in compliance with IETF IPR rules > (see RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669 and 5378 for more details). > > There is one IPR disclosures filed against this document. > > If you are listed as a document author or contributor please respond to > this email regardless of whether or not you are aware of any relevant > IPR. *The response needs to be sent to the MPLS wg mailing list.* The > document will not advance to the next stage until a response has been > received from each author and contributor. > > If you are on the MPLS WG email list but are not listed as an author or > contributor, then please explicitly respond only if you are aware of any > IPR that has not yet been disclosed in conformance with IETF rules. > > > /Loa > mpls wg co-chair From nobody Tue Oct 13 08:01:42 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E53041B3334; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 08:01:40 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -14.511 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.511 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, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham 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 hGjgx536eOLN; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 08:01:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rcdn-iport-8.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-8.cisco.com [173.37.86.79]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A03341B331C; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 08:01:39 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1440; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1444748499; x=1445958099; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-id:content-transfer-encoding: mime-version; bh=4C2se5dGXV8dfvY0IJEukE2VndzwTQSltnFcAw+nclI=; b=PzrDao3kinvUBYMzR2flyEpOHUzl+Xb+TxeS2NHEdSy++8fENRQxypY6 gkNaFKNIczln1gfnm03oP9HWwcgLThK5kLpSnnTr8Pa9PbJigI+NNnnRn QwOqDtgxsHbyMGrPZZlqUL8jKdLUlrSD5dAlpdcUGI644YBtxGm+cD5Y6 k=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0BWAgByHB1W/5hdJa1egyaBQga+DQENgVqDE4IKfwKBPzgUAQEBAQEBAYEKhCcBAQQ6MQMGBQ4CAgEINhAbFyUCBAENBYguwVgBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBARgEhnGEfoQqEAIBUAeELgEElhYBjRmBWIQ6lXUBHwEBQoQCcYVrgQYBAQE X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.17,678,1437436800"; d="scan'208";a="35333445" Received: from rcdn-core-1.cisco.com ([173.37.93.152]) by rcdn-iport-8.cisco.com with ESMTP; 13 Oct 2015 15:01:38 +0000 Received: from XCH-ALN-004.cisco.com (xch-aln-004.cisco.com [173.36.7.14]) by rcdn-core-1.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id t9DF1cFI018732 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Tue, 13 Oct 2015 15:01:38 GMT Received: from xch-rcd-001.cisco.com (173.37.102.11) by XCH-ALN-004.cisco.com (173.36.7.14) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1104.5; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 10:01:25 -0500 Received: from xch-rcd-001.cisco.com ([173.37.102.11]) by XCH-RCD-001.cisco.com ([173.37.102.11]) with mapi id 15.00.1104.000; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 10:01:24 -0500 From: "Tarek Saad (tsaad)" To: Loa Andersson , "mpls@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: IPR poll on draft-chandra-mpls-ri-rsvp-frr Thread-Index: AQHRA9GAzdV5tD2RAUSA1iCAcvH+ZZ5pmTwA Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2015 15:01:24 +0000 Message-ID: References: <5619D1A4.8050401@pi.nu> In-Reply-To: <5619D1A4.8050401@pi.nu> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.5.4.150722 x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1 x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted x-originating-ip: [10.82.246.173] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <2D656ADE474EFF4C8B5C2D7B3980FB59@emea.cisco.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: Cc: "mpls-chairs@ietf.org" , "draft-chandra-mpls-ri-rsvp-frr@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [mpls] IPR poll on draft-chandra-mpls-ri-rsvp-frr X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2015 15:01:41 -0000 I am not aware of any IPR other than what is already disclosed. Regards, Tarek On 2015-10-10, 11:04 PM, "Loa Andersson" wrote: >Working Group, > >The authors of draft-chandra-mpls-ri-rsvp-frr has told us that >the document is ready for working adoption. > >Before we start the wgap we will do an IPR poll. > > >This mail starts the IPR poll. > >Are you aware of any IPR that applies to draft-chandra-mpls-ri-rsvp-frr? > >If so, has this IPR been disclosed in compliance with IETF IPR rules >(see RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669 and 5378 for more details). > >There is one IPR disclosures filed against this document. > >If you are listed as a document author or contributor please respond to >this email regardless of whether or not you are aware of any relevant >IPR. *The response needs to be sent to the MPLS wg mailing list.* The >document will not advance to the next stage until a response has been >received from each author and contributor. > >If you are on the MPLS WG email list but are not listed as an author or >contributor, then please explicitly respond only if you are aware of any >IPR that has not yet been disclosed in conformance with IETF rules. > > >/Loa >mpls wg co-chair >--=20 > > >Loa Andersson email: loa@mail01.huawei.com >Senior MPLS Expert loa@pi.nu >Huawei Technologies (consultant) phone: +46 739 81 21 64 From nobody Tue Oct 13 08:01:59 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2B2671B463E for ; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 08:01:54 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.388 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.388 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=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 udnVXAzzNiJh for ; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 08:01:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-qk0-x22e.google.com (mail-qk0-x22e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c09::22e]) (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 CF1401B462D for ; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 08:01:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: by qkap81 with SMTP id p81so9205798qka.2 for ; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 08:01:52 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=T4rnbVDik7JiA/uAzZx1+i8wQm/aX49L3SwJ2o/mG34=; b=UO6vMPEjTQlsTeL+LgJ/yuvGB+N6DRNv9qpw/RthuiZ4+rR/UPmzQXVeq2/TRP7I5z ecLhEa2OBmEnDBGURGvV1eGTEVQN6kGKeIP4ABcZ3kg3/qHFWmye1yvnwJs3iA2rOe2L 4oHA/G7Yae5HP7jH9iVzE4VgeWYFA15hXo82OL1aIGUnpA+pruCsLp7T5ZjdtPbgKA6K D6lgVdIpBauBQENkLIg0pDsNMA7NAmvom3cLK7GG/+n9qm6A3CU+TEYhOtApeIBHORuR 9E1brA/AOzdQIp11MQpNu8pcYn4/KsHiU6xGiOcB+ParDS1uvFoZvAMJ5eoYwXqL0qKK YZYw== 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:content-type; bh=T4rnbVDik7JiA/uAzZx1+i8wQm/aX49L3SwJ2o/mG34=; b=X/JBGUiMFIrgOC4qlR0BM+/IEVpgpnyjnIAhvKC7Z2I23OwVRIdgvuS7hJ+ZgHpwBw GK23CS+eirMhj8Q1zsUnBGxlfvHJE77Ufs8sM2qmRu7dRD3FOLr1oiJiW+thjGEdFgUB OEK2udrrCw9skWKq+VkeP8i0ppn71GRoHZ07MOeUVFIT3qkYKSrnprbOu6KTEuMuIQ6C +FWh1kYV7fExHr9nQ3KYfjiMmiFV9T3rGpFzur2K3xNJ0j9bV/dHjRo8QzPscRgoPTZy IPMP7lKdeFZESOkzVrn0A5+CyfKDLqP97nDlGhDcYxx+Y9Hkwt1tqR49DmIJgHMJGgC6 UYVw== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlxti+O35+Px0K2Q/ZEoz1IWGQpTqysZ2nM39IEV027VflypqpNV43xrQcHMnnLjVJjac/+ MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.55.23.83 with SMTP id i80mr40678994qkh.5.1444748511831; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 08:01:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.55.142.195 with HTTP; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 08:01:51 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <561D1BAA.7000803@dscp.org> References: <5619D1A4.8050401@pi.nu> <561D1BAA.7000803@dscp.org> Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2015 08:01:51 -0700 Message-ID: From: Ina Minei To: Ebben Aries Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11470798d6fc6a0521fdb9f3 Archived-At: Cc: "mpls@ietf.org" , "mpls-chairs@ietf.org" , "draft-chandra-mpls-ri-rsvp-frr@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [mpls] IPR poll on draft-chandra-mpls-ri-rsvp-frr X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2015 15:01:54 -0000 --001a11470798d6fc6a0521fdb9f3 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 I am not aware of any IPR other than what is already disclosed. On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 7:56 AM, Ebben Aries wrote: > I am not aware of any IPR other than what is already disclosed > > /ebben > > > On 10/10/2015 09:04 PM, Loa Andersson wrote: > >> Working Group, >> >> The authors of draft-chandra-mpls-ri-rsvp-frr has told us that >> the document is ready for working adoption. >> >> Before we start the wgap we will do an IPR poll. >> >> >> This mail starts the IPR poll. >> >> Are you aware of any IPR that applies to draft-chandra-mpls-ri-rsvp-frr? >> >> If so, has this IPR been disclosed in compliance with IETF IPR rules >> (see RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669 and 5378 for more details). >> >> There is one IPR disclosures filed against this document. >> >> If you are listed as a document author or contributor please respond to >> this email regardless of whether or not you are aware of any relevant >> IPR. *The response needs to be sent to the MPLS wg mailing list.* The >> document will not advance to the next stage until a response has been >> received from each author and contributor. >> >> If you are on the MPLS WG email list but are not listed as an author or >> contributor, then please explicitly respond only if you are aware of any >> IPR that has not yet been disclosed in conformance with IETF rules. >> >> >> /Loa >> mpls wg co-chair >> > --001a11470798d6fc6a0521fdb9f3 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I am not aware of any IPR other than what is already discl= osed.

On Tue= , Oct 13, 2015 at 7:56 AM, Ebben Aries <exa@dscp.org> wrote:
<= blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px= #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">I am not aware of any IPR other than what is = already disclosed

/ebben


On 10/10/2015 09:04 PM, Loa Andersson wrote:
Working Group,

The authors of draft-chandra-mpls-ri-rsvp-frr has told us that
the document is ready for working adoption.

Before we start the wgap we will do an IPR poll.


This mail starts the IPR poll.

Are you aware of any IPR that applies to draft-chandra-mpls-ri-rsvp-frr?
If so, has this IPR been disclosed in compliance with IETF IPR rules
(see RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669 and 5378 for more details).

There is one IPR disclosures filed against this document.

If you are listed as a document author or contributor please respond to
this email regardless of whether or not you are aware of any relevant
IPR. *The response needs to be sent to the MPLS wg mailing list.* The
document will not advance to the next stage until a response has been
received from each author and contributor.

If you are on the MPLS WG email list but are not listed as an author or
contributor, then please explicitly respond only if you are aware of any IPR that has not yet been disclosed in conformance with IETF rules.


/Loa
mpls wg co-chair

--001a11470798d6fc6a0521fdb9f3-- From nobody Tue Oct 13 08:03:52 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B8D831B465E; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 08:03:50 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.701 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.701 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_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 Ap36dU9-jx9N; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 08:03:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from omzsmtpe01.verizonbusiness.com (omzsmtpe01.verizonbusiness.com [199.249.25.210]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6B35D1B465C; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 08:03:49 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=verizon.com; i=@verizon.com; q=dns/txt; s=corp; t=1444748629; x=1476284629; h=from:to:cc:date:subject:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=YbNa9IL22FcAWrpvWC559t+L7bp0s+B0+yaERO9BQL8=; b=jcbLYyVZwWaQ8mERB+lbzbtG6xGsdKRMXuHTiP0hVpRGMfLa1x3O4VjP phxx0ca/K/FHfAJtvNygI+l+U0Knj4YT/wzyvvGUPMkpJd5+j1Fxs+ZOA N0EJRRXdL4ygVxI/dJr56Ch1IxaAKXkD5fpS2ASXghX2RWymKD1ssgBd+ k=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: false Received: from unknown (HELO fldsmtpi02.verizon.com) ([166.68.71.144]) by omzsmtpe01.verizonbusiness.com with ESMTP; 13 Oct 2015 15:03:12 +0000 From: "Pacella, Dante J" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.17,678,1437436800"; d="scan'208";a="1095424781" Received: from fhdp1lumxc7hb04.verizon.com (HELO FHDP1LUMXC7HB04.us.one.verizon.com) ([166.68.59.191]) by fldsmtpi02.verizon.com with ESMTP; 13 Oct 2015 15:03:12 +0000 Received: from FHDP1LUMXC7V33.us.one.verizon.com ([169.254.3.140]) by FHDP1LUMXC7HB04.us.one.verizon.com ([166.68.59.191]) with mapi; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 11:03:11 -0400 To: Ebben Aries , Loa Andersson , "mpls@ietf.org" Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2015 11:03:13 -0400 Thread-Topic: [mpls] IPR poll on draft-chandra-mpls-ri-rsvp-frr Thread-Index: AdEFyEZ/fBwpHO6PSOib+h6zIGEQVw== Message-ID: References: <5619D1A4.8050401@pi.nu> <561D1BAA.7000803@dscp.org> In-Reply-To: <561D1BAA.7000803@dscp.org> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.5.2.150604 acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: Cc: "mpls-chairs@ietf.org" , "draft-chandra-mpls-ri-rsvp-frr@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [mpls] IPR poll on draft-chandra-mpls-ri-rsvp-frr X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2015 15:03:50 -0000 I am not aware of any IPR other than what is already disclosed On 10/13/15, 10:56 AM, "Ebben Aries" wrote: >I am not aware of any IPR other than what is already disclosed > >/ebben > >On 10/10/2015 09:04 PM, Loa Andersson wrote: >> Working Group, >> >> The authors of draft-chandra-mpls-ri-rsvp-frr has told us that >> the document is ready for working adoption. >> >> Before we start the wgap we will do an IPR poll. >> >> >> This mail starts the IPR poll. >> >> Are you aware of any IPR that applies to draft-chandra-mpls-ri-rsvp-frr? >> >> If so, has this IPR been disclosed in compliance with IETF IPR rules >> (see RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669 and 5378 for more details). >> >> There is one IPR disclosures filed against this document. >> >> If you are listed as a document author or contributor please respond to >> this email regardless of whether or not you are aware of any relevant >> IPR. *The response needs to be sent to the MPLS wg mailing list.* The >> document will not advance to the next stage until a response has been >> received from each author and contributor. >> >> If you are on the MPLS WG email list but are not listed as an author or >> contributor, then please explicitly respond only if you are aware of any >> IPR that has not yet been disclosed in conformance with IETF rules. >> >> >> /Loa >> mpls wg co-chair From nobody Tue Oct 13 08:11:16 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 922BB1B3394 for ; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 08:11:14 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.301 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.301 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, J_CHICKENPOX_66=0.6, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=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 pfZsZswZct2Z for ; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 08:11:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from emea01-db3-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-db3on0782.outbound.protection.outlook.com [IPv6:2a01:111:f400:fe04::782]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 649BF1B3280 for ; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 08:11:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from DB3PR03MB0780.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com (10.161.55.12) by DB3PR03MB0779.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com (10.161.55.11) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.293.16; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 15:10:56 +0000 Received: from DB3PR03MB0780.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com ([10.161.55.12]) by DB3PR03MB0780.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com ([10.161.55.12]) with mapi id 15.01.0293.007; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 15:10:56 +0000 From: Alexander Vainshtein To: "Stewart Bryant (stbryant@cisco.com)" , "Bocci, Matthew (Matthew) (matthew.bocci@alcatel-lucent.com)" , "Andrew G. Malis (agmalis@gmail.com)" Thread-Topic: Responding to comments in the WG adoption poll for draft-vainshtein-mpls-gal-tc-ttl-handling Thread-Index: AdEFyVk8oAE6DorlSvORcvlcy5oXZg== Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2015 15:10:56 +0000 Message-ID: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=Alexander.Vainshtein@ecitele.com; x-originating-ip: [147.234.56.21] x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; DB3PR03MB0779; 5:iLw4btUNqCTxiqZahr2wJgKXYKd45EjIHkhA2WJfEwulg8bQvs8lCshTAB+BaWqDXCgbB8KUirVxFQuA9XLDg8LM0fzENlJmBbqyZhZ3GtBIwAppDuPz14MaOJfIYbSCacTshHTYX11f+L1mkRU7VQ==; 24:nwvFakhHgK4lhbIqsMJc5Ah9Gy1uoQebaSeNlrEO4kMgp9/ZsXTGc4Ko8gggi5QaDpzs7IERo3LL+tjbayJsQCq4350eLfQCHtx6l4dh4rE=; 20:PQXFdyoyiIm3yXc3vdNUioYQf0JZyQiNRIh5dOp7YQnR8fZQ3j11DzBzkiWNEs9Y1ZpYvVzoyLKAJu2drmbIsg== x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:DB3PR03MB0779; x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:(279101305709854)(108003899814671); x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(601004)(2401047)(5005006)(520078)(8121501046)(3002001); SRVR:DB3PR03MB0779; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:DB3PR03MB0779; x-forefront-prvs: 07283408BE x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(252514010)(199003)(189002)(51444003)(81156007)(33656002)(87936001)(5001960100002)(122556002)(54356999)(106356001)(77096005)(19609705001)(97736004)(15975445007)(102836002)(5001770100001)(19580395003)(19580405001)(189998001)(19300405004)(230783001)(10400500002)(101416001)(40100003)(50986999)(74316001)(5004730100002)(105586002)(46102003)(5002640100001)(16236675004)(5008740100001)(11100500001)(2900100001)(229853001)(19617315012)(19625215002)(76576001)(64706001)(5007970100001)(92566002)(5003600100002)(66066001)(86362001)(7059030); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:DB3PR03MB0779; H:DB3PR03MB0780.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; A:1; MX:1; LANG:en; received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: ecitele.com does not designate permitted sender hosts) spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:23 spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_DB3PR03MB07805452C19E1FA5C76776229D300DB3PR03MB0780eurp_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: ecitele.com X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 13 Oct 2015 15:10:56.4880 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 2c514a61-08de-4519-b4c0-921fef62c42a X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: DB3PR03MB0779 Archived-At: Cc: "Ross Callon \(rcallon@juniper.net\)" , "mpls@ietf.org" Subject: [mpls] Responding to comments in the WG adoption poll for draft-vainshtein-mpls-gal-tc-ttl-handling X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2015 15:11:14 -0000 --_000_DB3PR03MB07805452C19E1FA5C76776229D300DB3PR03MB0780eurp_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Stewart, Andy, Matthew and all, I would like to respond to the comments received so far in the adoption pol= l for draft-vainshtein-mpls-gal-tc-ttl-handling, and I would like to do it = in one email. First of all I'd like to thank Andy for his support:). The rest of my mail deals with comments from Stewart (here) and Matthew (here). I apologize = in advance for a rather long email, but I think that some explanations are = required. One point that I'd like to make is that the text quoted in Stewarts' commen= t (and presumably causing his concerns) comes from an earlier (-01) version= of the draft but does not exist in the -03 version of the draft (for which = adoption has been requested by the authors). The current text says: When this LSE becomes the top entry in the label stack (because the previous label has been popped) some receiving implementations have attempted to interpret the TC and TTL fields. In particular, packets with an LSE that contains the GAL with TTL set to one can be trapped to the generic (slow) MPLS exception handler with appropriate rate limiting before the GAL is noticed (which would otherwise result in trapping the packet to a fast OAM handler). The resultant poor performance in handling TTL of one could be seen as a poor implementation choice, but it does not violate RFC 5586. I assume that Stewart's conclusion "Any system that behaves as above is not= complying with the base MPLS specifications" has been correct with regard = to the old text (which erroneously mentioned setting TTL in the GAL LSE to = 0), but I do not see that implementations described in the new text would v= iolate any base MPLS specifications. Do I miss something? My next point is about Matthew's comment that mentions "changing the recomm= ended TTL value to work around a specific implementation". Actually RFC 558= 6 does not recommend any specific TTL = value to be set in the GAL LSE, it just says that this value MUST NOT be se= t to 0. Next, when it comes to preventing "buggy implementations forwarding packets= when the GAL is exposed" by setting the TTL value to 1 in the GAL LSE: thi= s is definitely worth discussion. From my POV this discussion could be done= after adoption, but, at least the draft in its current form does not preve= nt setting TTL to 1 even if it RECOMMENDS a different default. Regarding yet another Stewarts' comment, namely that "that label (Sasha: GA= L) is never supposed to be forwarded so the problem (Sasha: which TTL value= to set in the GAL LSE) should never arise" - from my POV this is not quite= correct. In modern systems packets that are not supposed to be forwarded (= for whatever reason) could be processed by not just by SW but also by HW ac= celerators (e.g., for fast OAM). Failure to differentiate between these two= cases would mean that two standard-compliant implementations are de-facto = not interoperable. The ultimate objective of the draft is to eliminate (or = at least to minimize) the possibility of such conflicts by filling in what = I see as gaps in the 5586. Last but not least, Stewart has asked about behavior of implementations tha= t encounter some other special purpose labels, specially mentioning Entropy= Label Indicator (ELI) defined in RFC 6790 and Extended Special Purpose Label indicator (XL) defined in RFC 7274= . I have checked both these documents, and from my POV RFC 6790 unambiguously= defines the behavior related to TC and TTL in LSE containing ELI and EL i= n Sections 4.1 and 4.2. Quoting from Section 4.1 "Egress LSR": When processing the final tunnel termination, Y (Sasha: the egress LSR for the tunnel) MAY enqueue the packet based on= that tunnel TL's or ELI's TC value and MAY use the tunnel TL's or ELI's TTL to compute th= e TTL of the remaining packet header. The EL's TTL MUST be ignored. Quoting from Section 4.2 "Ingress LSR": If Y has indicated that it can process ELs for the tunnel, push onto the packet. X (Sasha: the ingress LSR for the tunnel)SHOULD put the same TTL and TC fields for the ELI as it does for TL. X MAY choose different values for the TTL and TC fields if it is known that the ELI will not be exposed as the top label at any point along the LSP (as may happen in cases where PHP is used and the ELI and EL are not stripped at the penultimate hop (see Section 4.4). The BoS bit for the ELI MUST be zero (i.e., BoS is not set). The TTL for the EL MUST be zero to ensure that it is not used inadvertently for forwarding. The TC for the EL may be any value. The BoS bit for the EL depends on whether or not there are more labels in the label stack. RFC 7224 does not explicitly mention how the TTL and/or TC in the LSE conta= ining XL, but it says that "The XL only assigns special meaning to L" (Sash= a: the next label in the stack). To me this can only be interpreted as a re= quirement for the LSR that exposes the XL to ignore TC and TTL values in th= e corresponding LSE even if 2119 language is not used. So I do not see (at = least at this moment) any need in extending the draft for the "general" cas= e, since GAL is the only special purpose label for which handling of TC and= TTL fields by the receiver is not clearly defined. Hopefully these notes would be useful and help to resolve your concerns reg= arding adoption of the draft. Of course, once the draft is adopted, the WG could resolve any remaining (o= r newly identified) issues. Regards, Sasha Regards, Sasha Office: +972-39266302 Cell: +972-549266302 Email: Alexander.Vainshtein@ecitele.com --_000_DB3PR03MB07805452C19E1FA5C76776229D300DB3PR03MB0780eurp_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Stewart, Andy, Matthew and all,

I would like to respond to the comments received so = far in the adoption poll for draft-vainshtein-mpls-gal-tc-ttl-handling, and= I would like to do it in one email.

 

First of all I’d like to thank Andy for his &n= bsp;supportJ.

 

The rest of my mail deals with comments from  S= tewart (here) and Matthew (here). I apologize in advance for a rather long email, but I think that some expl= anations are required.

 

One point that I’d like to make is that the= text quoted in Stewarts’ comment (and presumably causing his con= cerns) comes from an earlier (-01) version of the draft but does not exist in the -03 version of the draft (for which = adoption has been requested by the authors).

The current text says:

 =

  = ; When this LSE becomes the top entry in the label stack (because the<= /o:p>

  = ; previous label has been popped) some receiving implementations have<= /o:p>

  = ; attempted to interpret the TC and TTL fields.  In particular, packet= s

  = ; with an LSE that contains the GAL with TTL set to one can be trapped=

  = ; to the generic (slow) MPLS exception handler with appropriate rate

  = ; limiting before the GAL is noticed (which would otherwise result in<= /o:p>

  &nbs= p;trapping the packet to a fast OAM handler).  The resultant poor=

  = ; performance in handling TTL of one could be seen as a poor

  = ; implementation choice, but it does not violate = RFC 5586.

 

I assume that Stewart’s conclusion “ 

My next point is about Matthew’s comment that = mentions “changing the recommended TTL value to work around a s= pecific implementation”. Actually RFC 5586 does not re= commend any specific TTL value to be set in the GAL LSE, it just says that this value MUST NOT be s= et to 0.

 

Next, when it comes to preventing “buggy= implementations forwarding packets when the GAL is exposed” b= y setting the TTL value to 1 in the GAL LSE: this is definitely worth discussion. From my POV this discussion could be done after adoption= , but, at least the draft in its current form does not prevent setting TTL = to 1 even if it RECOMMENDS a different default.

 

Regarding yet another Stewarts’ comment, namel= y that “that label (Sasha: GAL) is never supposed to be forwarded so the problem (Sasha: which TTL value to set in th= e GAL LSE) should never arise” – from my POV this = is not quite correct. In modern systems packets that are not supposed to be forwarded (for whatever reason) could be processed by n= ot just by SW but also by HW accelerators (e.g., for fast OAM). Failure to = differentiate between these two cases would mean that two standard-complian= t implementations are de-facto not interoperable. The ultimate objective of the draft is to eliminate (or at = least to minimize) the possibility of such conflicts by filling in what I s= ee as gaps in the 5586.

 

Last but not least, Stewart has asked about behavior= of implementations that encounter some other special purpose labels, speci= ally mentioning Entropy Label Indicator (ELI) defined in RFC 6790 and Extended S= pecial Purpose Label indicator (XL)  defined in RFC 7274.

I have checked both these documents, and from my POV= RFC 6790 unambiguously defines the behavior related to TC and TTL in LSE c= ontaining ELI and EL  in Sections 4.1 and 4.2.

Quoting from Section 4.1 “Egress LSR”:

 &=
nbsp; When processing the final tunnel termination,
 &=
nbsp; Y (Sasha: the egress LSR for the tunnel) MAY enqueue the packet based on that tunnel TL's=
 
 &=
nbsp; or ELI's TC value and MAY use the tunnel TL's or ELI's TTL to co=
mpute the 
 &=
nbsp; TTL of the remaining packet header.  The EL's TTL MUST be i=
gnored.

 

Quoting from Section 4.2 “Ingress LSR”:<= o:p>

 &=
nbsp;     If Y has indicated that it can process ELs fo=
r the tunnel, 
 &=
nbsp;     push <TL, ELI, EL> onto the packet=
.  
 &=
nbsp;     X (Sasha: the ingres=
s LSR for the tunnel)SHOULD put the same=
 
 &=
nbsp;     TTL and TC fields for the ELI as it does=
 for TL.  
 &=
nbsp;     X MAY choose different values for the TT=
L and TC
 &=
nbsp;     fields if it is known that the ELI will not b=
e exposed as the top
 &=
nbsp;     label at any point along the LSP (as may happ=
en in cases where
 &=
nbsp;     PHP is used and the ELI and EL are not stripp=
ed at the
 &=
nbsp;     penultimate hop (see Section 4.4).  The BoS bit for=
 the ELI MUST
 &=
nbsp;     be zero (i.e., BoS is not set).  The TTL=
 for the EL MUST be zero
 &=
nbsp;     to ensure that it is not used inadvertently f=
or forwarding.  The
 &=
nbsp;     TC for the EL may be any value.  The BoS=
 bit for the EL depends
 &=
nbsp;     on whether or not there are more labels in th=
e label stack.

 

RFC 7224 does not expl=
icitly mention how the TTL and/or TC in the LSE containing XL, but it says =
that “The XL only assigns speci=
al meaning to L” (Sasha: the next label in the=
 stack). To me this can only be interpreted as a requirement for the LSR th=
at exposes the XL to ignore TC and TTL values in the corresponding LSE even if 2119 language is not used. So I do not see=
 (at least at this moment) any need in extending the draft for the “g=
eneral” case, since GAL is the only special purpose label for which h=
andling of TC and TTL fields by the receiver is not clearly defined.=

 

Hopefully these notes would be useful and help to re= solve your concerns regarding adoption of the draft.

Of course, once the draft is adopted, the WG could r= esolve any remaining (or newly identified) issues.

 

Regards,

Sasha

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Regards,

Sasha

 

Office: +972-39266302

Cell:      +972-5492663= 02

Email:   Alexander.Vainshtein@ecitele.com<= o:p>

 

--_000_DB3PR03MB07805452C19E1FA5C76776229D300DB3PR03MB0780eurp_-- From nobody Tue Oct 13 11:50:53 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 060831A7D85; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 11:50:51 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.902 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.902 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 PlNW94CQ-QDq; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 11:50:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from na01-bn1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-bn1bon0700.outbound.protection.outlook.com [IPv6:2a01:111:f400:fc10::1:700]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 11FB51A8777; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 11:44:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from CO2PR0501MB919.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.141.247.22) by CO2PR0501MB918.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.141.247.21) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.293.16; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 18:44:27 +0000 Received: from CO2PR0501MB919.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([10.141.247.22]) by CO2PR0501MB919.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([10.141.247.22]) with mapi id 15.01.0293.007; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 18:44:27 +0000 From: Markus Jork To: Loa Andersson , "mpls@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [mpls] IPR poll on draft-chandra-mpls-ri-rsvp-frr Thread-Index: AQHRA9GJkS6iXv2r80uYq7WMt/I/3p5pxf2Q Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2015 18:44:26 +0000 Message-ID: References: <5619D1A4.8050401@pi.nu> In-Reply-To: <5619D1A4.8050401@pi.nu> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=mjork@juniper.net; x-originating-ip: [66.129.241.12] x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; CO2PR0501MB918; 5:fucN9WjFIFWNLSNxd/MMLcBWZ5ckdIDuMHRl5yNgBlBcQ7XeNaxjbJjm/QcyxBCbQFQsZ/j2Yzx/8GLr9lNHvaBYIAfy7J6pCJOnGgR9HNPETXcvBBq64DRdQlOOR1pf7q/AcS79MAUluix3G0nhWw==; 24:7gD40vYkC4RUiqmMsFW9KqXPSgX/qMxmpmSgv1fuj9rFRHN9MM/wYU0c8MLVK3iVs1duNKC0k9g0ZuDFnUQkcTrlbngniJcbxhVcOv+QI5c=; 20:giHA8+s0cktzQuPaqX6Lh0ffhCuMJIpu/ZpOMDqYq9GusoH5qAaK9sE0oE6oi0eV5BQ6uV1N6NJymo7WCudJtA== x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:CO2PR0501MB918; x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:; x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(601004)(2401047)(5005006)(520078)(8121501046)(3002001); SRVR:CO2PR0501MB918; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:CO2PR0501MB918; x-forefront-prvs: 07283408BE x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(6009001)(377454003)(252514010)(13464003)(189002)(199003)(105586002)(86362001)(19580395003)(99286002)(74316001)(5002640100001)(106116001)(10400500002)(46102003)(5008740100001)(19580405001)(5001960100002)(106356001)(33656002)(5004730100002)(5007970100001)(5001770100001)(76576001)(11100500001)(81156007)(64706001)(101416001)(50986999)(87936001)(92566002)(189998001)(122556002)(40100003)(76176999)(5003600100002)(230783001)(77096005)(2501003)(97736004)(102836002)(15975445007)(2950100001)(54356999)(66066001)(2900100001); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:CO2PR0501MB918; H:CO2PR0501MB919.namprd05.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; MX:1; A:1; LANG:en; received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: juniper.net does not designate permitted sender hosts) spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:23 spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: juniper.net X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 13 Oct 2015 18:44:26.9499 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: bea78b3c-4cdb-4130-854a-1d193232e5f4 X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: CO2PR0501MB918 Archived-At: Cc: "mpls-chairs@ietf.org" , "draft-chandra-mpls-ri-rsvp-frr@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [mpls] IPR poll on draft-chandra-mpls-ri-rsvp-frr X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2015 18:50:51 -0000 I am not aware of any IPR other than what has already been disclosed (https= ://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/2580/). -Markus > -----Original Message----- > From: mpls [mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Loa Andersson > Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2015 11:04 PM > To: mpls@ietf.org > Cc: mpls-chairs@ietf.org; draft-chandra-mpls-ri-rsvp-frr@ietf.org > Subject: [mpls] IPR poll on draft-chandra-mpls-ri-rsvp-frr >=20 > Working Group, >=20 > The authors of draft-chandra-mpls-ri-rsvp-frr has told us that > the document is ready for working adoption. >=20 > Before we start the wgap we will do an IPR poll. >=20 >=20 > This mail starts the IPR poll. >=20 > Are you aware of any IPR that applies to draft-chandra-mpls-ri-rsvp-frr? >=20 > If so, has this IPR been disclosed in compliance with IETF IPR rules > (see RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669 and 5378 for more details). >=20 > There is one IPR disclosures filed against this document. >=20 > If you are listed as a document author or contributor please respond to > this email regardless of whether or not you are aware of any relevant > IPR. *The response needs to be sent to the MPLS wg mailing list.* The > document will not advance to the next stage until a response has been > received from each author and contributor. >=20 > If you are on the MPLS WG email list but are not listed as an author or > contributor, then please explicitly respond only if you are aware of any > IPR that has not yet been disclosed in conformance with IETF rules. >=20 >=20 > /Loa > mpls wg co-chair > -- >=20 >=20 > Loa Andersson email: loa@mail01.huawei.com > Senior MPLS Expert loa@pi.nu > Huawei Technologies (consultant) phone: +46 739 81 21 64 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From nobody Tue Oct 13 11:52:58 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B243E1A86FE; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 11:52:51 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.902 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.902 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 jWrvsUnvbZ_p; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 11:52:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from na01-bn1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-bn1bon0771.outbound.protection.outlook.com [IPv6:2a01:111:f400:fc10::1:771]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 35EEF1A6FC8; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 11:46:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from CY1PR05MB1897.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.162.167.151) by CY1PR05MB1897.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.162.167.151) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.293.16; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 18:45:43 +0000 Received: from CY1PR05MB1897.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([10.162.167.151]) by CY1PR05MB1897.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([10.162.167.151]) with mapi id 15.01.0293.007; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 18:45:43 +0000 From: Harish Sitaraman To: Loa Andersson , "mpls@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [mpls] IPR poll on draft-chandra-mpls-ri-rsvp-frr Thread-Index: AQHRA9GIsu+737xTaUSrdp50BRJ81J5pxuaQ Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2015 18:45:43 +0000 Message-ID: References: <5619D1A4.8050401@pi.nu> In-Reply-To: <5619D1A4.8050401@pi.nu> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=hsitaraman@juniper.net; x-originating-ip: [66.129.239.12] x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; CY1PR05MB1897; 5:kwlRMEBENN8HEGJzwGJt+tNij9OxHm6IweM2m0t4i18Ome6n/aaWKXf4hHma2ARO33LK8FYMSDpnICVVd5eMpgmtuIw3kYRa2J58PG7umrLVW81nQPhsxCAA8erXONDiUXzyS8guq5KIyIVzYXLr4w==; 24:Hq3+yhs88Z20ieujsQDPV6Yyn2vd4Z2dGb3aT833TcHrOkXY9gcMuaYsQceHbLwTs3XaGDES8RBo8ssdNQ7/xPucAoD8qlD7k3/JRpOmopQ=; 20:mwMGlGbd5tmkfl6d9WrFpl2cUTyX/5CnJIa8zvrEPL2WmGZqqq3N2f1oJcEKuhCeXsyxdsGLFRYSKLTI7KsVjA== x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:CY1PR05MB1897; x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:; x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(601004)(2401047)(520078)(5005006)(8121501046)(3002001); SRVR:CY1PR05MB1897; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:CY1PR05MB1897; x-forefront-prvs: 07283408BE x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(6009001)(252514010)(377454003)(13464003)(199003)(189002)(97736004)(99286002)(105586002)(122556002)(2900100001)(15975445007)(106116001)(102836002)(5001960100002)(81156007)(5001770100001)(230783001)(189998001)(106356001)(77096005)(10400500002)(87936001)(19580395003)(101416001)(33656002)(5004730100002)(74316001)(50986999)(11100500001)(46102003)(5008740100001)(40100003)(76576001)(19580405001)(54356999)(76176999)(2501003)(5001920100001)(5003600100002)(92566002)(2950100001)(5007970100001)(66066001)(86362001)(64706001)(5002640100001); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:CY1PR05MB1897; H:CY1PR05MB1897.namprd05.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; A:1; MX:1; LANG:en; received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: juniper.net does not designate permitted sender hosts) spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:23 spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: juniper.net X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 13 Oct 2015 18:45:43.1746 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: bea78b3c-4cdb-4130-854a-1d193232e5f4 X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: CY1PR05MB1897 Archived-At: Cc: "mpls-chairs@ietf.org" , "draft-chandra-mpls-ri-rsvp-frr@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [mpls] IPR poll on draft-chandra-mpls-ri-rsvp-frr X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2015 18:52:51 -0000 I am not aware of any IPR, that applies to this draft, other than the one a= lready disclosed. Harish > -----Original Message----- > From: mpls [mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Loa Andersson > Sent: Sunday, October 11, 2015 8:34 AM > To: mpls@ietf.org > Cc: mpls-chairs@ietf.org; draft-chandra-mpls-ri-rsvp-frr@ietf.org > Subject: [mpls] IPR poll on draft-chandra-mpls-ri-rsvp-frr >=20 > Working Group, >=20 > The authors of draft-chandra-mpls-ri-rsvp-frr has told us that > the document is ready for working adoption. >=20 > Before we start the wgap we will do an IPR poll. >=20 >=20 > This mail starts the IPR poll. >=20 > Are you aware of any IPR that applies to draft-chandra-mpls-ri-rsvp-frr? >=20 > If so, has this IPR been disclosed in compliance with IETF IPR rules > (see RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669 and 5378 for more details). >=20 > There is one IPR disclosures filed against this document. >=20 > If you are listed as a document author or contributor please respond to > this email regardless of whether or not you are aware of any relevant > IPR. *The response needs to be sent to the MPLS wg mailing list.* The > document will not advance to the next stage until a response has been > received from each author and contributor. >=20 > If you are on the MPLS WG email list but are not listed as an author or > contributor, then please explicitly respond only if you are aware of any > IPR that has not yet been disclosed in conformance with IETF rules. >=20 >=20 > /Loa > mpls wg co-chair > -- >=20 >=20 > Loa Andersson email: loa@mail01.huawei.com > Senior MPLS Expert loa@pi.nu > Huawei Technologies (consultant) phone: +46 739 81 21 64 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From nobody Tue Oct 13 11:53:10 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D18121A6FCD; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 11:53:02 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -14.511 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.511 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, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham 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 RqFKHb9SxnQ6; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 11:53:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rcdn-iport-3.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-3.cisco.com [173.37.86.74]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C25621A882A; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 11:46:23 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=4951; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1444761983; x=1445971583; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-id:content-transfer-encoding: mime-version; bh=42pdqEOgoENVczmQOHDFSldcLBsgt2iTJN7YlWpAHXM=; b=NN3szdnguDGaSAzQBfML+BR3JnZFG22jIQ6eXqD+Yt2RQgduC3B5Sxki dr9tc7g0YD5Rh33X7PiQTvCv3x0pRvJh9qhk952vawujxTh22d8z0C7/h VSmAGEIm8rSRbUiQC37xWSLDBOkyxJHu17ylMJQUnT/bCZokFNlJdYKRq A=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0DxAQBSUB1W/5hdJa1egyZUbga+DQENgVoXCoJygwkCgUk4FAEBAQEBAQGBCoQnAQEEAQEBNy0HCxACAQgOCh4QJwslAgQBDQWILg3CLgEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBARMEhnWDeIEGhQ0HhC4FlhYBjRmBWIQ6kgeDbgEfAQFCghEdgVRxhWuBBgEBAQ X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.17,679,1437436800"; d="scan'208";a="40752825" Received: from rcdn-core-1.cisco.com ([173.37.93.152]) by rcdn-iport-3.cisco.com with ESMTP; 13 Oct 2015 18:46:22 +0000 Received: from XCH-RCD-004.cisco.com (xch-rcd-004.cisco.com [173.37.102.14]) by rcdn-core-1.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id t9DIkMgJ025431 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Tue, 13 Oct 2015 18:46:22 GMT Received: from xch-rcd-001.cisco.com (173.37.102.11) by XCH-RCD-004.cisco.com (173.37.102.14) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1104.5; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 13:46:09 -0500 Received: from xch-rcd-001.cisco.com ([173.37.102.11]) by XCH-RCD-001.cisco.com ([173.37.102.11]) with mapi id 15.00.1104.000; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 13:46:09 -0500 From: "Tarek Saad (tsaad)" To: Lou Berger , "mpls@ietf.org" , "draft-mtaillon-mpls-summary-frr-rsvpte@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [mpls] progressing draft-mtaillon-mpls-summary-frr-rsvpte Thread-Index: AQHQ8TXlmJdk7DAXIkSUSayQf4h+fJ5BKlwAgAUxYICABy67AIAccsIA Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2015 18:46:09 +0000 Message-ID: References: <55FA9994.5000304@pi.nu> <55FADA66.4080709@labn.net> <56053C00.1000101@labn.net> In-Reply-To: <56053C00.1000101@labn.net> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.5.4.150722 x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1 x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted x-originating-ip: [161.44.213.120] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <85858E9D82A242448162C28E06F7D533@emea.cisco.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: Cc: "mpls-chairs@tools.ietf.org" , "teas-chairs@tools.ietf.org" Subject: Re: [mpls] progressing draft-mtaillon-mpls-summary-frr-rsvpte X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2015 18:53:03 -0000 Hi Lou, The authors met and reviewed the proposal to use the RSVP Association object as a mechanism to relay the per-group bypass assignment information between the PLR(s) and MP(s). We agree that since the Association object as proposed is used to associate recovery LSP with the LSPs it is protecting can serve the purpose of associating a group of protected LSP(s) with a bypass LSP. We are looking into extending the IPv4/IPv6 Extended ASSOCIATION Object (as defined in rfc6780) to carry the necessary Summary FRR information between the PLR and MP. We plan to add this in the next revision of the document. =20 Regards, Tarek On 2015-09-25, 8:20 AM, "Lou Berger" wrote: >Tarek, > Thanks for the response, see below. > >On 9/20/2015 10:39 PM, Tarek Saad (tsaad) wrote: >> Thanks Lou for your review and comments. Inline for responses. >> >> On 2015-09-17, 11:21 AM, "mpls on behalf of Lou Berger" >> wrote: >> >>> I have some comments on the proposed mechanism (I have no opinion on >>> utility or likely implementation): >>> >>> 1. WRT SUMMARY_FRR_BYPASS_ACTIVE object >>> >>> RSVP object space is a pretty scarce resource and it seems we have a >>> number of existing objects that could be reused to support transport of >>> the required information. Some candidates include: the Association >>> object with a new association type; or perhaps the PRIMARY_PATH_ROUTE >>> Object with a new C-type. >> [TS]: seems reasonable, we will discuss this among the authors for a >> suitable extension. >great. > >> >>> 2. SUMMARY_FRR_BYPASS_ASSIGNMENT subobjects >>> >>> While RFC4090 makes use of RRO carried information, it does so without >>> changing the RRO format. (At the time, I recall some used this as >>> justification for RRO usage vs introducing new formats.) The new SOs >>> introduce new information and don't seem to be particularly linked to >>> normal RRO operation -- and more significantly really defining new >>> transit-node to transit-node signaling semantics: >> [TS]: the new SO, is recording local information that if intercepted by >> another LSR (PLR or MP that understands it) can use it for further >>summary >> FRR processing. This resembles to an extent what other RRO SOs do today >> (e.g. node-id and label Sos) for regular FRR. > >The point was that those SOs serve their original purpose of being >useful in constructing EROs, while the new SOs really have entirely >different semantics -- for example what does it mean if an ingress >includes the new SOs for a transit node? > >>> The PLR notifies the MP of the bypass tunnel assignment via adding a >>> SUMMARY_FRR_BYPASS_ASSIGNMENT subobject to the RSVP Path message >>> RECORD_ROUTE object ... >>> >>> The MP acknowledges the PLR's assignment by signalling a >>> SUMMARY_FRR_BYPASS_ASSIGNMENT subobject within the RSVP Resv messsage >>> RECORD_ROUTE object. >>> >>> IMO this usage of RRO is really wrong (and is easily broken by >>> application of RRO policies). I think extending an existing object >> [TS]: yes, the comment (about RRO policies) is rightfully correct. .. >>but >> also applicable to existing RRO/SO(s) (e.g. node-id and/or label SO) >> needed for proper FRR too. >Again, this was leveraging SOs that were defined & used for other >purposes and overloading their semantics. > >> That said, will discuss extension of an >> existing (FRR) object amongst the authors for (dis)advantages. > >That would be great and will be very interested in hearing your thoughts. > >Thanks, >Lou > >> >> Regards, >> Tarek >> >> >>> class is a better approach. Extending one of the existing FRR objects >>> would probably be cleanest, but think the authors should consider and >>> propose their preference. >>> >>> Lou >>> >>> On 9/17/2015 6:44 AM, Loa Andersson wrote: >>>> Working Groups, >>>> >>>> The mpls and teas working group chairs discussed the home working >>>> group for draft-mtaillon-mpls-summary-frr-rsvpte. Since the is >>>>entirely >>>> the choice fell on the mpls working group. We also decided to keep >>>> the teas wg in the loop. >>>> >>>> We have just initiated the mpls review team (MPLS-RT) review if this >>>> draft. This review is focused on if we want to accept the document as >>>> a working group draft, and if it is in shape for us to do so. >>>> >>>> The MPLS-RT reviewers are picked by the mpls chair that will shepherd >>>> the document. >>>> >>>> This also mean that this is a good time for anyone, from both working >>>> groups, to review the document. Please send your reviews to the mpls >>>> working group mailing list (mpls@ietf.org). >>>> >>>> /Loa >>>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> mpls mailing list >>> mpls@ietf.org >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls >> > > From nobody Tue Oct 13 12:18:58 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE4B51A8937 for ; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 12:18:56 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.667 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.667 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, IP_NOT_FRIENDLY=0.334, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=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 HGzncBE6OLg1 for ; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 12:18:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gproxy5-pub.mail.unifiedlayer.com (gproxy5-pub.mail.unifiedlayer.com [67.222.38.55]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id CBD8F1A8934 for ; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 12:18:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 770 invoked by uid 0); 13 Oct 2015 19:18:53 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO cmgw2) (10.0.90.83) by gproxy5.mail.unifiedlayer.com with SMTP; 13 Oct 2015 19:18:53 -0000 Received: from box313.bluehost.com ([69.89.31.113]) by cmgw2 with id UjJj1r00a2SSUrH01jJmgl; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 13:18:51 -0600 X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.1 cv=Jv9i8qIC c=1 sm=1 tr=0 a=h1BC+oY+fLhyFmnTBx92Jg==:117 a=wU2YTnxGAAAA:8 a=cNaOj0WVAAAA:8 a=N659UExz7-8A:10 a=-NfooI8aBGcA:10 a=uEJ9t1CZtbIA:10 a=5lJygRwiOn0A:10 a=48vgC7mUAAAA:8 a=ZWeEEsOA0SWyfI9l6SQA:9 a=VU-pyMwvJ-SFenwX:21 a=cWembIWyJSwwr4vt:21 a=pILNOxqGKmIA:10 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=labn.net; s=default; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Date:Message-ID:From:Cc:References:To:Subject; bh=RIPXy4nVHd8g3EtFs9P9gLw01IwwqSxtrv1yuNOl814=; b=0Vn7Hze5M4u9drmCXYY4jSZDa77pTm3xlvE+Ne9fAp+LlMY0xJIn96shS0boixki3T8MEDEbpu5VVrsl2Xd6tLPsVPLIaKZDnqO1j4vOQWbofeNsAeL3qWP69W14q0uB; Received: from box313.bluehost.com ([69.89.31.113]:44225 helo=[127.0.0.1]) by box313.bluehost.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.84) (envelope-from ) id 1Zm55x-0002rc-0Q; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 13:18:45 -0600 To: "Tarek Saad (tsaad)" , "mpls@ietf.org" , "draft-mtaillon-mpls-summary-frr-rsvpte@ietf.org" References: <55FA9994.5000304@pi.nu> <55FADA66.4080709@labn.net> <56053C00.1000101@labn.net> From: Lou Berger Message-ID: <561D5911.7070809@labn.net> Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2015 15:18:41 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Identified-User: {1038:box313.bluehost.com:labnmobi:labn.net} {sentby:smtp auth 69.89.31.113 authed with lberger@labn.net} Archived-At: Cc: "mpls-chairs@tools.ietf.org" , "teas-chairs@tools.ietf.org" Subject: Re: [mpls] progressing draft-mtaillon-mpls-summary-frr-rsvpte X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2015 19:18:56 -0000 Tarek, Thanks for the status. I'll keep an eye out for the next rev. Lou On 10/13/2015 2:46 PM, Tarek Saad (tsaad) wrote: > Hi Lou, > > The authors met and reviewed the proposal to use the RSVP Association > object as a mechanism to relay the per-group bypass assignment information > between the PLR(s) and MP(s). We agree that since the Association object > as proposed is used to associate recovery LSP with the LSPs it is > protecting can serve the purpose of associating a group of protected > LSP(s) with a bypass LSP. We are looking into extending the IPv4/IPv6 > Extended ASSOCIATION Object (as defined in rfc6780) to carry the necessary > Summary FRR information between the PLR and MP. We plan to add this in the > next revision of the document. > > Regards, > Tarek > > > > On 2015-09-25, 8:20 AM, "Lou Berger" wrote: > >> Tarek, >> Thanks for the response, see below. >> >> On 9/20/2015 10:39 PM, Tarek Saad (tsaad) wrote: >>> Thanks Lou for your review and comments. Inline for responses. >>> >>> On 2015-09-17, 11:21 AM, "mpls on behalf of Lou Berger" >>> wrote: >>> >>>> I have some comments on the proposed mechanism (I have no opinion on >>>> utility or likely implementation): >>>> >>>> 1. WRT SUMMARY_FRR_BYPASS_ACTIVE object >>>> >>>> RSVP object space is a pretty scarce resource and it seems we have a >>>> number of existing objects that could be reused to support transport of >>>> the required information. Some candidates include: the Association >>>> object with a new association type; or perhaps the PRIMARY_PATH_ROUTE >>>> Object with a new C-type. >>> [TS]: seems reasonable, we will discuss this among the authors for a >>> suitable extension. >> great. >> >>>> 2. SUMMARY_FRR_BYPASS_ASSIGNMENT subobjects >>>> >>>> While RFC4090 makes use of RRO carried information, it does so without >>>> changing the RRO format. (At the time, I recall some used this as >>>> justification for RRO usage vs introducing new formats.) The new SOs >>>> introduce new information and don't seem to be particularly linked to >>>> normal RRO operation -- and more significantly really defining new >>>> transit-node to transit-node signaling semantics: >>> [TS]: the new SO, is recording local information that if intercepted by >>> another LSR (PLR or MP that understands it) can use it for further >>> summary >>> FRR processing. This resembles to an extent what other RRO SOs do today >>> (e.g. node-id and label Sos) for regular FRR. >> The point was that those SOs serve their original purpose of being >> useful in constructing EROs, while the new SOs really have entirely >> different semantics -- for example what does it mean if an ingress >> includes the new SOs for a transit node? >> >>>> The PLR notifies the MP of the bypass tunnel assignment via adding a >>>> SUMMARY_FRR_BYPASS_ASSIGNMENT subobject to the RSVP Path message >>>> RECORD_ROUTE object ... >>>> >>>> The MP acknowledges the PLR's assignment by signalling a >>>> SUMMARY_FRR_BYPASS_ASSIGNMENT subobject within the RSVP Resv messsage >>>> RECORD_ROUTE object. >>>> >>>> IMO this usage of RRO is really wrong (and is easily broken by >>>> application of RRO policies). I think extending an existing object >>> [TS]: yes, the comment (about RRO policies) is rightfully correct. .. >>> but >>> also applicable to existing RRO/SO(s) (e.g. node-id and/or label SO) >>> needed for proper FRR too. >> Again, this was leveraging SOs that were defined & used for other >> purposes and overloading their semantics. >> >>> That said, will discuss extension of an >>> existing (FRR) object amongst the authors for (dis)advantages. >> That would be great and will be very interested in hearing your thoughts. >> >> Thanks, >> Lou >> >>> Regards, >>> Tarek >>> >>> >>>> class is a better approach. Extending one of the existing FRR objects >>>> would probably be cleanest, but think the authors should consider and >>>> propose their preference. >>>> >>>> Lou >>>> >>>> On 9/17/2015 6:44 AM, Loa Andersson wrote: >>>>> Working Groups, >>>>> >>>>> The mpls and teas working group chairs discussed the home working >>>>> group for draft-mtaillon-mpls-summary-frr-rsvpte. Since the is >>>>> entirely >>>>> the choice fell on the mpls working group. We also decided to keep >>>>> the teas wg in the loop. >>>>> >>>>> We have just initiated the mpls review team (MPLS-RT) review if this >>>>> draft. This review is focused on if we want to accept the document as >>>>> a working group draft, and if it is in shape for us to do so. >>>>> >>>>> The MPLS-RT reviewers are picked by the mpls chair that will shepherd >>>>> the document. >>>>> >>>>> This also mean that this is a good time for anyone, from both working >>>>> groups, to review the document. Please send your reviews to the mpls >>>>> working group mailing list (mpls@ietf.org). >>>>> >>>>> /Loa >>>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> mpls mailing list >>>> mpls@ietf.org >>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls >> > From nobody Tue Oct 13 14:07:41 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 26B721A8F46 for ; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 14:07:40 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.912 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.912 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=ham 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 huSKtJie55Ar for ; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 14:07:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE8E41A8F4B for ; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 14:07:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: by rfc-editor.org (Postfix, from userid 30) id 27DF9187E28; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 14:07:28 -0700 (PDT) To: yakov@juniper.net, erosen@cisco.com, akatlas@gmail.com, db3546@att.com, aretana@cisco.com, loa@pi.nu, swallow@cisco.com, rcallon@juniper.net X-PHP-Originating-Script: 30:errata_mail_lib.php From: RFC Errata System Message-Id: <20151013210728.27DF9187E28@rfc-editor.org> Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2015 14:07:28 -0700 (PDT) Archived-At: Cc: alexander.okonnikov@gmail.com, mpls@ietf.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org Subject: [mpls] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC3107 (4497) X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2015 21:07:40 -0000 The following errata report has been submitted for RFC3107, "Carrying Label Information in BGP-4". -------------------------------------- You may review the report below and at: http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=3107&eid=4497 -------------------------------------- Type: Technical Reported by: Alexander Okonnikov Section: 2 Original Text ------------- Label distribution can be piggybacked in the BGP Update message by using the BGP-4 Multiprotocol Extensions attribute [RFC 2283]. Corrected Text -------------- Label distribution can be piggybacked in the BGP Update message by using the BGP-4 Multiprotocol Extensions attribute [BGP-MP]. Notes ----- No such reference [RFC 2283] in References section. Also document refers to newer version of BGP-MP (RFC 2858). Instructions: ------------- This erratum is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, please use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party (IESG) can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary. -------------------------------------- RFC3107 (draft-ietf-mpls-bgp4-mpls-04) -------------------------------------- Title : Carrying Label Information in BGP-4 Publication Date : May 2001 Author(s) : Y. Rekhter, E. Rosen Category : PROPOSED STANDARD Source : Multiprotocol Label Switching Area : Routing Stream : IETF Verifying Party : IESG From nobody Tue Oct 13 14:39:01 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5D8DA1A9087 for ; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 14:39:00 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.912 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.912 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=ham 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 vvOxdclAgh1d for ; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 14:38:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B78F1A9066 for ; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 14:38:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: by rfc-editor.org (Postfix, from userid 30) id 1736E187E28; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 14:38:49 -0700 (PDT) To: yakov@juniper.net, erosen@cisco.com, akatlas@gmail.com, db3546@att.com, aretana@cisco.com, loa@pi.nu, swallow@cisco.com, rcallon@juniper.net X-PHP-Originating-Script: 30:errata_mail_lib.php From: RFC Errata System Message-Id: <20151013213849.1736E187E28@rfc-editor.org> Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2015 14:38:49 -0700 (PDT) Archived-At: Cc: alexander.okonnikov@gmail.com, mpls@ietf.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org Subject: [mpls] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC3107 (4498) X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2015 21:39:00 -0000 The following errata report has been submitted for RFC3107, "Carrying Label Information in BGP-4". -------------------------------------- You may review the report below and at: http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=3107&eid=4498 -------------------------------------- Type: Technical Reported by: Alexander Okonnikov Section: 3 Original Text ------------- The label(s) specified for a particular route (and associated with its address prefix) must be assigned by the LSR which is identified by the value of the Next Hop attribute of the route. When a BGP speaker redistributes a route, the label(s) assigned to that route must not be changed (except by omission), unless the speaker changes the value of the Next Hop attribute of the route. Corrected Text -------------- The label(s) specified for a particular route (and associated with its address prefix) must be assigned by the LSR which is identified by the value of the Network Address of Next Hop field of MP_REACH_NLRI attribute of the route. When a BGP speaker redistributes a route, the label(s) assigned to that route must not be changed (except by omission), unless the speaker changes the value of the Network Address of Next Hop field of MP_REACH_NLRI attribute of the route. Notes ----- Next Hop address for labeled routes is conveyed within MP_REACH_NLRI attribute. Instructions: ------------- This erratum is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, please use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party (IESG) can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary. -------------------------------------- RFC3107 (draft-ietf-mpls-bgp4-mpls-04) -------------------------------------- Title : Carrying Label Information in BGP-4 Publication Date : May 2001 Author(s) : Y. Rekhter, E. Rosen Category : PROPOSED STANDARD Source : Multiprotocol Label Switching Area : Routing Stream : IETF Verifying Party : IESG From nobody Tue Oct 13 15:05:42 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D43BB1A1A43 for ; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 15:05:40 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.912 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.912 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=ham 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 oC8GuAcVemG0 for ; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 15:05:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0699A1A1A32 for ; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 15:05:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: by rfc-editor.org (Postfix, from userid 30) id 01C13188CF0; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 15:05:29 -0700 (PDT) To: yakov@juniper.net, erosen@cisco.com, akatlas@gmail.com, db3546@att.com, aretana@cisco.com, loa@pi.nu, swallow@cisco.com, rcallon@juniper.net X-PHP-Originating-Script: 30:errata_mail_lib.php From: RFC Errata System Message-Id: <20151013220529.01C13188CF0@rfc-editor.org> Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2015 15:05:29 -0700 (PDT) Archived-At: Cc: alexander.okonnikov@gmail.com, mpls@ietf.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org Subject: [mpls] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC3107 (4499) X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2015 22:05:41 -0000 The following errata report has been submitted for RFC3107, "Carrying Label Information in BGP-4". -------------------------------------- You may review the report below and at: http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=3107&eid=4499 -------------------------------------- Type: Technical Reported by: Alexander Okonnikov Section: 3 Original Text ------------- A BGP speaker can withdraw a previously advertised route (as well as the binding between this route and a label) by either (a) advertising a new route (and a label) with the same NLRI as the previously advertised route, or (b) listing the NLRI of the previously advertised route in the Withdrawn Routes field of an Update message. The label information carried (as part of NLRI) in the Withdrawn Routes field should be set to 0x800000. (Of course, terminating the BGP session also withdraws all the previously advertised routes.) Corrected Text -------------- A BGP speaker can withdraw a previously advertised route (as well as the binding between this route and a label) by either (a) advertising a new route (and a label) with the same NLRI as the previously advertised route, or (b) listing the NLRI of the previously advertised route in the Withdrawn Routes field of an MR_UNREACH_NLRI attribute of an Update message. The label information carried (as part of NLRI) in the Withdrawn Routes field should be set to 0x000001. (Of course, terminating the BGP session also withdraws all the previously advertised routes.) Notes ----- 1. Labeled routes are withdrawn by virtue of MR_UNREACH_NLRI attribute. 2. Label value should be set to 0x00000 with BoS=1. Value 0x800000 was carried from draft, where BoS was high-order bit. Instructions: ------------- This erratum is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, please use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party (IESG) can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary. -------------------------------------- RFC3107 (draft-ietf-mpls-bgp4-mpls-04) -------------------------------------- Title : Carrying Label Information in BGP-4 Publication Date : May 2001 Author(s) : Y. Rekhter, E. Rosen Category : PROPOSED STANDARD Source : Multiprotocol Label Switching Area : Routing Stream : IETF Verifying Party : IESG From nobody Tue Oct 13 15:19:33 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 776101A90A9 for ; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 15:19:32 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.912 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.912 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=ham 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 20aSY2JeTD5y for ; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 15:19:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F1EAF1A90A5 for ; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 15:19:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: by rfc-editor.org (Postfix, from userid 30) id C2B7C180206; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 15:19:20 -0700 (PDT) To: yakov@juniper.net, erosen@cisco.com, akatlas@gmail.com, db3546@att.com, aretana@cisco.com, loa@pi.nu, swallow@cisco.com, rcallon@juniper.net X-PHP-Originating-Script: 30:errata_mail_lib.php From: RFC Errata System Message-Id: <20151013221920.C2B7C180206@rfc-editor.org> Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2015 15:19:20 -0700 (PDT) Archived-At: Cc: alexander.okonnikov@gmail.com, mpls@ietf.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org Subject: [mpls] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC3107 (4500) X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2015 22:19:32 -0000 The following errata report has been submitted for RFC3107, "Carrying Label Information in BGP-4". -------------------------------------- You may review the report below and at: http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=3107&eid=4500 -------------------------------------- Type: Technical Reported by: Alexander Okonnikov Section: 5 Original Text ------------- A BGP speaker that is capable of handling multiple routes to a destination (as described above) should use the Capabilities Optional Parameter, as defined in [BGP-CAP], to inform its peers about this capability. The value of this capability is 4. Corrected Text -------------- A BGP speaker that is capable of handling multiple routes to a destination (as described above) should use the Capabilities Optional Parameter, as defined in [BGP-CAP], to inform its peers about this capability. This capability is advertised using the Capability Code 4 and Capability Length 0. Notes ----- To remove confusion what word value means - Capability Value or value of Capability Code. Also, format of multiple routes capability is not described, so length = 0 is assumed. Instructions: ------------- This erratum is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, please use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party (IESG) can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary. -------------------------------------- RFC3107 (draft-ietf-mpls-bgp4-mpls-04) -------------------------------------- Title : Carrying Label Information in BGP-4 Publication Date : May 2001 Author(s) : Y. Rekhter, E. Rosen Category : PROPOSED STANDARD Source : Multiprotocol Label Switching Area : Routing Stream : IETF Verifying Party : IESG From nobody Wed Oct 14 00:29:01 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CBB701B29D4; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 00:28:59 -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] autolearn=ham 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 jrZygA1COOOv; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 00:28:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 804781A8830; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 00:28:58 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: "Benoit Claise" To: "The IESG" X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.5.1 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <20151014072858.21790.46687.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2015 00:28:58 -0700 Archived-At: Cc: mpls@ietf.org, bwietf@bwijnen.net Subject: [mpls] Benoit Claise's No Objection on draft-ietf-mpls-self-ping-05: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2015 07:28:59 -0000 Benoit Claise has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-mpls-self-ping-05: 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-mpls-self-ping/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Did the WG consider updating RF C3209? OLD: The node SHOULD be prepared to forward packets carrying the assigned label prior to sending the RESV message. NEW: The node SHOULD be prepared to forward packets carrying the assigned label prior to sending the RESV message. When an ingress LSR receives an RESV message, it MAY/SHOULD/MUST invoke the LSP Self-ping procedures [this-RFC-to-be] to verify that forwarding state has been installed on all downstream nodes. From nobody Wed Oct 14 01:47:18 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 374E71B2C9B for ; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 01:47:15 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.309 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.309 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, J_CHICKENPOX_66=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham 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 8-4pKZ1ucU6N for ; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 01:47:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp-fr.alcatel-lucent.com (fr-hpida-esg-02.alcatel-lucent.com [135.245.210.21]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1114B1B2C9A for ; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 01:47:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fr712usmtp2.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (unknown [135.239.2.42]) by Websense Email Security Gateway with ESMTPS id AEB436B572E80; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 08:46:57 +0000 (GMT) Received: from FR711WXCHHUB01.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (fr711wxchhub01.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com [135.239.2.111]) by fr712usmtp2.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (GMO) with ESMTP id t9E8kxeu025893 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Wed, 14 Oct 2015 10:47:00 +0200 Received: from FR711WXCHMBA05.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com ([169.254.1.213]) by FR711WXCHHUB01.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com ([135.239.2.111]) with mapi id 14.03.0195.001; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 10:46:59 +0200 From: "Bocci, Matthew (Matthew)" To: Alexander Vainshtein , "Stewart Bryant (stbryant@cisco.com)" , "Andrew G. Malis (agmalis@gmail.com)" Thread-Topic: Responding to comments in the WG adoption poll for draft-vainshtein-mpls-gal-tc-ttl-handling Thread-Index: AdEFyVk8oAE6DorlSvORcvlcy5oXZgAiyVEA Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2015 08:46:58 +0000 Message-ID: References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-GB, en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.5.6.150930 x-originating-ip: [135.239.27.41] Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_D243D25F84320matthewboccialcatellucentcom_" MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: Cc: "Ross Callon \(rcallon@juniper.net\)" , "mpls@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [mpls] Responding to comments in the WG adoption poll for draft-vainshtein-mpls-gal-tc-ttl-handling X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2015 08:47:15 -0000 --_000_D243D25F84320matthewboccialcatellucentcom_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sasha Thanks very much for responding in detail. The problem is that the draft do= es still discuss the case of implementations treating the TTL as if it indi= cates something about the OAM packet. I=92ve discussed this with the co-edi= tors of RFC5586 (Stewart and Martin) and it really seems to us that the dra= ft is motivated by this. As co-authors of RFC 5586, we are concerned with the impact on existing imp= lementations of trying to update 5586 to work with a specific proprietary i= mplementation. That implementation seems to rely on TTL signalling the OAM = priority. This use of TTL is a deviation from the MPLS architecture. It is = not clear that this is the right thing to do, but if there is consensus to make that change it should be up-front rather than a = by-product of this document. However, we do acknowledge that we were not very strict in the specificatio= n of the TTL value: must be at least 1, and exact value is application spec= ific. So that has left the door open to people making wrong decisions. Since there are no known issues with the existing implementations of RFC558= 6, it seems inappropriate for this new draft to be an update. It also appears to legitimise the proprietary interpretations and will not sol= ve the problems that they introduce, which are never going to interoperate = with the existing deployed base even with this draft. This makes the usefulness= of the document rather tenuous. We see no need to publish this document, but if there is consensus that it = should be published, then an acceptable way forward would be to make the do= cument an informational and not to update RFC 5586. Matthew From: Alexander Vainshtein > Date: Tuesday, 13 October 2015 at 16:10 To: "Stewart Bryant (stbryant@cisco.com)" >, Matthew Bocci >, "Andrew G. Malis= (agmalis@gmail.com)" > Cc: "'adrian@olddog.co.uk'" >, "Loa Andersson (loa@pi.nu)" >, "Ross Callon (rcallon@juniper.net)" >, = "mpls@ietf.org" > Subject: Responding to comments in the WG adoption poll for draft-vainshtei= n-mpls-gal-tc-ttl-handling Stewart, Andy, Matthew and all, I would like to respond to the comments received so far in the adoption pol= l for draft-vainshtein-mpls-gal-tc-ttl-handling, and I would like to do it = in one email. First of all I=92d like to thank Andy for his support:). The rest of my mail deals with comments from Stewart (here) and Matthew (here). I apologize = in advance for a rather long email, but I think that some explanations are = required. One point that I=92d like to make is that the text quoted in Stewarts=92 co= mment (and presumably causing his concerns) comes from an earlier (-01) ver= sion of the draft but does not exist in the -03 version of the draft (for wh= ich adoption has been requested by the authors). The current text says: When this LSE becomes the top entry in the label stack (because the previous label has been popped) some receiving implementations have attempted to interpret the TC and TTL fields. In particular, packets with an LSE that contains the GAL with TTL set to one can be trapped to the generic (slow) MPLS exception handler with appropriate rate limiting before the GAL is noticed (which would otherwise result in trapping the packet to a fast OAM handler). The resultant poor performance in handling TTL of one could be seen as a poor implementation choice, but it does not violate RFC 5586. I assume that Stewart=92s conclusion =93Any system that behaves as above is= not complying with the base MPLS specifications=94 has been correct with r= egard to the old text (which erroneously mentioned setting TTL in the GAL L= SE to 0), but I do not see that implementations described in the new text w= ould violate any base MPLS specifications. Do I miss something? My next point is about Matthew=92s comment that mentions =93changing the re= commended TTL value to work around a specific implementation=94. Actually R= FC 5586 does not recommend any specifi= c TTL valueto be set in the GAL LSE, it just says that this value MUST NOT = be set to 0. Next, when it comes to preventing =93buggy implementations forwarding packe= ts when the GAL is exposed=94 by setting the TTL value to 1 in the GAL LSE:= this is definitely worth discussion. From my POV this discussion could be = done after adoption, but, at least the draft in its current form does not p= revent setting TTL to 1 even if it RECOMMENDS a different default. Regarding yet another Stewarts=92 comment, namely that =93that label (Sasha= : GAL) is never supposed to be forwarded so the problem (Sasha: which TTL v= alue to set in the GAL LSE) should never arise=94 =96 from my POV this is n= ot quite correct. In modern systems packets that are not supposed to be for= warded (for whatever reason) could be processed by not just by SW but also = by HW accelerators (e.g., for fast OAM). Failure to differentiate between t= hese two cases would mean that two standard-compliant implementations are d= e-facto not interoperable. The ultimate objective of the draft is to elimin= ate (or at least to minimize) the possibility of such conflicts by filling = in what I see as gaps in the 5586. Last but not least, Stewart has asked about behavior of implementations tha= t encounter some other special purpose labels, specially mentioning Entropy= Label Indicator (ELI) defined in RFC 6790 and Extended Special Purpose Label indicator (XL) defined in RFC 7274= . I have checked both these documents, and from my POV RFC 6790 unambiguously= defines the behavior related to TC and TTL in LSE containing ELI and EL i= n Sections 4.1 and 4.2. Quoting from Section 4.1 =93Egress LSR=94: When processing the final tunnel termination, Y (Sasha: the egress LSR for the tunnel) MAY enqueue the packet based on= that tunnel TL's or ELI's TC value and MAY use the tunnel TL's or ELI's TTL to compute th= e TTL of the remaining packet header. The EL's TTL MUST be ignored. Quoting from Section 4.2 =93Ingress LSR=94: If Y has indicated that it can process ELs for the tunnel, push onto the packet. X (Sasha: the ingress LSR for the tunnel)SHOULD put the same TTL and TC fields for the ELI as it does for TL. X MAY choose different values for the TTL and TC fields if it is known that the ELI will not be exposed as the top label at any point along the LSP (as may happen in cases where PHP is used and the ELI and EL are not stripped at the penultimate hop (see Section 4.4). The BoS bit for the ELI MUST be zero (i.e., BoS is not set). The TTL for the EL MUST be zero to ensure that it is not used inadvertently for forwarding. The TC for the EL may be any value. The BoS bit for the EL depends on whether or not there are more labels in the label stack. RFC 7224 does not explicitly mention how the TTL and/or TC in the LSE conta= ining XL, but it says that =93The XL only assigns special meaning to L=94 (= Sasha: the next label in the stack). To me this can only be interpreted as = a requirement for the LSR that exposes the XL to ignore TC and TTL values i= n the corresponding LSE even if 2119 language is not used. So I do not see = (at least at this moment) any need in extending the draft for the =93genera= l=94 case, since GAL is the only special purpose label for which handling o= f TC and TTL fields by the receiver is not clearly defined. Hopefully these notes would be useful and help to resolve your concerns reg= arding adoption of the draft. Of course, once the draft is adopted, the WG could resolve any remaining (o= r newly identified) issues. Regards, Sasha Regards, Sasha Office: +972-39266302 Cell: +972-549266302 Email: Alexander.Vainshtein@ecitele.com --_000_D243D25F84320matthewboccialcatellucentcom_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-ID: <76B8DA5F123E9647ADAC8727182FFA83@exchange.lucent.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Sasha

Thanks very much for responding in detail. The problem is that the dra= ft does still discuss the case of implementations treating the TTL as if it= indicates something about the OAM packet. I=92ve discussed this with the c= o-editors of RFC5586 (Stewart and Martin) and it really seems to us that the draft is motivated by this.&nbs= p;

As co-authors of RFC 5586, we= are concerned with the impact on existing implementations of trying to upd= ate 5586 to work with a specific proprietary implementation. That implement= ation seems to rely on TTL signalling the OAM priority. This use of TTL is a deviation from the MPLS architectur= e. It is not clear that this is the right thing to do, but if
there is consensus to make th= at change it should be up-front rather than a by-product of this document.<= /div>

However, we do acknowledge th= at we were not very strict in the specification of the TTL value: must be a= t least 1, and exact value is application specific. So that has left the do= or open to people making wrong decisions.

Since there are no known issu= es with the existing implementations of RFC5586, it seems inappropriate for= this new draft to be an update. It
also appears to legitimise th= e proprietary interpretations and will not solve the problems that they int= roduce, which are never going to interoperate with
the existing deployed base ev= en with  this draft. This makes the usefulness of the document ra= ther tenuous.

We see no need to publish thi= s document, but if there is consensus that it should be published, then an = acceptable way forward would be to make the document an informational and n= ot to update RFC 5586.

Matthew



From: Alexander Vainshtein <Alexander.Vainshtein@ecitel= e.com>
Date: Tuesday, 13 October 2015 at 1= 6:10
To: "Stewart Bryant (stbryant@cisco.com)" <stbryant@cisco.com>, Matthew Bocci <<= a href=3D"mailto:matthew.bocci@alcatel-lucent.com">matthew.bocci@alcatel-lu= cent.com>, "Andrew G. Malis (agmalis@gmail.= com)" <agmalis@gmail.com>
Cc: "'adrian@olddog.co.uk'" <adrian@olddog.co.uk>, "Loa Andersson (loa@pi.nu)" <lo= a@pi.nu>, "Ross Callon (rcallon@juniper.= net)" <rcallon@juniper.n= et>, "mpls@ietf.org" = <mpls@ietf.org>
Subject: Responding to comments in = the WG adoption poll for draft-vainshtein-mpls-gal-tc-ttl-handling

Stewart, Andy, Matthew and all,

I would like to respond to the comments received so = far in the adoption poll for draft-vainshtein-mpls-gal-tc-ttl-handling, and= I would like to do it in one email.

 

First of all I=92d like to thank Andy for his  = supportJ.

 

The rest of my mail deals with comments from  S= tewart (here) and Matthew (here). I apologize in advance for a rather long email, but I think that some expl= anations are required.

 

One point that I=92d like to make is that the tex= t quoted in Stewarts=92 comment (and presumably causing his concerns) c= omes from an earlier (-01) version of the draft but does not exist in the -03 version of the draft (for which = adoption has been requested by the authors).

The current text says:

 =

  = ; When this LSE becomes the top entry in the label stack (because the<= /o:p>

  = ; previous label has been popped) some receiving implementations have<= /o:p>

  = ; attempted to interpret the TC and TTL fields.  In particular, packet= s

  = ; with an LSE that contains the GAL with TTL set to one can be trapped=

  = ; to the generic (slow) MPLS exception handler with appropriate rate

  = ; limiting before the GAL is noticed (which would otherwise result in<= /o:p>

  &nbs= p;trapping the packet to a fast OAM handler).  The resultant poor=

  = ; performance in handling TTL of one could be seen as a poor

  = ; implementation choice, but it does not violate = RFC 5586.

 

I assume that Stewart=92s conclusion =93Any s= ystem that behaves as above is not complying with the base MPLS specificati= ons=94 has been correct with regard to the old text (which erroneously mentioned setting TTL in the GAL LSE to 0), but I = do not see that implementations described in the new text would violate any= base MPLS specifications. Do I miss something?

 

My next point is about Matthew=92s comment that ment= ions =93changing the recommended TTL value to work around a specific = implementation=94. Actually RFC 5586 does not re= commend any specific TTL valueto be set in the GAL LSE, it just = says that this value MUST NOT be set to 0.

 

Next, when it comes to preventing =93buggy imp= lementations forwarding packets when the GAL is exposed=94 by settin= g the TTL value to 1 in the GAL LSE: this is definitely worth discussion. From my POV this discussion could be done after adoption= , but, at least the draft in its current form does not prevent setting TTL = to 1 even if it RECOMMENDS a different default.

 

Regarding yet another Stewarts=92 comment, namely th= at =93that label (Sasha: GAL) is never supposed to be forwarded so the problem (Sasha: which TTL value to set in th= e GAL LSE) should never arise=94 =96 from my POV this is not q= uite correct. In modern systems packets that are not supposed to be forwarded (for whatever reason) could be processed by n= ot just by SW but also by HW accelerators (e.g., for fast OAM). Failure to = differentiate between these two cases would mean that two standard-complian= t implementations are de-facto not interoperable. The ultimate objective of the draft is to eliminate (or at = least to minimize) the possibility of such conflicts by filling in what I s= ee as gaps in the 5586.

 

Last but not least, Stewart has asked about behavior= of implementations that encounter some other special purpose labels, speci= ally mentioning Entropy Label Indicator (ELI) defined in RFC 6790 and Extended S= pecial Purpose Label indicator (XL)  defined in RFC 7274.

I have checked both these documents, and from my POV= RFC 6790 unambiguously defines the behavior related to TC and TTL in LSE c= ontaining ELI and EL  in Sections 4.1 and 4.2.

Quoting from Section 4.1 =93Egress LSR=94:

 &=
nbsp; When processing the final tunnel termination,
 &=
nbsp; Y (Sasha: the egress LSR for the tunnel) MAY enqueue the packet based on that tunnel TL's 

 &=
nbsp; or ELI's TC value and MAY use the tunnel TL's or ELI's TTL to co=
mpute the 


 &=
nbsp; TTL of the remaining packet header.  The EL's TTL MUST be i=
gnored.


 


Quoting from Section 4.2 =93Ingress LSR=94:


 &=
nbsp;     If Y has indicated that it can process ELs fo=
r the tunnel, 


 &=
nbsp;     push <TL, ELI, EL> onto the packet=
.  


 &=
nbsp;     X (Sasha: the ingress LSR for the tunnel<=
/span>)SHOULD put the same 

 &=
nbsp;     TTL and TC fields for the ELI as it does=
 for TL.  


 &=
nbsp;     X MAY choose different values for the TT=
L and TC


 &=
nbsp;     fields if it is known that the ELI will not b=
e exposed as the top


 &=
nbsp;     label at any point along the LSP (as may happ=
en in cases where


 &=
nbsp;     PHP is used and the ELI and EL are not stripp=
ed at the


 &=
nbsp;     penultimate hop (see Section 4.4).  The BoS bit for=
 the ELI MUST


 &=
nbsp;     be zero (i.e., BoS is not set).  The TTL=
 for the EL MUST be zero


 &=
nbsp;     to ensure that it is not used inadvertently f=
or forwarding.  The


 &=
nbsp;     TC for the EL may be any value.  The BoS=
 bit for the EL depends


 &=
nbsp;     on whether or not there are more labels in th=
e label stack.


 


RFC 7224 does not explicitly mention how th=
e TTL and/or TC in the LSE containing XL, but it says that =93The XL only assigns special meaning to L=94 (Sasha: the next label in the stack). To me th=
is can only be interpreted as a requirement for the LSR that exposes the XL=
 to ignore TC and TTL values in the corresponding LSE even if 2119 language is not used. So I do not see (at lea=
st at this moment) any need in extending the draft for the =93general=94 ca=
se, since GAL is the only special purpose label for which handling of TC an=
d TTL fields by the receiver is not clearly defined.


 


Hopefully these notes would be useful and help to re=
solve your concerns regarding adoption of the draft.


Of course, once the draft is adopted, the WG could r=
esolve any remaining (or newly identified) issues.


 


Regards,


Sasha


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Regards,


Sasha


 


Office: +972-39266302


Cell:      +972-5492663=
02


Email:   Alexander.Vainshtein@ecitele.com


 
--_000_D243D25F84320matthewboccialcatellucentcom_-- From nobody Wed Oct 14 02:20:44 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D7A251B2CFD for ; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 02:20:41 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.91 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham 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 hVDQzhijyt57 for ; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 02:20:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pipi.pi.nu (pipi.pi.nu [83.168.239.141]) (using TLSv1.1 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 620501B2CD0 for ; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 02:13:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.10] (unknown [112.205.73.125]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: loa@pi.nu) by pipi.pi.nu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id AF74C18013BE; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 11:13:53 +0200 (CEST) To: RFC Errata System , erosen@cisco.com, akatlas@gmail.com, db3546@att.com, aretana@cisco.com, swallow@cisco.com, rcallon@juniper.net References: <20151013210728.27DF9187E28@rfc-editor.org> From: Loa Andersson Message-ID: <561E1CC9.7080600@pi.nu> Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2015 17:13:45 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20151013210728.27DF9187E28@rfc-editor.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: Cc: alexander.okonnikov@gmail.com, mpls@ietf.org Subject: Re: [mpls] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC3107 (4497) X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2015 09:20:42 -0000 Folks, (I removed Yacov, since hie mail address is no longer working), I think this errata is - first of minor importance and could be held for a future update of RFC 3107 - second the errata is at the core correct - third I'm not happy with the proposed new text I think it should be: NEW - first alternative ----------------------- Label distribution can be piggybacked in the BGP Update message by using the BGP-4 Multiprotocol Extensions attribute defined in RFC 2858 [BGP-MP]. Note: RFC 2858 obsoletes RFC 2283, so the text above reflects the situation as it was when 3107 were written. This correctly captured in the RFC archives and will be found even we only have the original text. But it would have been no harm doing this updates, if the documentation had not changed. RFC 2858 has later been obsoleted by RFC 4760, which in turn has been updated by RFC 7606. So I'm a bit undecided what to do about this, given that an update will take place in the time it is done, I believe that the corrected text should be: NEW - preferred alternative --------------------------- Label distribution can be piggybacked in the BGP Update message by using the BGP-4 Multiprotocol Extensions attribute defined in RFC 4760 [BGP-MP]. Caveat: This requires an update to the [BGP-MP] in the reference section at the same time. Any opinions? /Loa On 2015-10-14 05:07, RFC Errata System wrote: > The following errata report has been submitted for RFC3107, > "Carrying Label Information in BGP-4". > > -------------------------------------- > You may review the report below and at: > http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=3107&eid=4497 > > -------------------------------------- > Type: Technical > Reported by: Alexander Okonnikov > > Section: 2 > > Original Text > ------------- > Label distribution can be piggybacked in the BGP Update message by > using the BGP-4 Multiprotocol Extensions attribute [RFC 2283]. > > Corrected Text > -------------- > Label distribution can be piggybacked in the BGP Update message by > using the BGP-4 Multiprotocol Extensions attribute [BGP-MP]. > > Notes > ----- > No such reference [RFC 2283] in References section. Also document refers to newer version of BGP-MP (RFC 2858). > > Instructions: > ------------- > This erratum is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, please > use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or > rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party (IESG) > can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary. > > -------------------------------------- > RFC3107 (draft-ietf-mpls-bgp4-mpls-04) > -------------------------------------- > Title : Carrying Label Information in BGP-4 > Publication Date : May 2001 > Author(s) : Y. Rekhter, E. Rosen > Category : PROPOSED STANDARD > Source : Multiprotocol Label Switching > Area : Routing > Stream : IETF > Verifying Party : IESG > From nobody Wed Oct 14 02:30:56 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4EB1D1B2CC1 for ; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 02:30:55 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.91 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=unavailable 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 1GTOhLiXYmVC for ; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 02:30:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pipi.pi.nu (pipi.pi.nu [83.168.239.141]) (using TLSv1.1 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B598F1B2D3B for ; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 02:20:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.10] (unknown [112.205.73.125]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: loa@pi.nu) by pipi.pi.nu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4149618013BE; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 11:20:22 +0200 (CEST) To: RFC Errata System , Eric C Rosen , akatlas@gmail.com, db3546@att.com, aretana@cisco.com, swallow@cisco.com, rcallon@juniper.net References: <20151013210728.27DF9187E28@rfc-editor.org> <561E1CC9.7080600@pi.nu> From: Loa Andersson Message-ID: <561E1E4E.4070208@pi.nu> Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2015 17:20:14 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <561E1CC9.7080600@pi.nu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: Cc: alexander.okonnikov@gmail.com, mpls@ietf.org Subject: [mpls] Re-sending -Re: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC3107 (4497) X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2015 09:30:55 -0000 Folks, I'm re-sending this because Eric's mail address was wrong. SOory for those of you that got duplicates, but better duplicates than none at all. /Loa On 2015-10-14 17:13, Loa Andersson wrote: > Folks, (I removed Yacov, since hie mail address is no longer working), > > I think this errata is > - first of minor importance and could be held for a future update > of RFC 3107 > - second the errata is at the core correct > - third I'm not happy with the proposed new text > > I think it should be: > > NEW - first alternative > ----------------------- > Label distribution can be piggybacked in the BGP Update message by > using the BGP-4 Multiprotocol Extensions attribute defined in > RFC 2858 [BGP-MP]. > > Note: > RFC 2858 obsoletes RFC 2283, so the text above reflects the situation > as it was when 3107 were written. This correctly captured in the > RFC archives and will be found even we only have the original text. > But it would have been no harm doing this updates, if the documentation > had not changed. RFC 2858 has later been obsoleted by RFC 4760, which in > turn has been updated by RFC 7606. > > So I'm a bit undecided what to do about this, given that an update will > take place in the time it is done, I believe that the corrected text > should be: > > NEW - preferred alternative > --------------------------- > Label distribution can be piggybacked in the BGP Update message by > using the BGP-4 Multiprotocol Extensions attribute defined in > RFC 4760 [BGP-MP]. > > Caveat: This requires an update to the [BGP-MP] in the reference > section at the same time. > > Any opinions? > > /Loa > > On 2015-10-14 05:07, RFC Errata System wrote: >> The following errata report has been submitted for RFC3107, >> "Carrying Label Information in BGP-4". >> >> -------------------------------------- >> You may review the report below and at: >> http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=3107&eid=4497 >> >> -------------------------------------- >> Type: Technical >> Reported by: Alexander Okonnikov >> >> Section: 2 >> >> Original Text >> ------------- >> Label distribution can be piggybacked in the BGP Update message by >> using the BGP-4 Multiprotocol Extensions attribute [RFC 2283]. >> >> Corrected Text >> -------------- >> Label distribution can be piggybacked in the BGP Update message by >> using the BGP-4 Multiprotocol Extensions attribute [BGP-MP]. >> >> Notes >> ----- >> No such reference [RFC 2283] in References section. Also document >> refers to newer version of BGP-MP (RFC 2858). >> >> Instructions: >> ------------- >> This erratum is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, please >> use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or >> rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party (IESG) >> can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary. >> >> -------------------------------------- >> RFC3107 (draft-ietf-mpls-bgp4-mpls-04) >> -------------------------------------- >> Title : Carrying Label Information in BGP-4 >> Publication Date : May 2001 >> Author(s) : Y. Rekhter, E. Rosen >> Category : PROPOSED STANDARD >> Source : Multiprotocol Label Switching >> Area : Routing >> Stream : IETF >> Verifying Party : IESG >> From nobody Wed Oct 14 04:34:50 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E6081A00D0 for ; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 04:34:49 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 nEytmEmlnr3P for ; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 04:34:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-wi0-x22d.google.com (mail-wi0-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c05::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 4A50C1A040C for ; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 04:34:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: by wicgb1 with SMTP id gb1so126078740wic.1 for ; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 04:34:45 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; bh=rP6HKreUSykbSN95UFFzHGa38dijhXo3G1Fn8e+57BY=; b=ONKICBFSd9G4EipmvfdSSmzFjCzw0SnE4IMzX6F644qgiQFQtFrQOIoIfwMFLWf0Hj VHEMK91s6bvUDwJkE3RDCVSi5AApuRdB73t+CYbKzWtX2FGFAgOLZR/Ccp5Htb4dQx7l atvHCucVHJwK/8G0aZ0rjiW33jwEtb1bCBSUnt331ImNmSGlMiCZKC8MAPvp2C8MMSne Kj7u7woqIT/H5nLjU5AXRKqNeDfCIdWmV5vP0NiDPsbu33PftMu3B21A+N7rS2Zxaf3I TDzwinrzvj8+pt6s3Dv5M6rY2YFki47QZn1/pzTeNAFJUOfEOJMK3/pM4/O1Cg2UNKGe +mVQ== X-Received: by 10.195.13.164 with SMTP id ez4mr3393035wjd.112.1444822484853; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 04:34:44 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.28.9.212 with HTTP; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 04:34:25 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <561E1CC9.7080600@pi.nu> References: <20151013210728.27DF9187E28@rfc-editor.org> <561E1CC9.7080600@pi.nu> From: "Andrew G. Malis" Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2015 13:34:25 +0200 Message-ID: To: Loa Andersson Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7bb04f68f929e305220ef2ae Archived-At: Cc: "mpls@ietf.org" , alexander.okonnikov@gmail.com, Ross Callon , erosen@cisco.com, RFC Errata System Subject: Re: [mpls] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC3107 (4497) X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2015 11:34:49 -0000 --047d7bb04f68f929e305220ef2ae Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Loa, Just personally, I prefer referring to RFC 4760. Cheers, Andy On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 11:13 AM, Loa Andersson wrote: > Folks, (I removed Yacov, since hie mail address is no longer working), > > I think this errata is > - first of minor importance and could be held for a future update > of RFC 3107 > - second the errata is at the core correct > - third I'm not happy with the proposed new text > > I think it should be: > > NEW - first alternative > ----------------------- > Label distribution can be piggybacked in the BGP Update message by > using the BGP-4 Multiprotocol Extensions attribute defined in > RFC 2858 [BGP-MP]. > > Note: > RFC 2858 obsoletes RFC 2283, so the text above reflects the situation > as it was when 3107 were written. This correctly captured in the > RFC archives and will be found even we only have the original text. > But it would have been no harm doing this updates, if the documentation > had not changed. RFC 2858 has later been obsoleted by RFC 4760, which in > turn has been updated by RFC 7606. > > So I'm a bit undecided what to do about this, given that an update will > take place in the time it is done, I believe that the corrected text > should be: > > NEW - preferred alternative > --------------------------- > Label distribution can be piggybacked in the BGP Update message by > using the BGP-4 Multiprotocol Extensions attribute defined in > RFC 4760 [BGP-MP]. > > Caveat: This requires an update to the [BGP-MP] in the reference > section at the same time. > > Any opinions? > > /Loa > > > On 2015-10-14 05:07, RFC Errata System wrote: > >> The following errata report has been submitted for RFC3107, >> "Carrying Label Information in BGP-4". >> >> -------------------------------------- >> You may review the report below and at: >> http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=3107&eid=4497 >> >> -------------------------------------- >> Type: Technical >> Reported by: Alexander Okonnikov >> >> Section: 2 >> >> Original Text >> ------------- >> Label distribution can be piggybacked in the BGP Update message by >> using the BGP-4 Multiprotocol Extensions attribute [RFC 2283]. >> >> Corrected Text >> -------------- >> Label distribution can be piggybacked in the BGP Update message by >> using the BGP-4 Multiprotocol Extensions attribute [BGP-MP]. >> >> Notes >> ----- >> No such reference [RFC 2283] in References section. Also document refers >> to newer version of BGP-MP (RFC 2858). >> >> Instructions: >> ------------- >> This erratum is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, please >> use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or >> rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party (IESG) >> can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary. >> >> -------------------------------------- >> RFC3107 (draft-ietf-mpls-bgp4-mpls-04) >> -------------------------------------- >> Title : Carrying Label Information in BGP-4 >> Publication Date : May 2001 >> Author(s) : Y. Rekhter, E. Rosen >> Category : PROPOSED STANDARD >> Source : Multiprotocol Label Switching >> Area : Routing >> Stream : IETF >> Verifying Party : IESG >> >> > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > --047d7bb04f68f929e305220ef2ae Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Loa,

Just personally, I prefer referrin= g to RFC 4760.

Cheers,
Andy
<= div class=3D"gmail_extra">
On Wed, Oct 14, 20= 15 at 11:13 AM, Loa Andersson <loa@pi.nu> wrote:
Folks, (I removed Yacov, since hie mail address is no longer= working),

I think this errata is
- first of minor importance and could be held for a future update
=C2=A0 of RFC 3107
- second the errata is at the core correct
- third I'm not happy with the proposed new text

I think it should be:

NEW - first alternative
-----------------------
Label distribution can be piggybacked in the BGP Update message by
using the BGP-4 Multiprotocol Extensions attribute defined in
RFC 2858 [BGP-MP].

Note:
RFC 2858 obsoletes RFC 2283, so the text above reflects the situation
as it was when 3107 were written. This correctly captured in the
RFC archives and will be found even we only have the original text.
But it would have been no harm doing this updates, if the documentation
had not changed. RFC 2858 has later been obsoleted by RFC 4760, which in turn has been updated by RFC 7606.

So I'm a bit undecided what to do about this, given that an update will=
take place in the time it is done, I believe that the corrected text
should be:

NEW - preferred alternative
---------------------------
Label distribution can be piggybacked in the BGP Update message by
using the BGP-4 Multiprotocol Extensions attribute defined in
RFC 4760 [BGP-MP].

Caveat: This requires an update to the [BGP-MP] in the reference
section at the same time.

Any opinions?

/Loa


On 2015-10-14 05:07, RFC Errata System wrote:
The following errata report has been submitted for RFC3107,
"Carrying Label Information in BGP-4".

--------------------------------------
You may review the report below and at:
http://www.rfc-editor.org/err= ata_search.php?rfc=3D3107&eid=3D4497

--------------------------------------
Type: Technical
Reported by: Alexander Okonnikov <alexander.okonnikov@gmail.com>

Section: 2

Original Text
-------------
Label distribution can be piggybacked in the BGP Update message by
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 using the BGP-4 Multiprotocol Extensions attribute [RFC 2283]= .

Corrected Text
--------------
Label distribution can be piggybacked in the BGP Update message by
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 using the BGP-4 Multiprotocol Extensions attribute [BGP-MP].<= br>
Notes
-----
No such reference [RFC 2283] in References section. Also document refers to= newer version of BGP-MP (RFC 2858).

Instructions:
-------------
This erratum is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, ple= ase
use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or
rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party (IESG)
can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary.

--------------------------------------
RFC3107 (draft-ietf-mpls-bgp4-mpls-04)
--------------------------------------
Title=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0: Carrying Labe= l Information in BGP-4
Publication Date=C2=A0 =C2=A0 : May 2001
Author(s)=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0: Y. Rekhter, E. Rosen Category=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 : PROPOSED STANDARD
Source=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 : Multiprotocol Labe= l Switching
Area=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 : Routing
Stream=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 : IETF
Verifying Party=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0: IESG


_______________________________________________
mpls mailing list
mpls@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls

--047d7bb04f68f929e305220ef2ae-- From nobody Wed Oct 14 04:40:01 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 888E81A1A75 for ; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 04:39:59 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 Aw5_Vu__FmMI for ; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 04:39:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-wi0-x230.google.com (mail-wi0-x230.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c05::230]) (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 D79A21A1A76 for ; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 04:39:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: by wieq12 with SMTP id q12so78546498wie.1 for ; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 04:39:55 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; bh=praZTxtCosDXaE5Ck0Z3/58/0ezKYAZbKKk/pKCSuqA=; b=pmhj8MesC5q55sdoK2LJn9CBcfRe1MU2oW5G0FgK3cpl3fAnx03BGmn3PPQDxDNqwM bxg0a1iqt5/sncLuW3ojkS3vYRue0cXnPkGCyIRBNTBvBEk+HFPepdeJeb4FYAIynbm6 aGIQYQ+z9dt+Fg1wgg6ScanO8NsFx7xsE2tm5qKBJZaFI8Ys1o7kZKOT/1K0XNY8scwE x5GiBL5X39N/n1zhVo5o2K1a5DzuKcihKlYmcfNzjbn45/M+f5eNK8+OcH0zbDOJKOcM QXljfKJavvOhZl7tTlhapd0UQZsA1MHt0Fkw7JR2APKcpdxe9GJ8q/oECpIW+4y8FfXQ x72A== X-Received: by 10.194.143.43 with SMTP id sb11mr3891233wjb.120.1444822795441; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 04:39:55 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.28.9.212 with HTTP; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 04:39:35 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <20151013210728.27DF9187E28@rfc-editor.org> <561E1CC9.7080600@pi.nu> From: "Andrew G. Malis" Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2015 13:39:35 +0200 Message-ID: To: Loa Andersson Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e0112c50c7c5cdb05220f0547 Archived-At: Cc: "mpls@ietf.org" , alexander.okonnikov@gmail.com, Ross Callon , RFC Errata System Subject: Re: [mpls] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC3107 (4497) X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2015 11:39:59 -0000 --089e0112c50c7c5cdb05220f0547 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 And repeating my reply to include Eric: On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 1:34 PM, Andrew G. Malis wrote: > Loa, > > Just personally, I prefer referring to RFC 4760. > > Cheers, > Andy > > On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 11:13 AM, Loa Andersson wrote: > >> Folks, (I removed Yacov, since hie mail address is no longer working), >> >> I think this errata is >> - first of minor importance and could be held for a future update >> of RFC 3107 >> - second the errata is at the core correct >> - third I'm not happy with the proposed new text >> >> I think it should be: >> >> NEW - first alternative >> ----------------------- >> Label distribution can be piggybacked in the BGP Update message by >> using the BGP-4 Multiprotocol Extensions attribute defined in >> RFC 2858 [BGP-MP]. >> >> Note: >> RFC 2858 obsoletes RFC 2283, so the text above reflects the situation >> as it was when 3107 were written. This correctly captured in the >> RFC archives and will be found even we only have the original text. >> But it would have been no harm doing this updates, if the documentation >> had not changed. RFC 2858 has later been obsoleted by RFC 4760, which in >> turn has been updated by RFC 7606. >> >> So I'm a bit undecided what to do about this, given that an update will >> take place in the time it is done, I believe that the corrected text >> should be: >> >> NEW - preferred alternative >> --------------------------- >> Label distribution can be piggybacked in the BGP Update message by >> using the BGP-4 Multiprotocol Extensions attribute defined in >> RFC 4760 [BGP-MP]. >> >> Caveat: This requires an update to the [BGP-MP] in the reference >> section at the same time. >> >> Any opinions? >> >> /Loa >> >> >> On 2015-10-14 05:07, RFC Errata System wrote: >> >>> The following errata report has been submitted for RFC3107, >>> "Carrying Label Information in BGP-4". >>> >>> -------------------------------------- >>> You may review the report below and at: >>> http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=3107&eid=4497 >>> >>> -------------------------------------- >>> Type: Technical >>> Reported by: Alexander Okonnikov >>> >>> Section: 2 >>> >>> Original Text >>> ------------- >>> Label distribution can be piggybacked in the BGP Update message by >>> using the BGP-4 Multiprotocol Extensions attribute [RFC 2283]. >>> >>> Corrected Text >>> -------------- >>> Label distribution can be piggybacked in the BGP Update message by >>> using the BGP-4 Multiprotocol Extensions attribute [BGP-MP]. >>> >>> Notes >>> ----- >>> No such reference [RFC 2283] in References section. Also document refers >>> to newer version of BGP-MP (RFC 2858). >>> >>> Instructions: >>> ------------- >>> This erratum is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, please >>> use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or >>> rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party (IESG) >>> can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary. >>> >>> -------------------------------------- >>> RFC3107 (draft-ietf-mpls-bgp4-mpls-04) >>> -------------------------------------- >>> Title : Carrying Label Information in BGP-4 >>> Publication Date : May 2001 >>> Author(s) : Y. Rekhter, E. Rosen >>> Category : PROPOSED STANDARD >>> Source : Multiprotocol Label Switching >>> Area : Routing >>> Stream : IETF >>> Verifying Party : IESG >>> >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> mpls mailing list >> mpls@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls >> > > --089e0112c50c7c5cdb05220f0547 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
And repeating my reply to include Eric:

On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 1= :34 PM, Andrew G. Malis <agmalis@gmail.com> wrote:
Loa,

Just pers= onally, I prefer referring to RFC 4760.

Cheers,
Andy

On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 11:= 13 AM, Loa Andersson <loa@pi.nu> wrote:
Folks, (I removed Yacov, since hie mail address is no longer working)= ,

I think this errata is
- first of minor importance and could be held for a future update
=C2=A0 of RFC 3107
- second the errata is at the core correct
- third I'm not happy with the proposed new text

I think it should be:

NEW - first alternative
-----------------------
Label distribution can be piggybacked in the BGP Update message by
using the BGP-4 Multiprotocol Extensions attribute defined in
RFC 2858 [BGP-MP].

Note:
RFC 2858 obsoletes RFC 2283, so the text above reflects the situation
as it was when 3107 were written. This correctly captured in the
RFC archives and will be found even we only have the original text.
But it would have been no harm doing this updates, if the documentation
had not changed. RFC 2858 has later been obsoleted by RFC 4760, which in turn has been updated by RFC 7606.

So I'm a bit undecided what to do about this, given that an update will=
take place in the time it is done, I believe that the corrected text
should be:

NEW - preferred alternative
---------------------------
Label distribution can be piggybacked in the BGP Update message by
using the BGP-4 Multiprotocol Extensions attribute defined in
RFC 4760 [BGP-MP].

Caveat: This requires an update to the [BGP-MP] in the reference
section at the same time.

Any opinions?

/Loa


On 2015-10-14 05:07, RFC Errata System wrote:
The following errata report has been submitted for RFC3107,
"Carrying Label Information in BGP-4".

--------------------------------------
You may review the report below and at:
http://www.rfc-editor.org/err= ata_search.php?rfc=3D3107&eid=3D4497

--------------------------------------
Type: Technical
Reported by: Alexander Okonnikov <alexander.okonnikov@gmail.com>

Section: 2

Original Text
-------------
Label distribution can be piggybacked in the BGP Update message by
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 using the BGP-4 Multiprotocol Extensions attribute [RFC 2283]= .

Corrected Text
--------------
Label distribution can be piggybacked in the BGP Update message by
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 using the BGP-4 Multiprotocol Extensions attribute [BGP-MP].<= br>
Notes
-----
No such reference [RFC 2283] in References section. Also document refers to= newer version of BGP-MP (RFC 2858).

Instructions:
-------------
This erratum is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, ple= ase
use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or
rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party (IESG)
can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary.

--------------------------------------
RFC3107 (draft-ietf-mpls-bgp4-mpls-04)
--------------------------------------
Title=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0: Carrying Labe= l Information in BGP-4
Publication Date=C2=A0 =C2=A0 : May 2001
Author(s)=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0: Y. Rekhter, E. Rosen Category=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 : PROPOSED STANDARD
Source=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 : Multiprotocol Labe= l Switching
Area=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 : Routing
Stream=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 : IETF
Verifying Party=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0: IESG


_______________________________________________
mpls mailing list
mpls@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls


--089e0112c50c7c5cdb05220f0547-- From nobody Wed Oct 14 05:01:55 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 80F561A1B17 for ; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 05:01:54 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.91 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham 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 kwAvjTrgG-qB for ; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 05:01:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pipi.pi.nu (pipi.pi.nu [83.168.239.141]) (using TLSv1.1 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7B3951A1B13 for ; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 05:01:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.10] (unknown [112.205.73.125]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: loa@pi.nu) by pipi.pi.nu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8F4D918013BE; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 14:01:46 +0200 (CEST) To: "Andrew G. Malis" References: <20151013210728.27DF9187E28@rfc-editor.org> <561E1CC9.7080600@pi.nu> From: Loa Andersson Message-ID: <561E4422.9040503@pi.nu> Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2015 20:01:38 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: Cc: "mpls@ietf.org" , alexander.okonnikov@gmail.com, Ross Callon , RFC Errata System Subject: Re: [mpls] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC3107 (4497) X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2015 12:01:54 -0000 Andy, Yes that is my preference also, I just can't make up my mind if it is the right thing to do. /Loa On 2015-10-14 19:34, Andrew G. Malis wrote: > Loa, > > Just personally, I prefer referring to RFC 4760. > > Cheers, > Andy > > On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 11:13 AM, Loa Andersson > wrote: > > Folks, (I removed Yacov, since hie mail address is no longer working), > > I think this errata is > - first of minor importance and could be held for a future update > of RFC 3107 > - second the errata is at the core correct > - third I'm not happy with the proposed new text > > I think it should be: > > NEW - first alternative > ----------------------- > Label distribution can be piggybacked in the BGP Update message by > using the BGP-4 Multiprotocol Extensions attribute defined in > RFC 2858 [BGP-MP]. > > Note: > RFC 2858 obsoletes RFC 2283, so the text above reflects the situation > as it was when 3107 were written. This correctly captured in the > RFC archives and will be found even we only have the original text. > But it would have been no harm doing this updates, if the documentation > had not changed. RFC 2858 has later been obsoleted by RFC 4760, which in > turn has been updated by RFC 7606. > > So I'm a bit undecided what to do about this, given that an update will > take place in the time it is done, I believe that the corrected text > should be: > > NEW - preferred alternative > --------------------------- > Label distribution can be piggybacked in the BGP Update message by > using the BGP-4 Multiprotocol Extensions attribute defined in > RFC 4760 [BGP-MP]. > > Caveat: This requires an update to the [BGP-MP] in the reference > section at the same time. > > Any opinions? > > /Loa > > > On 2015-10-14 05:07, RFC Errata System wrote: > > The following errata report has been submitted for RFC3107, > "Carrying Label Information in BGP-4". > > -------------------------------------- > You may review the report below and at: > http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=3107&eid=4497 > > -------------------------------------- > Type: Technical > Reported by: Alexander Okonnikov > > > Section: 2 > > Original Text > ------------- > Label distribution can be piggybacked in the BGP Update message by > using the BGP-4 Multiprotocol Extensions attribute [RFC 2283]. > > Corrected Text > -------------- > Label distribution can be piggybacked in the BGP Update message by > using the BGP-4 Multiprotocol Extensions attribute [BGP-MP]. > > Notes > ----- > No such reference [RFC 2283] in References section. Also > document refers to newer version of BGP-MP (RFC 2858). > > Instructions: > ------------- > This erratum is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, please > use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or > rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party (IESG) > can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary. > > -------------------------------------- > RFC3107 (draft-ietf-mpls-bgp4-mpls-04) > -------------------------------------- > Title : Carrying Label Information in BGP-4 > Publication Date : May 2001 > Author(s) : Y. Rekhter, E. Rosen > Category : PROPOSED STANDARD > Source : Multiprotocol Label Switching > Area : Routing > Stream : IETF > Verifying Party : IESG > > > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > > From nobody Wed Oct 14 05:09:52 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2E1501A1B4C for ; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 05:09:51 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, FREEMAIL_REPLY=1, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=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 p3mN7ELRuZnu for ; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 05:09:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-wi0-x236.google.com (mail-wi0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c05::236]) (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 42B0E1A1B4B for ; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 05:09:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: by wieq12 with SMTP id q12so79836129wie.1 for ; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 05:09:47 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=subject:to:references:cc:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=ZJFomQdqQOMBIUfcO6ZmZCQn9ngL4ExszfmwAXnIBWA=; b=ZfpPozkN2XZYrD6FfjCrx6cce2tgJxBirmLYRBEcXp1TlIQTuDVFf3QCwVooRnDSLE XPDJGyVRiXSsFWXO1DdyC/xACcbtmlPoUdXlrWM1gU6GgzhKlooGAIaG5cPwkgmL4z+l 2mqFFNfrpClzh93fy5w8ydQb4XrduxcWhFEWj16x8zoiOFpg944FaGXEq1LEPnQvyzQw jt6U6LFaajxTkc6OMFdxTP1GEkFh1i1WWn6QBY4//BWLe5oalVzMCS4hDyrtOOrMaIzP 2C0L8HYYMDBKH5ksIw7fVNsYIw1ddyi274SF1Rtsa5gfzvaM86Gq5s4oDGPVaP9DhOfZ X+Hg== X-Received: by 10.180.187.244 with SMTP id fv20mr28510195wic.23.1444824587810; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 05:09:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?IPv6:2001:420:4084:1300:4c06:b29e:81b2:9c79? ([2001:420:4084:1300:4c06:b29e:81b2:9c79]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id r9sm9635510wjz.35.2015.10.14.05.09.46 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 14 Oct 2015 05:09:46 -0700 (PDT) To: Loa Andersson , "Andrew G. Malis" References: <20151013210728.27DF9187E28@rfc-editor.org> <561E1CC9.7080600@pi.nu> <561E4422.9040503@pi.nu> From: Stewart Bryant Message-ID: <561E460E.5010007@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2015 13:09:50 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.10; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <561E4422.9040503@pi.nu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: Cc: alexander.okonnikov@gmail.com, "mpls@ietf.org" , Ross Callon , RFC Errata System Subject: Re: [mpls] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC3107 (4497) X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2015 12:09:51 -0000 Normally an errata is constrained to correct the text as it should have been at the time of writing. It is outside of the errata system to apply an update which is what a reference to RFC4760 would be. - Stewart On 14/10/2015 13:01, Loa Andersson wrote: > Andy, > > Yes that is my preference also, I just can't make up my mind if it is > the right thing to do. > > /Loa > > On 2015-10-14 19:34, Andrew G. Malis wrote: >> Loa, >> >> Just personally, I prefer referring to RFC 4760. >> >> Cheers, >> Andy >> >> On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 11:13 AM, Loa Andersson > > wrote: >> >> Folks, (I removed Yacov, since hie mail address is no longer >> working), >> >> I think this errata is >> - first of minor importance and could be held for a future update >> of RFC 3107 >> - second the errata is at the core correct >> - third I'm not happy with the proposed new text >> >> I think it should be: >> >> NEW - first alternative >> ----------------------- >> Label distribution can be piggybacked in the BGP Update message by >> using the BGP-4 Multiprotocol Extensions attribute defined in >> RFC 2858 [BGP-MP]. >> >> Note: >> RFC 2858 obsoletes RFC 2283, so the text above reflects the >> situation >> as it was when 3107 were written. This correctly captured in the >> RFC archives and will be found even we only have the original text. >> But it would have been no harm doing this updates, if the >> documentation >> had not changed. RFC 2858 has later been obsoleted by RFC 4760, >> which in >> turn has been updated by RFC 7606. >> >> So I'm a bit undecided what to do about this, given that an >> update will >> take place in the time it is done, I believe that the corrected text >> should be: >> >> NEW - preferred alternative >> --------------------------- >> Label distribution can be piggybacked in the BGP Update message by >> using the BGP-4 Multiprotocol Extensions attribute defined in >> RFC 4760 [BGP-MP]. >> >> Caveat: This requires an update to the [BGP-MP] in the reference >> section at the same time. >> >> Any opinions? >> >> /Loa >> >> >> On 2015-10-14 05:07, RFC Errata System wrote: >> >> The following errata report has been submitted for RFC3107, >> "Carrying Label Information in BGP-4". >> >> -------------------------------------- >> You may review the report below and at: >> http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=3107&eid=4497 >> >> -------------------------------------- >> Type: Technical >> Reported by: Alexander Okonnikov > > >> >> Section: 2 >> >> Original Text >> ------------- >> Label distribution can be piggybacked in the BGP Update >> message by >> using the BGP-4 Multiprotocol Extensions attribute [RFC >> 2283]. >> >> Corrected Text >> -------------- >> Label distribution can be piggybacked in the BGP Update >> message by >> using the BGP-4 Multiprotocol Extensions attribute >> [BGP-MP]. >> >> Notes >> ----- >> No such reference [RFC 2283] in References section. Also >> document refers to newer version of BGP-MP (RFC 2858). >> >> Instructions: >> ------------- >> This erratum is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, >> please >> use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or >> rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party (IESG) >> can log in to change the status and edit the report, if >> necessary. >> >> -------------------------------------- >> RFC3107 (draft-ietf-mpls-bgp4-mpls-04) >> -------------------------------------- >> Title : Carrying Label Information in BGP-4 >> Publication Date : May 2001 >> Author(s) : Y. Rekhter, E. Rosen >> Category : PROPOSED STANDARD >> Source : Multiprotocol Label Switching >> Area : Routing >> Stream : IETF >> Verifying Party : IESG >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> mpls mailing list >> mpls@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From nobody Wed Oct 14 05:13:07 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2E36E1A1B64 for ; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 05:13:05 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.45 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.45 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, MIME_CHARSET_FARAWAY=2.45, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 Y7RnNKfICoVs for ; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 05:13:02 -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 41D231A1B62 for ; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 05:13:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: by lbbck17 with SMTP id ck17so44821961lbb.1 for ; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 05:13:00 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=references:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:cc:from:subject:date:to; bh=FyVVs6+JFHJPX4E8pczi/qJ1On8aj0gACd9aiXzAOZg=; b=FpgPxkRiUYSCa8jqEINFJ8fSOWArf2Wm1moYjsg3J23CiPChQ5AgIEbwOJ+58d+tDP cHf12qKbc0iKXKgeZSKG8b7Ef8fiS2xNYesA8ZOTXV0OyDbinZXIU/R+31g1bNRugSqo tvOLByT8deITes5S9cpzPIeSS1LseGKRrRmmjqJxJsDGVmjvPzPVTD43P5Eu+PYuncXr c4UD9y6zBEubrSIt7wiRFRELp6oDTsu06GEoK+CEYbFhyNEbWZegtvYFXiiOSEFQ1EuW VnKisIhZoWp4WA7yB+mNppYXLYdKx6S49uuN2AQwCaJEq6SM/ORqQTp3nYo+ihts0qdX Oy8w== X-Received: by 10.112.32.72 with SMTP id g8mr1406087lbi.22.1444824780438; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 05:13:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.181.249.70] ([213.87.146.219]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id ez6sm710657lbc.27.2015.10.14.05.12.59 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Wed, 14 Oct 2015 05:12:59 -0700 (PDT) References: <20151013210728.27DF9187E28@rfc-editor.org> <561E1CC9.7080600@pi.nu> <561E4422.9040503@pi.nu> Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) In-Reply-To: <561E4422.9040503@pi.nu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (10B350) From: Alexander Okonnikov Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2015 15:13:28 +0300 To: Loa Andersson Archived-At: Cc: "mpls@ietf.org" , Ross Callon , RFC Errata System Subject: Re: [mpls] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC3107 (4497) X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2015 12:13:05 -0000 Hello, Excuse me, I'm novice, but is it acceptable when elder document (RFC 3107) r= efers to newer one (RFC 4760)? I.e. my confusion is that when RFC 3107 has b= een issued, RFC 4760 just didn't exist. If it is correct to point actual ver= sion (RFC 4760) while submitting errata, then I would point actual document (= RFC 4760). I just was not aware about this detail. Thanks. 14.10.2015, =D7 15:01, Loa Andersson =CE=C1=D0=C9=D3=C1=CC(=C1):= > Andy, >=20 > Yes that is my preference also, I just can't make up my mind if it is > the right thing to do. >=20 > /Loa >=20 > On 2015-10-14 19:34, Andrew G. Malis wrote: >> Loa, >>=20 >> Just personally, I prefer referring to RFC 4760. >>=20 >> Cheers, >> Andy >>=20 >> On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 11:13 AM, Loa Andersson > > wrote: >>=20 >> Folks, (I removed Yacov, since hie mail address is no longer working),= >>=20 >> I think this errata is >> - first of minor importance and could be held for a future update >> of RFC 3107 >> - second the errata is at the core correct >> - third I'm not happy with the proposed new text >>=20 >> I think it should be: >>=20 >> NEW - first alternative >> ----------------------- >> Label distribution can be piggybacked in the BGP Update message by >> using the BGP-4 Multiprotocol Extensions attribute defined in >> RFC 2858 [BGP-MP]. >>=20 >> Note: >> RFC 2858 obsoletes RFC 2283, so the text above reflects the situation >> as it was when 3107 were written. This correctly captured in the >> RFC archives and will be found even we only have the original text. >> But it would have been no harm doing this updates, if the documentatio= n >> had not changed. RFC 2858 has later been obsoleted by RFC 4760, which i= n >> turn has been updated by RFC 7606. >>=20 >> So I'm a bit undecided what to do about this, given that an update wil= l >> take place in the time it is done, I believe that the corrected text >> should be: >>=20 >> NEW - preferred alternative >> --------------------------- >> Label distribution can be piggybacked in the BGP Update message by >> using the BGP-4 Multiprotocol Extensions attribute defined in >> RFC 4760 [BGP-MP]. >>=20 >> Caveat: This requires an update to the [BGP-MP] in the reference >> section at the same time. >>=20 >> Any opinions? >>=20 >> /Loa >>=20 >>=20 >> On 2015-10-14 05:07, RFC Errata System wrote: >>=20 >> The following errata report has been submitted for RFC3107, >> "Carrying Label Information in BGP-4". >>=20 >> -------------------------------------- >> You may review the report below and at: >> http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=3D3107&eid=3D4497 >>=20 >> -------------------------------------- >> Type: Technical >> Reported by: Alexander Okonnikov > > >>=20 >> Section: 2 >>=20 >> Original Text >> ------------- >> Label distribution can be piggybacked in the BGP Update message by= >> using the BGP-4 Multiprotocol Extensions attribute [RFC 2283]= . >>=20 >> Corrected Text >> -------------- >> Label distribution can be piggybacked in the BGP Update message by= >> using the BGP-4 Multiprotocol Extensions attribute [BGP-MP]. >>=20 >> Notes >> ----- >> No such reference [RFC 2283] in References section. Also >> document refers to newer version of BGP-MP (RFC 2858). >>=20 >> Instructions: >> ------------- >> This erratum is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, plea= se >> use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or >> rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party (IESG) >> can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary.= >>=20 >> -------------------------------------- >> RFC3107 (draft-ietf-mpls-bgp4-mpls-04) >> -------------------------------------- >> Title : Carrying Label Information in BGP-4 >> Publication Date : May 2001 >> Author(s) : Y. Rekhter, E. Rosen >> Category : PROPOSED STANDARD >> Source : Multiprotocol Label Switching >> Area : Routing >> Stream : IETF >> Verifying Party : IESG >>=20 >>=20 >> _______________________________________________ >> mpls mailing list >> mpls@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls >>=20 >>=20 From nobody Wed Oct 14 05:15:55 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E55DF1A1B77 for ; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 05:15:54 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.91 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham 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 DYPtbBwGdk6j for ; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 05:15:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp-fr.alcatel-lucent.com (fr-hpgre-esg-01.alcatel-lucent.com [135.245.210.22]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C17771A1B82 for ; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 05:15:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fr711usmtp1.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (unknown [135.239.2.122]) by Websense Email Security Gateway with ESMTPS id E48EDFEE70A95; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 12:15:47 +0000 (GMT) Received: from FR712WXCHHUB03.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (fr712wxchhub03.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com [135.239.2.74]) by fr711usmtp1.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (GMO) with ESMTP id t9ECFnTT011133 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Wed, 14 Oct 2015 14:15:50 +0200 Received: from [135.224.193.50] (135.239.27.39) by FR712WXCHHUB03.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (135.239.2.74) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.195.1; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 14:15:49 +0200 Message-ID: <561E4773.1090904@alcatel-lucent.com> Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2015 14:15:47 +0200 From: Martin Vigoureux User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Loa Andersson , RFC Errata System , Eric C Rosen , , , , , References: <20151013210728.27DF9187E28@rfc-editor.org> <561E1CC9.7080600@pi.nu> In-Reply-To: <561E1CC9.7080600@pi.nu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Originating-IP: [135.239.27.39] Archived-At: Cc: alexander.okonnikov@gmail.com, mpls@ietf.org Subject: Re: [mpls] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC3107 (4497) X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2015 12:15:55 -0000 Loa, I think we should respect the timeline. I understand that this errata gives the opportunity to reference the most up to date RFC, but I think we should stick to changing [RFC 2283] into [BGP-MP]. Otherwise it could open the door to creating erratas for any reference that would have been updated/obsoleted. The updates/obsoletes tag enables readers to reach the latest relevant document. -m Le 14/10/2015 11:13, Loa Andersson a crit : > Folks, (I removed Yacov, since hie mail address is no longer working), > > I think this errata is > - first of minor importance and could be held for a future update > of RFC 3107 > - second the errata is at the core correct > - third I'm not happy with the proposed new text > > I think it should be: > > NEW - first alternative > ----------------------- > Label distribution can be piggybacked in the BGP Update message by > using the BGP-4 Multiprotocol Extensions attribute defined in > RFC 2858 [BGP-MP]. > > Note: > RFC 2858 obsoletes RFC 2283, so the text above reflects the situation > as it was when 3107 were written. This correctly captured in the > RFC archives and will be found even we only have the original text. > But it would have been no harm doing this updates, if the documentation > had not changed. RFC 2858 has later been obsoleted by RFC 4760, which in > turn has been updated by RFC 7606. > > So I'm a bit undecided what to do about this, given that an update will > take place in the time it is done, I believe that the corrected text > should be: > > NEW - preferred alternative > --------------------------- > Label distribution can be piggybacked in the BGP Update message by > using the BGP-4 Multiprotocol Extensions attribute defined in > RFC 4760 [BGP-MP]. > > Caveat: This requires an update to the [BGP-MP] in the reference > section at the same time. > > Any opinions? > > /Loa > > On 2015-10-14 05:07, RFC Errata System wrote: >> The following errata report has been submitted for RFC3107, >> "Carrying Label Information in BGP-4". >> >> -------------------------------------- >> You may review the report below and at: >> http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=3107&eid=4497 >> >> -------------------------------------- >> Type: Technical >> Reported by: Alexander Okonnikov >> >> Section: 2 >> >> Original Text >> ------------- >> Label distribution can be piggybacked in the BGP Update message by >> using the BGP-4 Multiprotocol Extensions attribute [RFC 2283]. >> >> Corrected Text >> -------------- >> Label distribution can be piggybacked in the BGP Update message by >> using the BGP-4 Multiprotocol Extensions attribute [BGP-MP]. >> >> Notes >> ----- >> No such reference [RFC 2283] in References section. Also document >> refers to newer version of BGP-MP (RFC 2858). >> >> Instructions: >> ------------- >> This erratum is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, please >> use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or >> rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party (IESG) >> can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary. >> >> -------------------------------------- >> RFC3107 (draft-ietf-mpls-bgp4-mpls-04) >> -------------------------------------- >> Title : Carrying Label Information in BGP-4 >> Publication Date : May 2001 >> Author(s) : Y. Rekhter, E. Rosen >> Category : PROPOSED STANDARD >> Source : Multiprotocol Label Switching >> Area : Routing >> Stream : IETF >> Verifying Party : IESG >> > > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > From nobody Wed Oct 14 05:53:22 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8EE621A219C for ; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 05:53:21 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.91 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham 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 mu7Ejf3q_kmS for ; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 05:53:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pipi.pi.nu (pipi.pi.nu [83.168.239.141]) (using TLSv1.1 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 525C61A219B for ; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 05:53:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.10] (unknown [112.205.73.125]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: loa@pi.nu) by pipi.pi.nu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8D0C818013BE; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 14:52:45 +0200 (CEST) To: Martin Vigoureux , RFC Errata System , Eric C Rosen , akatlas@gmail.com, db3546@att.com, aretana@cisco.com, swallow@cisco.com, rcallon@juniper.net References: <20151013210728.27DF9187E28@rfc-editor.org> <561E1CC9.7080600@pi.nu> <561E4773.1090904@alcatel-lucent.com> From: Loa Andersson Message-ID: <561E5015.5070101@pi.nu> Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2015 20:52:37 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <561E4773.1090904@alcatel-lucent.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Archived-At: Cc: alexander.okonnikov@gmail.com, mpls@ietf.org Subject: Re: [mpls] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC3107 (4497) X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2015 12:53:21 -0000 Martin, Stewart, Alexander, You are very well summarizing the very reason why I put it as a note. So for the Errata I think this is what we should go with: NEW --- Label distribution can be piggybacked in the BGP Update message by using the BGP-4 Multiprotocol Extensions attribute defined in RFC 2858 [BGP-MP]. When we get to do a 3071bis the second alternative could be used. /Loa On 2015-10-14 20:15, Martin Vigoureux wrote: > Loa, > > I think we should respect the timeline. > I understand that this errata gives the opportunity to reference the > most up to date RFC, but I think we should stick to changing [RFC 2283] > into [BGP-MP]. Otherwise it could open the door to creating erratas for > any reference that would have been updated/obsoleted. > The updates/obsoletes tag enables readers to reach the latest relevant > document. > > -m > > Le 14/10/2015 11:13, Loa Andersson a crit : >> Folks, (I removed Yacov, since hie mail address is no longer working), >> >> I think this errata is >> - first of minor importance and could be held for a future update >> of RFC 3107 >> - second the errata is at the core correct >> - third I'm not happy with the proposed new text >> >> I think it should be: >> >> NEW - first alternative >> ----------------------- >> Label distribution can be piggybacked in the BGP Update message by >> using the BGP-4 Multiprotocol Extensions attribute defined in >> RFC 2858 [BGP-MP]. >> >> Note: >> RFC 2858 obsoletes RFC 2283, so the text above reflects the situation >> as it was when 3107 were written. This correctly captured in the >> RFC archives and will be found even we only have the original text. >> But it would have been no harm doing this updates, if the documentation >> had not changed. RFC 2858 has later been obsoleted by RFC 4760, which in >> turn has been updated by RFC 7606. >> >> So I'm a bit undecided what to do about this, given that an update will >> take place in the time it is done, I believe that the corrected text >> should be: >> >> NEW - preferred alternative >> --------------------------- >> Label distribution can be piggybacked in the BGP Update message by >> using the BGP-4 Multiprotocol Extensions attribute defined in >> RFC 4760 [BGP-MP]. >> >> Caveat: This requires an update to the [BGP-MP] in the reference >> section at the same time. >> >> Any opinions? >> >> /Loa >> >> On 2015-10-14 05:07, RFC Errata System wrote: >>> The following errata report has been submitted for RFC3107, >>> "Carrying Label Information in BGP-4". >>> >>> -------------------------------------- >>> You may review the report below and at: >>> http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=3107&eid=4497 >>> >>> -------------------------------------- >>> Type: Technical >>> Reported by: Alexander Okonnikov >>> >>> Section: 2 >>> >>> Original Text >>> ------------- >>> Label distribution can be piggybacked in the BGP Update message by >>> using the BGP-4 Multiprotocol Extensions attribute [RFC 2283]. >>> >>> Corrected Text >>> -------------- >>> Label distribution can be piggybacked in the BGP Update message by >>> using the BGP-4 Multiprotocol Extensions attribute [BGP-MP]. >>> >>> Notes >>> ----- >>> No such reference [RFC 2283] in References section. Also document >>> refers to newer version of BGP-MP (RFC 2858). >>> >>> Instructions: >>> ------------- >>> This erratum is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, please >>> use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or >>> rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party (IESG) >>> can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary. >>> >>> -------------------------------------- >>> RFC3107 (draft-ietf-mpls-bgp4-mpls-04) >>> -------------------------------------- >>> Title : Carrying Label Information in BGP-4 >>> Publication Date : May 2001 >>> Author(s) : Y. Rekhter, E. Rosen >>> Category : PROPOSED STANDARD >>> Source : Multiprotocol Label Switching >>> Area : Routing >>> Stream : IETF >>> Verifying Party : IESG >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> mpls mailing list >> mpls@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls >> From nobody Wed Oct 14 09:57:25 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 37C891ACD16; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 09:57:23 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.898 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001] autolearn=ham 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 z1SiOcx3nWpi; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 09:57:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB9731A87D0; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 09:57:21 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: "Spencer Dawkins" To: "The IESG" X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.5.1 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <20151014165721.30191.11703.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2015 09:57:21 -0700 Archived-At: Cc: mpls@ietf.org Subject: [mpls] Spencer Dawkins' No Objection on draft-ietf-mpls-self-ping-05: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2015 16:57:23 -0000 Spencer Dawkins has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-mpls-self-ping-05: 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-mpls-self-ping/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- I was looking at o The UDP Destination Port MUST be lsp-self-ping (8503) [IANA.PORTS] and wondering why this is a MUST. Is the answer that this mechanism works within an administrative domain, so you can just tell the other end what the port number needs to be? From nobody Wed Oct 14 11:20:36 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B39CB1AD373; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 11:20:33 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.898 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001] autolearn=ham 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 bJEKmRC5G-Gr; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 11:20:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AC0BE1ACD6E; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 11:20:32 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: "Kathleen Moriarty" To: "The IESG" X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.5.1 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <20151014182032.13746.4907.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2015 11:20:32 -0700 Archived-At: Cc: mpls@ietf.org Subject: [mpls] Kathleen Moriarty's No Objection on draft-ietf-mpls-self-ping-05: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2015 18:20:33 -0000 Kathleen Moriarty has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-mpls-self-ping-05: 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-mpls-self-ping/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- I see that the Security Considerations section says, "operators SHOULD filter LSP Self-ping packets at network ingress points" I think it would be helpful to have the draft explicitly state the scope for this new function - within a single operator's network is my assumption. If that assumption is not correct, I may come back with more questions. There was also a suggestion made int he SecDir review that you may want to consider: https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/search/?email_list=secdir From nobody Wed Oct 14 20:04:57 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F86C1B2F60; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 20:04:56 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.91 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham 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 Sk9UbjPOgPCx; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 20:04:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pipi.pi.nu (pipi.pi.nu [83.168.239.141]) (using TLSv1.1 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 33D7D1B2F63; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 20:04:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.10] (unknown [112.205.73.125]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: loa@pi.nu) by pipi.pi.nu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3A1821801559; Thu, 15 Oct 2015 05:04:50 +0200 (CEST) To: "mpls@ietf.org" , "mpls-chairs@ietf.org" , "draft-kompella-mpls-rmr@ietf.org" References: <56091F68.8050000@pi.nu> From: Loa Andersson Message-ID: <561F17CA.7050804@pi.nu> Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2015 11:04:42 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <56091F68.8050000@pi.nu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: Subject: [mpls] Closed - Re: Poll to see if we have consensus to adopt draft-kompella-mpls-rmr as an MPLS wg dcument X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2015 03:04:56 -0000 Working Group, This working group adoption poll (wgap) is closed. We have a new working group document. Can the authors please post the document as draft-ietf-mpls-rmr-00, without any other changes than the administrative (file name, dates and version). /Loa mpls wg co-chair On 2015-09-28 19:07, Loa Andersson wrote: > Working Group, > > This is to start a two week poll on adopting draft-kompella-mpls-rmr-02 > as an MPLS working group document. > > Please send your comments (support/not support) to the mpls working > group mailing list (mpls@ietf.org). Please give a technical > motivation for your support/not support, especially if you think that > the document should not be adopted as a working group document. > > There is currently one IPR disclosure against this document. All the > authors has stated on the working group mailing that they are unaware of > any undisclosed IPRs that relates to this draft.. > > However if you are on the the mpls working group mailing list and > aware of IPR that relates to this draft, the time to disclose > this is now. > > This poll ends October 12, 2015. > > /Loa > mpls wg co-chair > From nobody Wed Oct 14 20:45:24 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 844971B2FC3; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 20:45:22 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.211 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.211 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham 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 uQFLAw3anQoy; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 20:45:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [194.213.3.17]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3249F1B2FBF; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 20:45:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 172.18.7.190 (EHLO lhreml405-hub.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.7.190]) by lhrrg01-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.3.7-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id CCO41148; Thu, 15 Oct 2015 03:45:16 +0000 (GMT) Received: from SZXEMA412-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.82.72.71) by lhreml405-hub.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.242) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.235.1; Thu, 15 Oct 2015 04:45:13 +0100 Received: from SZXEMA510-MBX.china.huawei.com ([169.254.3.229]) by SZXEMA412-HUB.china.huawei.com ([10.82.72.71]) with mapi id 14.03.0235.001; Thu, 15 Oct 2015 11:45:08 +0800 From: Mach Chen To: "mpls@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: IPR poll on draft-tiruveedhula-mpls-mldp-mib Thread-Index: AdEG++JAmJ0Ngn3qRdiGrv/QuTQMLg== Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2015 03:45:08 +0000 Message-ID: Accept-Language: en-US, zh-CN Content-Language: zh-CN X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.111.102.135] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Archived-At: Cc: "mpls-chairs@ietf.org" , "draft-tiruveedhula-mpls-mldp-mib@ietf.org" Subject: [mpls] IPR poll on draft-tiruveedhula-mpls-mldp-mib X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2015 03:45:22 -0000 Working Group, I am the shepherd of draft-tiruveedhula-mpls-mldp-mib. The authors of it ha= s told us that the document is ready for working adoption. Before we start the WG adoption polling, we will do an IPR poll. This mail starts the IPR poll. Are you aware of any IPR that applies to draft-tiruveedhula-mpls-mldp-mib? If so, has this IPR been disclosed in compliance with IETF IPR rules (see R= FCs 3979, 4879, 3669 and 5378 for more details). If you are listed as a document author or contributor please respond to thi= s email regardless of whether or not you are aware of any relevant IPR. *Th= e response needs to be sent to the MPLS wg mailing list.* The document will= not advance to the next stage until a response has been received from each= author and contributor. If you are on the MPLS WG email list but are not listed as an author or con= tributor, then please explicitly respond only if you are aware of any IPR t= hat has not yet been disclosed in conformance with IETF rules. Thanks, Mach From nobody Thu Oct 15 06:18:18 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F4861B3195; Thu, 15 Oct 2015 06:18:17 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -14.511 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.511 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, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham 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 w79JSsvD4kTo; Thu, 15 Oct 2015 06:18:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rcdn-iport-4.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-4.cisco.com [173.37.86.75]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2F6D41B318D; Thu, 15 Oct 2015 06:18:14 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1640; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1444915094; x=1446124694; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-id:content-transfer-encoding: mime-version; bh=K4OiUqgnUR1uRjD2g5jfFDozvCWU51tuYRBs4vWgGsY=; b=g1fRdIlsz68BwgWymhzxEUx7DbMtxT/Ca2CQwy+vJQEDoSsPCWz9RC0E G8/LzLIhuq/ZjYzxMsWpSoKTKK/D2yD3qYfK+b3/yntiBR70de+tQfZ7G Le1d9Z3ZNp3Cm2d4H2MjKxudChOn2Nl8Wbbq9VFlKIqZKnzQtjVkfSPUv 0=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0D3AQDWph9W/5tdJa1egyZUbga9NwENgVkXCoV7AoE2OBQBAQEBAQEBgQqEJgEBAQMBAQEBNzEDBgUFCQICAQgYHhAbDAslAgQBDQWIJggNwwUBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQETBASGcoIQgm6EKhACAVAHgxqBFAWWGwGNGoFYhDqVfAEfAQFChANxhGGBBgEBAQ X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.17,685,1437436800"; d="scan'208";a="37813892" Received: from rcdn-core-4.cisco.com ([173.37.93.155]) by rcdn-iport-4.cisco.com with ESMTP; 15 Oct 2015 13:18:13 +0000 Received: from XCH-RCD-018.cisco.com (xch-rcd-018.cisco.com [173.37.102.28]) by rcdn-core-4.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id t9FDIDV9017098 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Thu, 15 Oct 2015 13:18:13 GMT Received: from xch-aln-019.cisco.com (173.36.7.29) by XCH-RCD-018.cisco.com (173.37.102.28) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1104.5; Thu, 15 Oct 2015 08:17:58 -0500 Received: from xch-aln-019.cisco.com ([173.36.7.29]) by XCH-ALN-019.cisco.com ([173.36.7.29]) with mapi id 15.00.1104.000; Thu, 15 Oct 2015 08:17:58 -0500 From: "Mike Taillon (mtaillon)" To: Loa Andersson , "mpls@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [mpls] IPR poll on draft-chandra-mpls-ri-rsvp-frr Thread-Index: AQHRA9GE3fR72eDL7kSZu805ohMBap5s5EIA Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2015 13:17:58 +0000 Message-ID: References: <5619D1A4.8050401@pi.nu> In-Reply-To: <5619D1A4.8050401@pi.nu> 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: [161.44.212.126] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <545A48361356E94EAAF73CF9E82011FB@emea.cisco.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: Cc: "mpls-chairs@ietf.org" , "draft-chandra-mpls-ri-rsvp-frr@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [mpls] IPR poll on draft-chandra-mpls-ri-rsvp-frr X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2015 13:18:17 -0000 I am not aware of any IPR other than what is already disclosed. -mike > On Oct 10, 2015, at 11:04 PM, Loa Andersson wrote: >=20 > Working Group, >=20 > The authors of draft-chandra-mpls-ri-rsvp-frr has told us that > the document is ready for working adoption. >=20 > Before we start the wgap we will do an IPR poll. >=20 >=20 > This mail starts the IPR poll. >=20 > Are you aware of any IPR that applies to draft-chandra-mpls-ri-rsvp-frr? >=20 > If so, has this IPR been disclosed in compliance with IETF IPR rules > (see RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669 and 5378 for more details). >=20 > There is one IPR disclosures filed against this document. >=20 > If you are listed as a document author or contributor please respond to > this email regardless of whether or not you are aware of any relevant > IPR. *The response needs to be sent to the MPLS wg mailing list.* The > document will not advance to the next stage until a response has been > received from each author and contributor. >=20 > If you are on the MPLS WG email list but are not listed as an author or > contributor, then please explicitly respond only if you are aware of any > IPR that has not yet been disclosed in conformance with IETF rules. >=20 >=20 > /Loa > mpls wg co-chair > --=20 >=20 >=20 > Loa Andersson email: loa@mail01.huawei.com > Senior MPLS Expert loa@pi.nu > Huawei Technologies (consultant) phone: +46 739 81 21 64 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From nobody Thu Oct 15 06:54:55 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3F0201B3229; Thu, 15 Oct 2015 06:54:53 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.902 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.902 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 W1eAwzJH8I2z; Thu, 15 Oct 2015 06:54:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from na01-by2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-by2on0123.outbound.protection.outlook.com [207.46.100.123]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7B9ED1B3225; Thu, 15 Oct 2015 06:54:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from BLUPR0501MB1716.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.163.120.19) by BLUPR0501MB1716.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.163.120.19) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.300.14; Thu, 15 Oct 2015 13:54:47 +0000 Received: from BLUPR0501MB1716.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([10.163.120.19]) by BLUPR0501MB1716.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([10.163.120.19]) with mapi id 15.01.0300.010; Thu, 15 Oct 2015 13:54:47 +0000 From: Kishore Tiruveedhula To: Mach Chen , "mpls@ietf.org" , "mpls-chairs@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: IPR poll on draft-tiruveedhula-mpls-mldp-mib Thread-Index: AdEG++JAmJ0Ngn3qRdiGrv/QuTQMLgAM+gWA Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2015 13:54:47 +0000 Message-ID: References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.4.8.150116 authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=kishoret@juniper.net; x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1 x-originating-ip: [66.129.241.10] x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; BLUPR0501MB1716; 5:RZUvagJIyHNwxaJ+QJ/ykzHSYm0qgP+dXQj0n/539rYJEx+KRDdOaiv4/q2eIgMsylzVNSCxrteDLSjlrhEy8a7WcDDtjWniWFeDEMgzJzzNJCPsX7K+OZaNpiRHoPvgQN6Fq+ArIO/c3hMMiw7BrA==; 24:yag0ZLXbZxCP7szRaZh8QXGWl92oIhFq2yzAjQN9Sh1EsAGLtRCgu3U93u2dOvssmWkxUN3X4uVAQa/H+7kVsd+RgUVnA9iSzxj2yfENdXY=; 20:B76o6ziv5u9bUR5JeBRo594iZpwh2VN+ZTwqBcgSNx48zbQeSrufoQSyV0BOLWQiIG8evGabaJ2pYUHdkzzrzg== x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:BLUPR0501MB1716; x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:; x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(601004)(2401047)(5005006)(520078)(8121501046)(3002001); SRVR:BLUPR0501MB1716; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:BLUPR0501MB1716; x-forefront-prvs: 0730093765 x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(6009001)(377454003)(164054003)(199003)(479174004)(189002)(24454002)(40100003)(101416001)(46102003)(64706001)(10400500002)(5001960100002)(66066001)(36756003)(230783001)(5008740100001)(2501003)(5007970100001)(92566002)(5004730100002)(11100500001)(122556002)(189998001)(77096005)(19580405001)(83506001)(2900100001)(19580395003)(2950100001)(76176999)(2201001)(86362001)(106356001)(54356999)(87936001)(81156007)(4001350100001)(50986999)(105586002)(5002640100001)(99286002)(5001770100001)(97736004)(102836002); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:BLUPR0501MB1716; H:BLUPR0501MB1716.namprd05.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; A:1; MX:1; LANG:en; received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: juniper.net does not designate permitted sender hosts) spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:23 spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: juniper.net X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 15 Oct 2015 13:54:47.6655 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: bea78b3c-4cdb-4130-854a-1d193232e5f4 X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BLUPR0501MB1716 Archived-At: Cc: "draft-tiruveedhula-mpls-mldp-mib@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [mpls] IPR poll on draft-tiruveedhula-mpls-mldp-mib X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2015 13:54:53 -0000 I am not aware of any IPR that applies to this draft. Thanks, Kishore On 10/14/15, 11:45 PM, "Mach Chen" wrote: >Working Group, > >I am the shepherd of draft-tiruveedhula-mpls-mldp-mib. The authors of it >has told us that the document is ready for working adoption. > >Before we start the WG adoption polling, we will do an IPR poll. > > >This mail starts the IPR poll. > >Are you aware of any IPR that applies to draft-tiruveedhula-mpls-mldp-mib? > >If so, has this IPR been disclosed in compliance with IETF IPR rules (see >RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669 and 5378 for more details). > >If you are listed as a document author or contributor please respond to >this email regardless of whether or not you are aware of any relevant >IPR. *The response needs to be sent to the MPLS wg mailing list.* The >document will not advance to the next stage until a response has been >received from each author and contributor. > >If you are on the MPLS WG email list but are not listed as an author or >contributor, then please explicitly respond only if you are aware of any >IPR that has not yet been disclosed in conformance with IETF rules. > >Thanks, >Mach From nobody Thu Oct 15 07:00:53 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD4771B3250; Thu, 15 Oct 2015 07:00:50 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.898 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001] autolearn=ham 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 AnmlZBat0n1t; Thu, 15 Oct 2015 07:00:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4CD351B324E; Thu, 15 Oct 2015 07:00:49 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: "Kathleen Moriarty" To: "The IESG" X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.6.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <20151015140049.32207.76529.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2015 07:00:49 -0700 Archived-At: Cc: rcallon@juniper.net, mpls@ietf.org, draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-reply-mode-simple@ietf.org, mpls-chairs@ietf.org Subject: [mpls] Kathleen Moriarty's No Objection on draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-reply-mode-simple-05: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2015 14:00:51 -0000 Kathleen Moriarty has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-reply-mode-simple-05: 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-mpls-lsp-ping-reply-mode-simple/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Thank you for addressing my prior discuss. From nobody Thu Oct 15 08:42:55 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 72FE61A010E; Thu, 15 Oct 2015 08:42:54 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -14.51 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.51 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham 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 9iYtiC6ziL_t; Thu, 15 Oct 2015 08:42:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from alln-iport-1.cisco.com (alln-iport-1.cisco.com [173.37.142.88]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BB7EB1A8A9D; Thu, 15 Oct 2015 08:42:23 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=4141; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1444923743; x=1446133343; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:mime-version; bh=xFO58MXbzAcXOdEy/essNMBb84EcH2icsAZDfvfSFS0=; b=AZXBtTDJJm+E2VTwLRt6rMa1uRlz8owB0Tj0tC6P2SAr9EdXgz8TJkBv fyELd3uJPalEhIS+z+G+y1DvWb12+tFbMg77H/x+UJYIn2g+VvlETnXIg tfGbvVpjFmZF8+RPwknmPkFTAZ/LzDlJP8ORqSWWE2TVwZjc7JEzu79BM 4=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0D2AQBgyB9W/5ldJa1egyaBQga9NwENgVmGHAKBNTgUAQEBAQEBAYEKhCcBAQRuBgUQAgEIBDsHMhQRAgQBDQWILsM9AQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBF4Z2AYIPgm6EKhACAVAHgxqBFAWSVoNFAY0aBYFThDqVfAEfAQFChANxhGGBBgEBAQ X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.17,686,1437436800"; d="scan'208,217";a="198484690" Received: from rcdn-core-2.cisco.com ([173.37.93.153]) by alln-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA; 15 Oct 2015 15:42:23 +0000 Received: from XCH-RCD-011.cisco.com (xch-rcd-011.cisco.com [173.37.102.21]) by rcdn-core-2.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id t9FFgMfA003725 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Thu, 15 Oct 2015 15:42:22 GMT Received: from xch-rcd-014.cisco.com (173.37.102.24) by XCH-RCD-011.cisco.com (173.37.102.21) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1104.5; Thu, 15 Oct 2015 10:42:08 -0500 Received: from xch-rcd-014.cisco.com ([173.37.102.24]) by XCH-RCD-014.cisco.com ([173.37.102.24]) with mapi id 15.00.1104.000; Thu, 15 Oct 2015 10:42:08 -0500 From: "Arvind Venkateswaran (arvvenka)" To: Mach Chen , "mpls@ietf.org" , "mpls-chairs@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: IPR poll on draft-tiruveedhula-mpls-mldp-mib Thread-Index: AQHRB2AMmJ0Ngn3qRdiGrv/QuTQMLg== Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2015 15:42:08 +0000 Message-ID: References: In-Reply-To: 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: [10.24.180.70] Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_E991071574EC48DAA4469860FA3F01A7ciscocom_" MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: Cc: "draft-tiruveedhula-mpls-mldp-mib@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [mpls] IPR poll on draft-tiruveedhula-mpls-mldp-mib X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2015 15:42:54 -0000 --_000_E991071574EC48DAA4469860FA3F01A7ciscocom_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I am not aware of any IPR that applies to this draft. Thanks, Arvind. On Oct 14, 2015, at 8:45 PM, Mach Chen > wrote: Working Group, I am the shepherd of draft-tiruveedhula-mpls-mldp-mib. The authors of it ha= s told us that the document is ready for working adoption. Before we start the WG adoption polling, we will do an IPR poll. This mail starts the IPR poll. Are you aware of any IPR that applies to draft-tiruveedhula-mpls-mldp-mib? If so, has this IPR been disclosed in compliance with IETF IPR rules (see R= FCs 3979, 4879, 3669 and 5378 for more details). If you are listed as a document author or contributor please respond to thi= s email regardless of whether or not you are aware of any relevant IPR. *Th= e response needs to be sent to the MPLS wg mailing list.* The document will= not advance to the next stage until a response has been received from each= author and contributor. If you are on the MPLS WG email list but are not listed as an author or con= tributor, then please explicitly respond only if you are aware of any IPR t= hat has not yet been disclosed in conformance with IETF rules. Thanks, Mach --_000_E991071574EC48DAA4469860FA3F01A7ciscocom_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I am not aware of any IPR that applies to this draft.

Thanks,
Arvind.

On Oct 14, 2015, at 8:45 PM, Mach Chen <mach.chen@huawei.com> wrote:

Working Group,

I am the shepherd of draft-tiruveedhula-mpls-mldp-mib. The authors of it ha= s told us that the document is ready for working adoption.

Before we start the WG adoption polling, we will do an IPR poll.


This mail starts the IPR poll.

Are you aware of any IPR that applies to draft-tiruveedhula-mpls-mldp-mib?<= br>
If so, has this IPR been disclosed in compliance with IETF IPR rules (see R= FCs 3979, 4879, 3669 and 5378 for more details).

If you are listed as a document author or contributor please respond to thi= s email regardless of whether or not you are aware of any relevant IPR. *Th= e response needs to be sent to the MPLS wg mailing list.* The document will= not advance to the next stage until a response has been received from each author and contributor.

If you are on the MPLS WG email list but are not listed as an author or con= tributor, then please explicitly respond only if you are aware of any IPR t= hat has not yet been disclosed in conformance with IETF rules.

Thanks,
Mach

--_000_E991071574EC48DAA4469860FA3F01A7ciscocom_-- From nobody Thu Oct 15 09:15:25 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ECF4D1AC44A; Thu, 15 Oct 2015 09:15:23 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.902 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.902 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 OjX3vAgHCA7u; Thu, 15 Oct 2015 09:15:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from na01-bl2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-bl2on0146.outbound.protection.outlook.com [65.55.169.146]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F3F381AC43C; Thu, 15 Oct 2015 09:15:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from DM2PR05MB573.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.141.159.16) by DM2PR05MB573.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.141.159.16) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.293.16; Thu, 15 Oct 2015 16:15:19 +0000 Received: from DM2PR05MB573.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([10.141.159.16]) by DM2PR05MB573.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([10.141.159.16]) with mapi id 15.01.0293.007; Thu, 15 Oct 2015 16:15:19 +0000 From: Ross Callon To: "mpls@ietf.org" , Loa Andersson , "arai.kaoru@lab.ntt.co.jp" Thread-Topic: repeat IPR poll on draft-ietf-mpls-tp-temporal-hitless-psm Thread-Index: AQHRB2Sv6GDQUlPv2EuV3g0z94Xydw== Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2015 16:15:19 +0000 Message-ID: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=rcallon@juniper.net; x-originating-ip: [66.129.241.14] x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; DM2PR05MB573; 5:D7XrkXya5/S8DgAEZVvFCtE/UFcoFqBiEd5xXhQ7eMFKwVqK0ppRktsgrZ68pGL4U7/31qWfZ+Vijn0TA28x+lhLSDAahWVEeolY/stSEdXbVgsBX/ay0unvVjn8QEEgSQwzTARZYT0JoXMCuFtGlQ==; 24:YQCOuW5HZT9sKuGLlglxiNYBCIrh40+jLu/VStmykhFXDj/iFNWyViq+tTppegdKdVLJSdV+5jfOQFetNuWXkZMLrbLQMmGCN4TcZQ5aUWw=; 20:NEDxW3gd+3XXOHmsZ0MPsXPEzuDpRUHx1dbQgRRwKf/MvVKDlbTRKeCrXe8tb3STl22YVfxBcFPdjMaY4weuiQ== x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:DM2PR05MB573; x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:; x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(601004)(2401047)(5005006)(520078)(8121501046)(3002001); SRVR:DM2PR05MB573; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:DM2PR05MB573; x-forefront-prvs: 0730093765 x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(6009001)(199003)(189002)(189998001)(74316001)(64706001)(66066001)(2501003)(87936001)(97736004)(5008740100001)(86362001)(101416001)(92566002)(5001770100001)(81156007)(33656002)(106116001)(2900100001)(106356001)(54356999)(105586002)(77096005)(99286002)(5004730100002)(102836002)(5001920100001)(40100003)(5007970100001)(5003600100002)(46102003)(76576001)(230783001)(5001960100002)(122556002)(10400500002)(5002640100001)(229853001)(11100500001)(50986999); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:DM2PR05MB573; H:DM2PR05MB573.namprd05.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; A:1; MX:1; LANG:en; received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: juniper.net does not designate permitted sender hosts) spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:23 spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: juniper.net X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 15 Oct 2015 16:15:19.6748 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: bea78b3c-4cdb-4130-854a-1d193232e5f4 X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: DM2PR05MB573 Archived-At: Cc: "mpls-chairs@ietf.org" Subject: [mpls] repeat IPR poll on draft-ietf-mpls-tp-temporal-hitless-psm X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2015 16:15:24 -0000 V29ya2luZyBHcm91cCwNCg0KVGhlIGF1dGhvcnMgaGF2ZSB0b2xkIHRoZSBXRyBjaGFpcnMgdGhh dCBkcmFmdC1pZXRmLW1wbHMtdHAtdGVtcG9yYWwtaGl0bGVzcy1wc20NCmlzIHJlYWR5IGZvciBX RyBsYXN0IGNhbGwuIEEgd2hpbGUgYmFjayB3ZSBkaWQgYW4gSVBSIHBvbGwgb24gdGhpcyBkb2N1 bWVudC4gDQpIb3dldmVyLCB0d28gbmV3IGF1dGhvcnMgKExvYSBBbmRlcnNzb24gYW5kIEthb3J1 IEFyYWkpIGhhdmUgYmVlbiBhZGRlZCBzaW5jZSANClRoZSBvcmlnaW5hbCBJUFIgcG9sbC4gDQoN CldlIGFyZSB0aGVyZWZvcmUgcmVwZWF0aW5nIHRoZSBJUFIgcG9sbCB0byBhbGxvdyBMb2EgYW5k IEthb3J1IHRvIHJlc3BvbmQuIEFzIGFsd2F5cywgDQphbnkgSUVURiBwYXJ0aWNpcGFudCB3aG8g aXMgYXdhcmUgb2YgSVBSIHRoYXQgYXBwbGllcyB0byB0aGlzIGRvY3VtZW50IHNob3VsZCBhbHNv DQpyZXNwb25kLiANCg0KQXJlIHlvdSBhd2FyZSBvZiBhbnkgSVBSIHRoYXQgYXBwbGllcyB0byBk cmFmdC1jaGVuZy1tcGxzLXRwLXNoYXJlZC1yaW5nLXByb3RlY3Rpb24/DQoNCklmIHNvLCBoYXMg dGhpcyBJUFIgYmVlbiBkaXNjbG9zZWQgaW4gY29tcGxpYW5jZSB3aXRoIElFVEYgSVBSIHJ1bGVz IChzZWUgDQpSRkNzIDM5NzksIDQ4NzksIDM2NjkgYW5kIDUzNzggZm9yIG1vcmUgZGV0YWlscyk/ ICh3ZSB3aWxsIG5vdGUgaG93ZXZlciB0aGF0IHRoZXJlDQphcmUgY3VycmVudGx5IG5vIElQUiBk aXNjbG9zdXJlcyB0aGF0IGFwcGx5IHRvIHRoaXMgZG9jdW1lbnQpLiANCg0KSWYgeW91IGFyZSBs aXN0ZWQgYXMgYSBkb2N1bWVudCBhdXRob3Igb3IgY29udHJpYnV0b3IgYW5kIHlvdSBkaWQgbm90 IA0KcmVzcG9uZCB0byB0aGUgcHJldmlvdXMgcG9sbCB0aGVuIHBsZWFzZSByZXNwb25kIHRvIHRo aXMgZW1haWwgcmVnYXJkbGVzcyANCm9mIHdoZXRoZXIgb3Igbm90IHlvdSBhcmUgYXdhcmUgb2Yg YW55IHJlbGV2YW50IElQUi4gKlRoZSByZXNwb25zZSBuZWVkcyANCnRvIGJlIHNlbnQgdG8gdGhl IE1QTFMgd2cgbWFpbGluZyBsaXN0LiogDQoNCklmIHlvdSBhcmUgb24gdGhlIE1QTFMgV0cgZW1h aWwgbGlzdCBidXQgYXJlIG5vdCBsaXN0ZWQgYXMgYW4gYXV0aG9yIG9yDQpjb250cmlidXRvciwg dGhlbiBwbGVhc2UgZXhwbGljaXRseSByZXNwb25kIG9ubHkgaWYgeW91IGFyZSBhd2FyZSBvZiBh bnkNCklQUiB0aGF0IGhhcyBub3QgeWV0IGJlZW4gZGlzY2xvc2VkIGluIGNvbmZvcm1hbmNlIHdp dGggSUVURiBydWxlcy4NCg0KUm9zcw0KKGFzIG1wbHMgd2cgY28tY2hhaXIpDQoNCg== From nobody Thu Oct 15 09:16:57 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C91231B2A44; Thu, 15 Oct 2015 09:16:56 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.902 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.902 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 SgwGHvPMzr1n; Thu, 15 Oct 2015 09:16:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from na01-bl2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-bl2on0145.outbound.protection.outlook.com [65.55.169.145]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EBB281AC529; Thu, 15 Oct 2015 09:16:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from DM2PR05MB573.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.141.159.16) by DM2PR05MB574.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.141.159.22) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.293.16; Thu, 15 Oct 2015 16:16:53 +0000 Received: from DM2PR05MB573.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([10.141.159.16]) by DM2PR05MB573.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([10.141.159.16]) with mapi id 15.01.0293.007; Thu, 15 Oct 2015 16:16:52 +0000 From: Ross Callon To: "mpls@ietf.org" , Loa Andersson , "arai.kaoru@lab.ntt.co.jp" Thread-Topic: repeat IPR poll on draft-ietf-mpls-tp-temporal-hitless-psm Thread-Index: AQHQuaS16GDQUlPv2EuV3g0z94Xyd54EuNbAgDBOfhCAOExCQIAAAqxg Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2015 16:16:52 +0000 Message-ID: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=rcallon@juniper.net; x-originating-ip: [66.129.241.14] x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; DM2PR05MB574; 5:3zRuocAcBt4kb+XYCU0OxSFUUIh27fAuM0q2Kt2M9J4HeilrlkQ3mFT1PutaWKa8OH27s+Bz+NYPb6l8ueDKe81fqqsi34dcFQ9NAE1sjbAtxfH9IsfZXIJAX2ZeJu7mSxrKGMJO5eW+Vy9GVVBmUA==; 24:gwj6Kmh0G0D5SreEE9pFgOmCICqCWTT566ivOnGdm1okDmt5R1o1GiYbhWsD0CuUHa6Ix5HEptmjGZVpcOwXfFNBvp7d/zTRMuA1znfKAR8=; 20:P8tC+hsyEeWSefT/qDE4bMSXH6UtchatOWg4r19eR6+PI0HpRNq3GByqa90aNTtb/e3+/mzpuxTC8dzqljBtVw== x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:DM2PR05MB574; x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:; x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(601004)(2401047)(8121501046)(520078)(5005006)(3002001); SRVR:DM2PR05MB574; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:DM2PR05MB574; x-forefront-prvs: 0730093765 x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(6009001)(199003)(189002)(101416001)(5003600100002)(106356001)(2900100001)(46102003)(87936001)(5002640100001)(66066001)(122556002)(230783001)(5004730100002)(64706001)(99286002)(106116001)(105586002)(40100003)(76576001)(81156007)(86362001)(10400500002)(74316001)(5008740100001)(33656002)(97736004)(5001960100002)(5001770100001)(5007970100001)(189998001)(77096005)(92566002)(54356999)(102836002)(50986999)(2501003); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:DM2PR05MB574; H:DM2PR05MB573.namprd05.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; A:1; MX:1; LANG:en; received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: juniper.net does not designate permitted sender hosts) spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:23 spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: juniper.net X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 15 Oct 2015 16:16:52.7515 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: bea78b3c-4cdb-4130-854a-1d193232e5f4 X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: DM2PR05MB574 Archived-At: Cc: "mpls-chairs@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [mpls] repeat IPR poll on draft-ietf-mpls-tp-temporal-hitless-psm X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2015 16:16:57 -0000 T29wcywgSSBoaXQgInNlbmQiIHRvbyBxdWlja2x5LiBUaGUgY29ycmVjdCBJUFIgcG9sbCBzaG91 bGQgcmVhZDogDQoNCi0tLS0tDQoNCldvcmtpbmcgR3JvdXAsDQoNClRoZSBhdXRob3JzIGhhdmUg dG9sZCB0aGUgV0cgY2hhaXJzIHRoYXQgZHJhZnQtaWV0Zi1tcGxzLXRwLXRlbXBvcmFsLWhpdGxl c3MtcHNtDQppcyByZWFkeSBmb3IgV0cgbGFzdCBjYWxsLiBBIHdoaWxlIGJhY2sgd2UgZGlkIGFu IElQUiBwb2xsIG9uIHRoaXMgZG9jdW1lbnQuIA0KSG93ZXZlciwgdHdvIG5ldyBhdXRob3JzIChM b2EgQW5kZXJzc29uIGFuZCBLYW9ydSBBcmFpKSBoYXZlIGJlZW4gYWRkZWQgc2luY2UgDQpUaGUg b3JpZ2luYWwgSVBSIHBvbGwuIA0KDQpXZSBhcmUgdGhlcmVmb3JlIHJlcGVhdGluZyB0aGUgSVBS IHBvbGwgdG8gYWxsb3cgTG9hIGFuZCBLYW9ydSB0byByZXNwb25kLiBBcyBhbHdheXMsIA0KYW55 IElFVEYgcGFydGljaXBhbnQgd2hvIGlzIGF3YXJlIG9mIElQUiB0aGF0IGFwcGxpZXMgdG8gdGhp cyBkb2N1bWVudCBzaG91bGQgYWxzbw0KcmVzcG9uZC4gDQoNCkFyZSB5b3UgYXdhcmUgb2YgYW55 IElQUiB0aGF0IGFwcGxpZXMgdG8gZHJhZnQtaWV0Zi1tcGxzLXRwLXRlbXBvcmFsLWhpdGxlc3Mt cHNtPw0KDQpJZiBzbywgaGFzIHRoaXMgSVBSIGJlZW4gZGlzY2xvc2VkIGluIGNvbXBsaWFuY2Ug d2l0aCBJRVRGIElQUiBydWxlcyAoc2VlIA0KUkZDcyAzOTc5LCA0ODc5LCAzNjY5IGFuZCA1Mzc4 IGZvciBtb3JlIGRldGFpbHMpPyAod2Ugd2lsbCBub3RlIGhvd2V2ZXIgdGhhdCB0aGVyZQ0KYXJl IGN1cnJlbnRseSBubyBJUFIgZGlzY2xvc3VyZXMgdGhhdCBhcHBseSB0byB0aGlzIGRvY3VtZW50 KS4gDQoNCklmIHlvdSBhcmUgbGlzdGVkIGFzIGEgZG9jdW1lbnQgYXV0aG9yIG9yIGNvbnRyaWJ1 dG9yIGFuZCB5b3UgZGlkIG5vdCANCnJlc3BvbmQgdG8gdGhlIHByZXZpb3VzIHBvbGwgdGhlbiBw bGVhc2UgcmVzcG9uZCB0byB0aGlzIGVtYWlsIHJlZ2FyZGxlc3MgDQpvZiB3aGV0aGVyIG9yIG5v dCB5b3UgYXJlIGF3YXJlIG9mIGFueSByZWxldmFudCBJUFIuICpUaGUgcmVzcG9uc2UgbmVlZHMg DQp0byBiZSBzZW50IHRvIHRoZSBNUExTIHdnIG1haWxpbmcgbGlzdC4qIA0KDQpJZiB5b3UgYXJl IG9uIHRoZSBNUExTIFdHIGVtYWlsIGxpc3QgYnV0IGFyZSBub3QgbGlzdGVkIGFzIGFuIGF1dGhv ciBvcg0KY29udHJpYnV0b3IsIHRoZW4gcGxlYXNlIGV4cGxpY2l0bHkgcmVzcG9uZCBvbmx5IGlm IHlvdSBhcmUgYXdhcmUgb2YgYW55DQpJUFIgdGhhdCBoYXMgbm90IHlldCBiZWVuIGRpc2Nsb3Nl ZCBpbiBjb25mb3JtYW5jZSB3aXRoIElFVEYgcnVsZXMuDQoNClJvc3MNCihhcyBtcGxzIHdnIGNv LWNoYWlyKQ0KDQo= From nobody Thu Oct 15 09:51:31 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E08471B2CA5; Thu, 15 Oct 2015 09:51:29 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.91 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham 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 NMUXMIN1-OoE; Thu, 15 Oct 2015 09:51:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pipi.pi.nu (pipi.pi.nu [83.168.239.141]) (using TLSv1.1 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7BF3F1A9085; Thu, 15 Oct 2015 09:51:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.10] (unknown [112.205.73.125]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: loa@pi.nu) by pipi.pi.nu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5C2061801510; Thu, 15 Oct 2015 18:51:22 +0200 (CEST) To: Ross Callon , "mpls@ietf.org" , Loa Andersson , "arai.kaoru@lab.ntt.co.jp" References: From: Loa Andersson Message-ID: <561FD980.6090509@pi.nu> Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2015 00:51:12 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: Cc: "mpls-chairs@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [mpls] repeat IPR poll on draft-ietf-mpls-tp-temporal-hitless-psm X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2015 16:51:30 -0000 Ross, I'm not aware of any IPR that relates to this document. /Loa On 2015-10-16 00:16, Ross Callon wrote: > Oops, I hit "send" too quickly. The correct IPR poll should read: > > ----- > > Working Group, > > The authors have told the WG chairs that draft-ietf-mpls-tp-temporal-hitless-psm > is ready for WG last call. A while back we did an IPR poll on this document. > However, two new authors (Loa Andersson and Kaoru Arai) have been added since > The original IPR poll. > > We are therefore repeating the IPR poll to allow Loa and Kaoru to respond. As always, > any IETF participant who is aware of IPR that applies to this document should also > respond. > > Are you aware of any IPR that applies to draft-ietf-mpls-tp-temporal-hitless-psm? > > If so, has this IPR been disclosed in compliance with IETF IPR rules (see > RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669 and 5378 for more details)? (we will note however that there > are currently no IPR disclosures that apply to this document). > > If you are listed as a document author or contributor and you did not > respond to the previous poll then please respond to this email regardless > of whether or not you are aware of any relevant IPR. *The response needs > to be sent to the MPLS wg mailing list.* > > If you are on the MPLS WG email list but are not listed as an author or > contributor, then please explicitly respond only if you are aware of any > IPR that has not yet been disclosed in conformance with IETF rules. > > Ross > (as mpls wg co-chair) > > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > From nobody Thu Oct 15 14:15:13 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 28C6C1A1BC0; Thu, 15 Oct 2015 14:15:10 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -101.902 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.902 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=ham 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 5obvfH8TUuBb; Thu, 15 Oct 2015 14:15:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from na01-bn1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-bn1bon0709.outbound.protection.outlook.com [IPv6:2a01:111:f400:fc10::1:709]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F17381A1BBE; Thu, 15 Oct 2015 14:15:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from BLUPR05MB1985.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.162.224.27) by BLUPR05MB1988.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.162.224.30) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.300.14; Thu, 15 Oct 2015 21:14:49 +0000 Received: from BLUPR05MB1985.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([10.162.224.27]) by BLUPR05MB1985.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([10.162.224.27]) with mapi id 15.01.0300.010; Thu, 15 Oct 2015 21:14:49 +0000 From: Ronald Bonica To: "mpls@ietf.org" , "iesg@ietf.org" , "spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com" Thread-Topic: [mpls] Spencer Dawkins' No Objection on draft-ietf-mpls-self-ping-05: (with COMMENT) Thread-Index: AdEHjoUrkTjtIQptSkuMk3hUh/8A9A== Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2015 21:14:49 +0000 Message-ID: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=rbonica@juniper.net; x-originating-ip: [66.129.241.14] x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; BLUPR05MB1988; 5:lEiOyMwAm4xVUmYm06s8i3qVZ8nBDzFzsmkSemwP5gFOW2mo/HEyuRlIW1r4IoMbCvtbX270mocaoub19gwxfK8VZh1bKoys6x7YUZBNQuCBGrCl8j11z52mc6vo54YNUHLC+ObuSm6WHBT4SsZNMA==; 24:jZefVcgUftLVZaNbbcalO7Em797AouHCOEapTLe+ViaSgW7vYBBSPHWOTaAAxKbevEQPe3rVbj2STGiQexB99e8e9AhN+y7pzXsHvmOWPtI=; 20:nXjvEqQJNHizDPOG2XcrtPcqBCdmG4HNkH5GXXNRRLur4H1WRFHvm5mMJmAk0W026bJeyYVv5paxsuIW0jAwSg== x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:BLUPR05MB1988; x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:; x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(601004)(2401047)(520078)(5005006)(8121501046)(3002001); SRVR:BLUPR05MB1988; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:BLUPR05MB1988; x-forefront-prvs: 0730093765 x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(6009001)(199003)(189002)(46102003)(66066001)(230783001)(106356001)(10400500002)(74316001)(105586002)(5003600100002)(33656002)(99286002)(2201001)(2900100001)(81156007)(189998001)(87936001)(97736004)(64706001)(107886002)(54356999)(76576001)(86362001)(101416001)(77096005)(5002640100001)(2501003)(5001770100001)(5001960100002)(5004730100002)(5001920100001)(40100003)(102836002)(122556002)(5008740100001)(92566002)(5007970100001)(11100500001)(50986999); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:BLUPR05MB1988; H:BLUPR05MB1985.namprd05.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; A:1; MX:1; LANG:en; received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: juniper.net does not designate permitted sender hosts) spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:23 spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: juniper.net X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 15 Oct 2015 21:14:49.8935 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: bea78b3c-4cdb-4130-854a-1d193232e5f4 X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BLUPR05MB1988 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [mpls] Spencer Dawkins' No Objection on draft-ietf-mpls-self-ping-05: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2015 21:15:10 -0000 Hi Spencer, Thanks for your thoughtful review. In the Security Considerations section, you will find the following text: "LSP Self-ping messages are easily forged. Therefore, an attacker can send= the ingress LSR a forged LSP Self-ping message, causing the ingress LSR to= terminate the LSP Self-ping session prematurely. In order to mitigate the= se threats, implementations SHOULD NOT assign Session-ID's in a predictable= manner. Furthermore, operators SHOULD filter LSP Self-ping packets at netw= ork ingress points." The assignment of all LSP Self-ping traffic to UDP Port 8503 facilitates th= e above-mentioned filtering. = Ron ------------------------------------------------------------------ > COMMENT: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >=20 > I was looking at >=20 > o The UDP Destination Port MUST be lsp-self-ping (8503) [IANA.PORTS] >=20 > and wondering why this is a MUST. Is the answer that this mechanism works > within an administrative domain, so you can just tell the other end what = the > port number needs to be? >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 > ------------------------------ >=20 From nobody Thu Oct 15 14:43:50 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B1691A6F6F; Thu, 15 Oct 2015 14:43:50 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 8vBZVWKU_zvD; Thu, 15 Oct 2015 14:43:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-vk0-x22d.google.com (mail-vk0-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400c:c05::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 6856D1A6F34; Thu, 15 Oct 2015 14:43:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: by vkex70 with SMTP id x70so50749444vke.3; Thu, 15 Oct 2015 14:43:47 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=2WyqHCUilX33u1QrQUrbY0ByKNuCXgRGo7GZqYwRB24=; b=RHfqbpyMl5EUU7gFRiXOA/sLbPh6QdBVBtdLWYcm9W3XMapyHt5OLRcWwTaRY5RhdI I2gZvZqSKXOIkTmedJgMYIYD6kEixhYzqoBp2jzGx5Z9UIG5gyGwxteSorW+qYHaVa8K AWTNP2gf7eZmZYiwhdRV1wyYVB+YHhcK1F+ZCih8N6m2/UTaj+hh1qb7Ux/wgbq/siYM cOtEnhUNq5u4yL+tI5CLrd4A4yYp7lA6JC80w/+LEeLHhmxyXP+erI9pOWe0LnbAK1KB avFT1yTgwD0c+UebjCoTTfbPAS3xURgu2RByYFkXiivMnN7zyRS28mYjf7XF7Gxv12od jMgA== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.31.8.77 with SMTP id 74mr6897191vki.67.1444945427568; Thu, 15 Oct 2015 14:43:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.31.54.8 with HTTP; Thu, 15 Oct 2015 14:43:47 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2015 16:43:47 -0500 Message-ID: From: Spencer Dawkins at IETF To: Ronald Bonica Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1145507eee229105222b9280 Archived-At: Cc: "mpls@ietf.org" , "iesg@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [mpls] Spencer Dawkins' No Objection on draft-ietf-mpls-self-ping-05: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2015 21:43:50 -0000 --001a1145507eee229105222b9280 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Hi, Ron, On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 4:14 PM, Ronald Bonica wrote: > Hi Spencer, > > Thanks for your thoughtful review. > > In the Security Considerations section, you will find the following text: > > "LSP Self-ping messages are easily forged. Therefore, an attacker can > send the ingress LSR a forged LSP Self-ping message, causing the ingress > LSR to terminate the LSP Self-ping session prematurely. In order to > mitigate these threats, implementations SHOULD NOT assign Session-ID's in a > predictable manner. Furthermore, operators SHOULD filter LSP Self-ping > packets at network ingress points." > > The assignment of all LSP Self-ping traffic to UDP Port 8503 facilitates > the above-mentioned filtering. > You were answering a different question than the one I was asking (I was thinking of collisions on port numbers), but you provided an answer that makes my question go away. Good job! Were you once an AD? ;-) Spencer > > Ron > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > > COMMENT: > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > I was looking at > > > > o The UDP Destination Port MUST be lsp-self-ping (8503) [IANA.PORTS] > > > > and wondering why this is a MUST. Is the answer that this mechanism works > > within an administrative domain, so you can just tell the other end what > the > > port number needs to be? > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > > > --001a1145507eee229105222b9280 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi, Ron,

On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 4:14 PM, Ronald Bonica &l= t;rbonica@juniper.= net> wrote:
Hi Spencer,

Thanks for your thoughtful review.

In the Security Considerations section, you will find the following text:
"LSP Self-ping messages are easily forged.=C2=A0 Therefore, an attacke= r can send the ingress LSR a forged LSP Self-ping message, causing the ingr= ess LSR to terminate the LSP Self-ping session prematurely.=C2=A0 In order = to mitigate these threats, implementations SHOULD NOT assign Session-ID'= ;s in a predictable manner. Furthermore, operators SHOULD filter LSP Self-p= ing packets at network ingress points."

The assignment of all LSP Self-ping traffic to UDP Port 8503 facilitates th= e above-mentioned filtering.

You were a= nswering a different question than the one I was asking (I was thinking of = collisions on port numbers), but you provided an answer that makes my quest= ion go away.

Good job! Were you once an AD?=C2=A0<= /div>

;-)

Spencer
=C2= =A0
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2= =A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 = =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2= =A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 = =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0Ron


------------------------------------------------------------------
> COMMENT:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------=
>
> I was looking at
>
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 o=C2=A0 The UDP Destination Port MUST be lsp-self-ping (8= 503) [IANA.PORTS]
>
> and wondering why this is a MUST. Is the answer that this mechanism wo= rks
> within an administrative domain, so you can just tell the other end wh= at the
> port number needs to be?
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>


--001a1145507eee229105222b9280-- From nobody Thu Oct 15 15:09:24 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 331371A7020; Thu, 15 Oct 2015 15:09:21 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -101.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=ham 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 RsP4b_sdz7vb; Thu, 15 Oct 2015 15:09:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA8BE1A6FFD; Thu, 15 Oct 2015 15:09:19 -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: 6.6.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <20151015220919.30582.30641.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2015 15:09:19 -0700 Archived-At: Cc: mpls@ietf.org, draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-relay-reply@ietf.org, mpls-chairs@ietf.org, The IESG , rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org Subject: [mpls] Protocol Action: 'Relayed Echo Reply mechanism for LSP Ping' to Proposed Standard (draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-relay-reply-11.txt) X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2015 22:09:21 -0000 The IESG has approved the following document: - 'Relayed Echo Reply mechanism for LSP Ping' (draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-relay-reply-11.txt) as Proposed Standard This document is the product of the Multiprotocol Label Switching 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-mpls-lsp-ping-relay-reply/ Technical Summary In some inter autonomous system (AS) and inter-area deployment scenarios for RFC 4379 "Label Switched Path (LSP) Ping and Traceroute", a replying LSR might not have an available route to the initiator, and the Echo Reply message sent to the initiator would be discarded resulting in false negatives or complete failure of operation of LSP Ping and Traceroute. This document describes extensions to LSP Ping mechanism to enable the replying Label Switching Router (LSR) to have the capability to relay the Echo Response by a set of routable intermediate nodes to the initiator. This document updates RFC 4379 by adding those extensions. Working Group Summary Nothing out of the ordinary. Document Quality We know of implementations and deployments of this specification. We also have indications that vendors have plans to implement. Personnel Loa Andersson is the document Shepherd Deborah Brungard is the responsible AD From nobody Fri Oct 16 08:44:12 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 31F5B1B31B4; Fri, 16 Oct 2015 08:44:11 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -101.901 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=ham 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 V5VbtjgdJqBA; Fri, 16 Oct 2015 08:44:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from na01-bl2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-bl2on0146.outbound.protection.outlook.com [65.55.169.146]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 69B931A9166; Fri, 16 Oct 2015 08:44:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from BLUPR05MB1985.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.162.224.27) by BLUPR05MB1986.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.162.224.28) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.300.14; Fri, 16 Oct 2015 15:44:06 +0000 Received: from BLUPR05MB1985.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([10.162.224.27]) by BLUPR05MB1985.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([10.162.224.27]) with mapi id 15.01.0300.010; Fri, 16 Oct 2015 15:44:06 +0000 From: Ronald Bonica To: Spencer Dawkins at IETF Thread-Topic: [mpls] Spencer Dawkins' No Objection on draft-ietf-mpls-self-ping-05: (with COMMENT) Thread-Index: AdEHjoUrkTjtIQptSkuMk3hUh/8A9AABA0KAACUY6YA= Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2015 15:44:05 +0000 Message-ID: References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=rbonica@juniper.net; x-originating-ip: [66.129.241.11] x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; BLUPR05MB1986; 5:+rcDrLN8xcXvLrAgI+rSeZ3AcCvsWp8c7lmEarWut7dFm1QGaeXcpU62QOwuJ3mNBwAMrleOjjbs8Ul+iktz+j+ssntcU7Sfjq+BKUUqpq82CbAUQ7uxBE9VI47zNtlr1iMmtV3rW9HLkdotOz35KA==; 24:lVnlWfqx1Wmjp9SfElBgBhQjbYgcW+5S7EJfetRG1QqulsmpBt74pAd0PykCxVoQllws7luPUR87KclfvIh7gOJYSTQoIck+kONgn+v5+xI=; 20:l0IF3ZqCa3pEnlvoJpQZd+8TQOWIdMSrIP6P238w+SDbkjofJcFbLDC2OnM3CHZQCSzjXAIHeNEx5EqsRZozFA== x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:BLUPR05MB1986; x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:(138986009662008)(42673675456677)(108003899814671)(83020558694031)(202767206196957); x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(601004)(2401047)(5005006)(520078)(8121501046)(3002001); SRVR:BLUPR05MB1986; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:BLUPR05MB1986; x-forefront-prvs: 0731AA2DE6 x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(199003)(189002)(377454003)(24454002)(86362001)(101416001)(2900100001)(54356999)(5001960100002)(5007970100001)(76176999)(74316001)(19580405001)(5008740100001)(2950100001)(102836002)(76576001)(92566002)(230783001)(46102003)(19300405004)(16236675004)(50986999)(5004730100002)(110136002)(5003600100002)(11100500001)(189998001)(5002640100001)(19609705001)(40100003)(10400500002)(106356001)(19625215002)(77096005)(15975445007)(33656002)(99286002)(87936001)(66066001)(122556002)(105586002)(81156007)(97736004)(64706001)(19580395003); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:BLUPR05MB1986; H:BLUPR05MB1985.namprd05.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; A:1; MX:1; LANG:en; received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: juniper.net does not designate permitted sender hosts) spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:23 spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_BLUPR05MB19855202B394EEFCEB71B009AE3D0BLUPR05MB1985namp_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: juniper.net X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 16 Oct 2015 15:44:05.8745 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: bea78b3c-4cdb-4130-854a-1d193232e5f4 X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BLUPR05MB1986 Archived-At: Cc: "mpls@ietf.org" , "iesg@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [mpls] Spencer Dawkins' No Objection on draft-ietf-mpls-self-ping-05: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2015 15:44:11 -0000 --_000_BLUPR05MB19855202B394EEFCEB71B009AE3D0BLUPR05MB1985namp_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 SGkgU3BlbmNlLA0KDQpJIGd1ZXNzIHlvdSBkZXNlcnZlIGEgYmV0dGVyIGFuc3dlciA7LSkNCg0K SW4gTFNQIFNlbGYtcGluZywgdGhlIGluZ3Jlc3MgTFNSOg0KDQoNCi0gICAgICAgICAgRm9ybWF0 cyBhIHBhY2tldCBhZGRyZXNzZWQgdG8gaXRzZWxmDQoNCi0gICAgICAgICAgU2VuZHMgdGhlIHBh Y2tldCB0aHJvdWdoIHRoZSBMU1AgdW5kZXIgdGVzdA0KDQotICAgICAgICAgIFdhaXRzIGZvciB0 aGUgcGFja2V0IHRvIHJldHVybiB0byBpdA0KDQpUaGUgaW5ncmVzcyBMU1IgaXMgYm90aCB0aGUg cHJvZHVjZXIgYW5kIGNvbnN1bWVyIG9mIHRoZSBwYWNrZXQuDQoNCkluIGFuIGVhcmxpZXIgdmVy c2lvbiBvZiB0aGUgZHJhZnQsIHRoZSBpbmdyZXNzIExTUiBzZWxlY3RlZCBhIFVEUCBwb3J0IGZy b20gdGhlIGR5bmFtaWMgcmFuZ2UgKDQ5MTUyLSA2NTUzNSkuIEltcGxlbWVudGF0aW9ucyBjb3Vs ZCBwaWNrIGEgc2luZ2xlIHBvcnQgYW5kIHVzZSBpdCBhbGwgdGhlIHRpbWUgb3IgcGljayBhIHBv cnQgZm9yIGVhY2ggTFNQIFNlbGYtcGluZyBzZXNzaW9uLiBIb3dldmVyLCBpZiBhbiBpbXBsZW1l bnRhdGlvbiBkaWQgdGhpcywgaXQgd291bGQgYmUgZGlmZmljdWx0IHRvIGlkZW50aWZ5IGFuZCBm aWx0ZXIgTFNQIFNlbGYtcGluZyBwYWNrZXRzIGF0IHRoZSBkb21haW4gZWRnZS4gU28sIHRoZSBX RyBkZWNpZGVkIHRvIHB1dCBhbGwgTFNQIFNlbGYtcGluZyB0cmFmZmljIG9uIFVEUCBwb3J0IDg1 MDMsIHNvIGl0IGNvdWxkIGJlIGVhc2lseSBpZGVudGlmaWVkIGFuZCBmaWx0ZXJlZC4NCg0KICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIFJvbg0KDQpGcm9t OiBTcGVuY2VyIERhd2tpbnMgYXQgSUVURiBbbWFpbHRvOnNwZW5jZXJkYXdraW5zLmlldGZAZ21h aWwuY29tXQ0KU2VudDogVGh1cnNkYXksIE9jdG9iZXIgMTUsIDIwMTUgNTo0NCBQTQ0KVG86IFJv bmFsZCBCb25pY2EgPHJib25pY2FAanVuaXBlci5uZXQ+DQpDYzogbXBsc0BpZXRmLm9yZzsgaWVz Z0BpZXRmLm9yZw0KU3ViamVjdDogUmU6IFttcGxzXSBTcGVuY2VyIERhd2tpbnMnIE5vIE9iamVj dGlvbiBvbiBkcmFmdC1pZXRmLW1wbHMtc2VsZi1waW5nLTA1OiAod2l0aCBDT01NRU5UKQ0KDQpI aSwgUm9uLA0KDQpPbiBUaHUsIE9jdCAxNSwgMjAxNSBhdCA0OjE0IFBNLCBSb25hbGQgQm9uaWNh IDxyYm9uaWNhQGp1bmlwZXIubmV0PG1haWx0bzpyYm9uaWNhQGp1bmlwZXIubmV0Pj4gd3JvdGU6 DQpIaSBTcGVuY2VyLA0KDQpUaGFua3MgZm9yIHlvdXIgdGhvdWdodGZ1bCByZXZpZXcuDQoNCklu IHRoZSBTZWN1cml0eSBDb25zaWRlcmF0aW9ucyBzZWN0aW9uLCB5b3Ugd2lsbCBmaW5kIHRoZSBm b2xsb3dpbmcgdGV4dDoNCg0KIkxTUCBTZWxmLXBpbmcgbWVzc2FnZXMgYXJlIGVhc2lseSBmb3Jn ZWQuICBUaGVyZWZvcmUsIGFuIGF0dGFja2VyIGNhbiBzZW5kIHRoZSBpbmdyZXNzIExTUiBhIGZv cmdlZCBMU1AgU2VsZi1waW5nIG1lc3NhZ2UsIGNhdXNpbmcgdGhlIGluZ3Jlc3MgTFNSIHRvIHRl cm1pbmF0ZSB0aGUgTFNQIFNlbGYtcGluZyBzZXNzaW9uIHByZW1hdHVyZWx5LiAgSW4gb3JkZXIg dG8gbWl0aWdhdGUgdGhlc2UgdGhyZWF0cywgaW1wbGVtZW50YXRpb25zIFNIT1VMRCBOT1QgYXNz aWduIFNlc3Npb24tSUQncyBpbiBhIHByZWRpY3RhYmxlIG1hbm5lci4gRnVydGhlcm1vcmUsIG9w ZXJhdG9ycyBTSE9VTEQgZmlsdGVyIExTUCBTZWxmLXBpbmcgcGFja2V0cyBhdCBuZXR3b3JrIGlu Z3Jlc3MgcG9pbnRzLiINCg0KVGhlIGFzc2lnbm1lbnQgb2YgYWxsIExTUCBTZWxmLXBpbmcgdHJh ZmZpYyB0byBVRFAgUG9ydCA4NTAzIGZhY2lsaXRhdGVzIHRoZSBhYm92ZS1tZW50aW9uZWQgZmls dGVyaW5nLg0KDQpZb3Ugd2VyZSBhbnN3ZXJpbmcgYSBkaWZmZXJlbnQgcXVlc3Rpb24gdGhhbiB0 aGUgb25lIEkgd2FzIGFza2luZyAoSSB3YXMgdGhpbmtpbmcgb2YgY29sbGlzaW9ucyBvbiBwb3J0 IG51bWJlcnMpLCBidXQgeW91IHByb3ZpZGVkIGFuIGFuc3dlciB0aGF0IG1ha2VzIG15IHF1ZXN0 aW9uIGdvIGF3YXkuDQoNCkdvb2Qgam9iISBXZXJlIHlvdSBvbmNlIGFuIEFEPw0KDQo7LSkNCg0K U3BlbmNlcg0KDQogICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICBSb24NCg0KDQot LS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0t LS0tLS0tLS0NCj4gQ09NTUVOVDoNCj4gLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0t LS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLQ0KPg0KPiBJIHdhcyBsb29raW5n IGF0DQo+DQo+ICAgIG8gIFRoZSBVRFAgRGVzdGluYXRpb24gUG9ydCBNVVNUIGJlIGxzcC1zZWxm LXBpbmcgKDg1MDMpIFtJQU5BLlBPUlRTXQ0KPg0KPiBhbmQgd29uZGVyaW5nIHdoeSB0aGlzIGlz IGEgTVVTVC4gSXMgdGhlIGFuc3dlciB0aGF0IHRoaXMgbWVjaGFuaXNtIHdvcmtzDQo+IHdpdGhp biBhbiBhZG1pbmlzdHJhdGl2ZSBkb21haW4sIHNvIHlvdSBjYW4ganVzdCB0ZWxsIHRoZSBvdGhl ciBlbmQgd2hhdCB0aGUNCj4gcG9ydCBudW1iZXIgbmVlZHMgdG8gYmU/DQo+DQo+DQo+DQo+DQo+ IC0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLQ0KPg0KDQo= --_000_BLUPR05MB19855202B394EEFCEB71B009AE3D0BLUPR05MB1985namp_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 PGh0bWwgeG1sbnM6dj0idXJuOnNjaGVtYXMtbWljcm9zb2Z0LWNvbTp2bWwiIHhtbG5zOm89InVy bjpzY2hlbWFzLW1pY3Jvc29mdC1jb206b2ZmaWNlOm9mZmljZSIgeG1sbnM6dz0idXJuOnNjaGVt YXMtbWljcm9zb2Z0LWNvbTpvZmZpY2U6d29yZCIgeG1sbnM6bT0iaHR0cDovL3NjaGVtYXMubWlj cm9zb2Z0LmNvbS9vZmZpY2UvMjAwNC8xMi9vbW1sIiB4bWxucz0iaHR0cDovL3d3dy53My5vcmcv VFIvUkVDLWh0bWw0MCI+DQo8aGVhZD4NCjxtZXRhIGh0dHAtZXF1aXY9IkNvbnRlbnQtVHlwZSIg Y29udGVudD0idGV4dC9odG1sOyBjaGFyc2V0PXV0Zi04Ij4NCjxtZXRhIG5hbWU9IkdlbmVyYXRv ciIgY29udGVudD0iTWljcm9zb2Z0IFdvcmQgMTUgKGZpbHRlcmVkIG1lZGl1bSkiPg0KPHN0eWxl PjwhLS0NCi8qIEZvbnQgRGVmaW5pdGlvbnMgKi8NCkBmb250LWZhY2UNCgl7Zm9udC1mYW1pbHk6 V2luZ2RpbmdzOw0KCXBhbm9zZS0xOjUgMCAwIDAgMCAwIDAgMCAwIDA7fQ0KQGZvbnQtZmFjZQ0K CXtmb250LWZhbWlseToiQ2FtYnJpYSBNYXRoIjsNCglwYW5vc2UtMToyIDQgNSAzIDUgNCA2IDMg MiA0O30NCkBmb250LWZhY2UNCgl7Zm9udC1mYW1pbHk6Q2FsaWJyaTsNCglwYW5vc2UtMToyIDE1 IDUgMiAyIDIgNCAzIDIgNDt9DQovKiBTdHlsZSBEZWZpbml0aW9ucyAqLw0KcC5Nc29Ob3JtYWws IGxpLk1zb05vcm1hbCwgZGl2Lk1zb05vcm1hbA0KCXttYXJnaW46MGluOw0KCW1hcmdpbi1ib3R0 b206LjAwMDFwdDsNCglmb250LXNpemU6MTIuMHB0Ow0KCWZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiJUaW1lcyBOZXcg Um9tYW4iLHNlcmlmO30NCmE6bGluaywgc3Bhbi5Nc29IeXBlcmxpbmsNCgl7bXNvLXN0eWxlLXBy aW9yaXR5Ojk5Ow0KCWNvbG9yOmJsdWU7DQoJdGV4dC1kZWNvcmF0aW9uOnVuZGVybGluZTt9DQph OnZpc2l0ZWQsIHNwYW4uTXNvSHlwZXJsaW5rRm9sbG93ZWQNCgl7bXNvLXN0eWxlLXByaW9yaXR5 Ojk5Ow0KCWNvbG9yOnB1cnBsZTsNCgl0ZXh0LWRlY29yYXRpb246dW5kZXJsaW5lO30NCnAuTXNv TGlzdFBhcmFncmFwaCwgbGkuTXNvTGlzdFBhcmFncmFwaCwgZGl2Lk1zb0xpc3RQYXJhZ3JhcGgN Cgl7bXNvLXN0eWxlLXByaW9yaXR5OjM0Ow0KCW1hcmdpbi10b3A6MGluOw0KCW1hcmdpbi1yaWdo dDowaW47DQoJbWFyZ2luLWJvdHRvbTowaW47DQoJbWFyZ2luLWxlZnQ6LjVpbjsNCgltYXJnaW4t Ym90dG9tOi4wMDAxcHQ7DQoJZm9udC1zaXplOjEyLjBwdDsNCglmb250LWZhbWlseToiVGltZXMg TmV3IFJvbWFuIixzZXJpZjt9DQpzcGFuLkVtYWlsU3R5bGUxNw0KCXttc28tc3R5bGUtdHlwZTpw ZXJzb25hbC1yZXBseTsNCglmb250LWZhbWlseToiQ2FsaWJyaSIsc2Fucy1zZXJpZjsNCgljb2xv cjojMUY0OTdEO30NCi5Nc29DaHBEZWZhdWx0DQoJe21zby1zdHlsZS10eXBlOmV4cG9ydC1vbmx5 Ow0KCWZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiJDYWxpYnJpIixzYW5zLXNlcmlmO30NCkBwYWdlIFdvcmRTZWN0aW9u MQ0KCXtzaXplOjguNWluIDExLjBpbjsNCgltYXJnaW46MS4waW4gMS4waW4gMS4waW4gMS4waW47 fQ0KZGl2LldvcmRTZWN0aW9uMQ0KCXtwYWdlOldvcmRTZWN0aW9uMTt9DQovKiBMaXN0IERlZmlu aXRpb25zICovDQpAbGlzdCBsMA0KCXttc28tbGlzdC1pZDoyOTI4MzExNTg7DQoJbXNvLWxpc3Qt dHlwZTpoeWJyaWQ7DQoJbXNvLWxpc3QtdGVtcGxhdGUtaWRzOjYwNDk0MTI5MiAyMTA2MzI4MzQw IDY3Njk4NjkxIDY3Njk4NjkzIDY3Njk4Njg5IDY3Njk4NjkxIDY3Njk4NjkzIDY3Njk4Njg5IDY3 Njk4NjkxIDY3Njk4NjkzO30NCkBsaXN0IGwwOmxldmVsMQ0KCXttc28tbGV2ZWwtc3RhcnQtYXQ6 MDsNCgltc28tbGV2ZWwtbnVtYmVyLWZvcm1hdDpidWxsZXQ7DQoJbXNvLWxldmVsLXRleHQ6LTsN Cgltc28tbGV2ZWwtdGFiLXN0b3A6bm9uZTsNCgltc28tbGV2ZWwtbnVtYmVyLXBvc2l0aW9uOmxl ZnQ7DQoJdGV4dC1pbmRlbnQ6LS4yNWluOw0KCWZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiJDYWxpYnJpIixzYW5zLXNl cmlmOw0KCW1zby1mYXJlYXN0LWZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OkNhbGlicmk7DQoJbXNvLWJpZGktZm9udC1m YW1pbHk6IlRpbWVzIE5ldyBSb21hbiI7fQ0KQGxpc3QgbDA6bGV2ZWwyDQoJe21zby1sZXZlbC1u dW1iZXItZm9ybWF0OmJ1bGxldDsNCgltc28tbGV2ZWwtdGV4dDpvOw0KCW1zby1sZXZlbC10YWIt c3RvcDpub25lOw0KCW1zby1sZXZlbC1udW1iZXItcG9zaXRpb246bGVmdDsNCgl0ZXh0LWluZGVu dDotLjI1aW47DQoJZm9udC1mYW1pbHk6IkNvdXJpZXIgTmV3Ijt9DQpAbGlzdCBsMDpsZXZlbDMN Cgl7bXNvLWxldmVsLW51bWJlci1mb3JtYXQ6YnVsbGV0Ow0KCW1zby1sZXZlbC10ZXh0Ou+CpzsN Cgltc28tbGV2ZWwtdGFiLXN0b3A6bm9uZTsNCgltc28tbGV2ZWwtbnVtYmVyLXBvc2l0aW9uOmxl ZnQ7DQoJdGV4dC1pbmRlbnQ6LS4yNWluOw0KCWZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OldpbmdkaW5nczt9DQpAbGlz dCBsMDpsZXZlbDQNCgl7bXNvLWxldmVsLW51bWJlci1mb3JtYXQ6YnVsbGV0Ow0KCW1zby1sZXZl bC10ZXh0Ou+CtzsNCgltc28tbGV2ZWwtdGFiLXN0b3A6bm9uZTsNCgltc28tbGV2ZWwtbnVtYmVy LXBvc2l0aW9uOmxlZnQ7DQoJdGV4dC1pbmRlbnQ6LS4yNWluOw0KCWZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OlN5bWJv bDt9DQpAbGlzdCBsMDpsZXZlbDUNCgl7bXNvLWxldmVsLW51bWJlci1mb3JtYXQ6YnVsbGV0Ow0K CW1zby1sZXZlbC10ZXh0Om87DQoJbXNvLWxldmVsLXRhYi1zdG9wOm5vbmU7DQoJbXNvLWxldmVs LW51bWJlci1wb3NpdGlvbjpsZWZ0Ow0KCXRleHQtaW5kZW50Oi0uMjVpbjsNCglmb250LWZhbWls eToiQ291cmllciBOZXciO30NCkBsaXN0IGwwOmxldmVsNg0KCXttc28tbGV2ZWwtbnVtYmVyLWZv cm1hdDpidWxsZXQ7DQoJbXNvLWxldmVsLXRleHQ674KnOw0KCW1zby1sZXZlbC10YWItc3RvcDpu b25lOw0KCW1zby1sZXZlbC1udW1iZXItcG9zaXRpb246bGVmdDsNCgl0ZXh0LWluZGVudDotLjI1 aW47DQoJZm9udC1mYW1pbHk6V2luZ2RpbmdzO30NCkBsaXN0IGwwOmxldmVsNw0KCXttc28tbGV2 ZWwtbnVtYmVyLWZvcm1hdDpidWxsZXQ7DQoJbXNvLWxldmVsLXRleHQ674K3Ow0KCW1zby1sZXZl bC10YWItc3RvcDpub25lOw0KCW1zby1sZXZlbC1udW1iZXItcG9zaXRpb246bGVmdDsNCgl0ZXh0 LWluZGVudDotLjI1aW47DQoJZm9udC1mYW1pbHk6U3ltYm9sO30NCkBsaXN0IGwwOmxldmVsOA0K CXttc28tbGV2ZWwtbnVtYmVyLWZvcm1hdDpidWxsZXQ7DQoJbXNvLWxldmVsLXRleHQ6bzsNCglt c28tbGV2ZWwtdGFiLXN0b3A6bm9uZTsNCgltc28tbGV2ZWwtbnVtYmVyLXBvc2l0aW9uOmxlZnQ7 DQoJdGV4dC1pbmRlbnQ6LS4yNWluOw0KCWZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiJDb3VyaWVyIE5ldyI7fQ0KQGxp c3QgbDA6bGV2ZWw5DQoJe21zby1sZXZlbC1udW1iZXItZm9ybWF0OmJ1bGxldDsNCgltc28tbGV2 ZWwtdGV4dDrvgqc7DQoJbXNvLWxldmVsLXRhYi1zdG9wOm5vbmU7DQoJbXNvLWxldmVsLW51bWJl ci1wb3NpdGlvbjpsZWZ0Ow0KCXRleHQtaW5kZW50Oi0uMjVpbjsNCglmb250LWZhbWlseTpXaW5n ZGluZ3M7fQ0KQGxpc3QgbDENCgl7bXNvLWxpc3QtaWQ6MTMzNDk4OTI1ODsNCgltc28tbGlzdC10 eXBlOmh5YnJpZDsNCgltc28tbGlzdC10ZW1wbGF0ZS1pZHM6MjA0MzU1NzU2MCAzMjg2NTM4MTYg Njc2OTg2OTEgNjc2OTg2OTMgNjc2OTg2ODkgNjc2OTg2OTEgNjc2OTg2OTMgNjc2OTg2ODkgNjc2 OTg2OTEgNjc2OTg2OTM7fQ0KQGxpc3QgbDE6bGV2ZWwxDQoJe21zby1sZXZlbC1zdGFydC1hdDow Ow0KCW1zby1sZXZlbC1udW1iZXItZm9ybWF0OmJ1bGxldDsNCgltc28tbGV2ZWwtdGV4dDotOw0K CW1zby1sZXZlbC10YWItc3RvcDpub25lOw0KCW1zby1sZXZlbC1udW1iZXItcG9zaXRpb246bGVm dDsNCgl0ZXh0LWluZGVudDotLjI1aW47DQoJZm9udC1mYW1pbHk6IkNhbGlicmkiLHNhbnMtc2Vy aWY7DQoJbXNvLWZhcmVhc3QtZm9udC1mYW1pbHk6Q2FsaWJyaTsNCgltc28tYmlkaS1mb250LWZh bWlseToiVGltZXMgTmV3IFJvbWFuIjt9DQpAbGlzdCBsMTpsZXZlbDINCgl7bXNvLWxldmVsLW51 bWJlci1mb3JtYXQ6YnVsbGV0Ow0KCW1zby1sZXZlbC10ZXh0Om87DQoJbXNvLWxldmVsLXRhYi1z dG9wOm5vbmU7DQoJbXNvLWxldmVsLW51bWJlci1wb3NpdGlvbjpsZWZ0Ow0KCXRleHQtaW5kZW50 Oi0uMjVpbjsNCglmb250LWZhbWlseToiQ291cmllciBOZXciO30NCkBsaXN0IGwxOmxldmVsMw0K CXttc28tbGV2ZWwtbnVtYmVyLWZvcm1hdDpidWxsZXQ7DQoJbXNvLWxldmVsLXRleHQ674KnOw0K CW1zby1sZXZlbC10YWItc3RvcDpub25lOw0KCW1zby1sZXZlbC1udW1iZXItcG9zaXRpb246bGVm dDsNCgl0ZXh0LWluZGVudDotLjI1aW47DQoJZm9udC1mYW1pbHk6V2luZ2RpbmdzO30NCkBsaXN0 IGwxOmxldmVsNA0KCXttc28tbGV2ZWwtbnVtYmVyLWZvcm1hdDpidWxsZXQ7DQoJbXNvLWxldmVs LXRleHQ674K3Ow0KCW1zby1sZXZlbC10YWItc3RvcDpub25lOw0KCW1zby1sZXZlbC1udW1iZXIt cG9zaXRpb246bGVmdDsNCgl0ZXh0LWluZGVudDotLjI1aW47DQoJZm9udC1mYW1pbHk6U3ltYm9s O30NCkBsaXN0IGwxOmxldmVsNQ0KCXttc28tbGV2ZWwtbnVtYmVyLWZvcm1hdDpidWxsZXQ7DQoJ bXNvLWxldmVsLXRleHQ6bzsNCgltc28tbGV2ZWwtdGFiLXN0b3A6bm9uZTsNCgltc28tbGV2ZWwt bnVtYmVyLXBvc2l0aW9uOmxlZnQ7DQoJdGV4dC1pbmRlbnQ6LS4yNWluOw0KCWZvbnQtZmFtaWx5 OiJDb3VyaWVyIE5ldyI7fQ0KQGxpc3QgbDE6bGV2ZWw2DQoJe21zby1sZXZlbC1udW1iZXItZm9y bWF0OmJ1bGxldDsNCgltc28tbGV2ZWwtdGV4dDrvgqc7DQoJbXNvLWxldmVsLXRhYi1zdG9wOm5v bmU7DQoJbXNvLWxldmVsLW51bWJlci1wb3NpdGlvbjpsZWZ0Ow0KCXRleHQtaW5kZW50Oi0uMjVp bjsNCglmb250LWZhbWlseTpXaW5nZGluZ3M7fQ0KQGxpc3QgbDE6bGV2ZWw3DQoJe21zby1sZXZl bC1udW1iZXItZm9ybWF0OmJ1bGxldDsNCgltc28tbGV2ZWwtdGV4dDrvgrc7DQoJbXNvLWxldmVs LXRhYi1zdG9wOm5vbmU7DQoJbXNvLWxldmVsLW51bWJlci1wb3NpdGlvbjpsZWZ0Ow0KCXRleHQt aW5kZW50Oi0uMjVpbjsNCglmb250LWZhbWlseTpTeW1ib2w7fQ0KQGxpc3QgbDE6bGV2ZWw4DQoJ e21zby1sZXZlbC1udW1iZXItZm9ybWF0OmJ1bGxldDsNCgltc28tbGV2ZWwtdGV4dDpvOw0KCW1z by1sZXZlbC10YWItc3RvcDpub25lOw0KCW1zby1sZXZlbC1udW1iZXItcG9zaXRpb246bGVmdDsN Cgl0ZXh0LWluZGVudDotLjI1aW47DQoJZm9udC1mYW1pbHk6IkNvdXJpZXIgTmV3Ijt9DQpAbGlz dCBsMTpsZXZlbDkNCgl7bXNvLWxldmVsLW51bWJlci1mb3JtYXQ6YnVsbGV0Ow0KCW1zby1sZXZl bC10ZXh0Ou+CpzsNCgltc28tbGV2ZWwtdGFiLXN0b3A6bm9uZTsNCgltc28tbGV2ZWwtbnVtYmVy LXBvc2l0aW9uOmxlZnQ7DQoJdGV4dC1pbmRlbnQ6LS4yNWluOw0KCWZvbnQtZmFtaWx5Oldpbmdk aW5nczt9DQpvbA0KCXttYXJnaW4tYm90dG9tOjBpbjt9DQp1bA0KCXttYXJnaW4tYm90dG9tOjBp bjt9DQotLT48L3N0eWxlPjwhLS1baWYgZ3RlIG1zbyA5XT48eG1sPg0KPG86c2hhcGVkZWZhdWx0 cyB2OmV4dD0iZWRpdCIgc3BpZG1heD0iMTAyNiIgLz4NCjwveG1sPjwhW2VuZGlmXS0tPjwhLS1b aWYgZ3RlIG1zbyA5XT48eG1sPg0KPG86c2hhcGVsYXlvdXQgdjpleHQ9ImVkaXQiPg0KPG86aWRt YXAgdjpleHQ9ImVkaXQiIGRhdGE9IjEiIC8+DQo8L286c2hhcGVsYXlvdXQ+PC94bWw+PCFbZW5k aWZdLS0+DQo8L2hlYWQ+DQo8Ym9keSBsYW5nPSJFTi1VUyIgbGluaz0iYmx1ZSIgdmxpbms9InB1 cnBsZSI+DQo8ZGl2IGNsYXNzPSJXb3JkU2VjdGlvbjEiPg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCI+ PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtc2l6ZToxMS4wcHQ7Zm9udC1mYW1pbHk6JnF1b3Q7Q2FsaWJyaSZx dW90OyxzYW5zLXNlcmlmO2NvbG9yOiMxRjQ5N0QiPkhpIFNwZW5jZSw8bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwvc3Bh bj48L3A+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIj48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1zaXplOjExLjBw dDtmb250LWZhbWlseTomcXVvdDtDYWxpYnJpJnF1b3Q7LHNhbnMtc2VyaWY7Y29sb3I6IzFGNDk3 RCI+PG86cD4mbmJzcDs8L286cD48L3NwYW4+PC9wPg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCI+PHNw YW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtc2l6ZToxMS4wcHQ7Zm9udC1mYW1pbHk6JnF1b3Q7Q2FsaWJyaSZxdW90 OyxzYW5zLXNlcmlmO2NvbG9yOiMxRjQ5N0QiPkkgZ3Vlc3MgeW91IGRlc2VydmUgYSBiZXR0ZXIg YW5zd2VyIDstKTxvOnA+PC9vOnA+PC9zcGFuPjwvcD4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiPjxz cGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6MTEuMHB0O2ZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiZxdW90O0NhbGlicmkmcXVv dDssc2Fucy1zZXJpZjtjb2xvcjojMUY0OTdEIj48bzpwPiZuYnNwOzwvbzpwPjwvc3Bhbj48L3A+ DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIj48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1zaXplOjExLjBwdDtmb250 LWZhbWlseTomcXVvdDtDYWxpYnJpJnF1b3Q7LHNhbnMtc2VyaWY7Y29sb3I6IzFGNDk3RCI+SW4g TFNQIFNlbGYtcGluZywgdGhlIGluZ3Jlc3MgTFNSOjxvOnA+PC9vOnA+PC9zcGFuPjwvcD4NCjxw IGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6MTEuMHB0O2ZvbnQtZmFt aWx5OiZxdW90O0NhbGlicmkmcXVvdDssc2Fucy1zZXJpZjtjb2xvcjojMUY0OTdEIj48bzpwPiZu YnNwOzwvbzpwPjwvc3Bhbj48L3A+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTGlzdFBhcmFncmFwaCIgc3R5bGU9 InRleHQtaW5kZW50Oi0uMjVpbjttc28tbGlzdDpsMSBsZXZlbDEgbGZvMiI+PCFbaWYgIXN1cHBv cnRMaXN0c10+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtc2l6ZToxMS4wcHQ7Zm9udC1mYW1pbHk6JnF1b3Q7 Q2FsaWJyaSZxdW90OyxzYW5zLXNlcmlmO2NvbG9yOiMxRjQ5N0QiPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJtc28t bGlzdDpJZ25vcmUiPi08c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udDo3LjBwdCAmcXVvdDtUaW1lcyBOZXcgUm9t YW4mcXVvdDsiPiZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNw OyZuYnNwOw0KPC9zcGFuPjwvc3Bhbj48L3NwYW4+PCFbZW5kaWZdPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250 LXNpemU6MTEuMHB0O2ZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiZxdW90O0NhbGlicmkmcXVvdDssc2Fucy1zZXJpZjtj b2xvcjojMUY0OTdEIj5Gb3JtYXRzIGEgcGFja2V0IGFkZHJlc3NlZCB0byBpdHNlbGY8bzpwPjwv bzpwPjwvc3Bhbj48L3A+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTGlzdFBhcmFncmFwaCIgc3R5bGU9InRleHQt aW5kZW50Oi0uMjVpbjttc28tbGlzdDpsMSBsZXZlbDEgbGZvMiI+PCFbaWYgIXN1cHBvcnRMaXN0 c10+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtc2l6ZToxMS4wcHQ7Zm9udC1mYW1pbHk6JnF1b3Q7Q2FsaWJy aSZxdW90OyxzYW5zLXNlcmlmO2NvbG9yOiMxRjQ5N0QiPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJtc28tbGlzdDpJ Z25vcmUiPi08c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udDo3LjBwdCAmcXVvdDtUaW1lcyBOZXcgUm9tYW4mcXVv dDsiPiZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNw Ow0KPC9zcGFuPjwvc3Bhbj48L3NwYW4+PCFbZW5kaWZdPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6 MTEuMHB0O2ZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiZxdW90O0NhbGlicmkmcXVvdDssc2Fucy1zZXJpZjtjb2xvcjoj MUY0OTdEIj5TZW5kcyB0aGUgcGFja2V0IHRocm91Z2ggdGhlIExTUCB1bmRlciB0ZXN0PG86cD48 L286cD48L3NwYW4+PC9wPg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb0xpc3RQYXJhZ3JhcGgiIHN0eWxlPSJ0ZXh0 LWluZGVudDotLjI1aW47bXNvLWxpc3Q6bDEgbGV2ZWwxIGxmbzIiPjwhW2lmICFzdXBwb3J0TGlz dHNdPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6MTEuMHB0O2ZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiZxdW90O0NhbGli cmkmcXVvdDssc2Fucy1zZXJpZjtjb2xvcjojMUY0OTdEIj48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0ibXNvLWxpc3Q6 SWdub3JlIj4tPHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQ6Ny4wcHQgJnF1b3Q7VGltZXMgTmV3IFJvbWFuJnF1 b3Q7Ij4mbmJzcDsmbmJzcDsmbmJzcDsmbmJzcDsmbmJzcDsmbmJzcDsmbmJzcDsmbmJzcDsmbmJz cDsNCjwvc3Bhbj48L3NwYW4+PC9zcGFuPjwhW2VuZGlmXT48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1zaXpl OjExLjBwdDtmb250LWZhbWlseTomcXVvdDtDYWxpYnJpJnF1b3Q7LHNhbnMtc2VyaWY7Y29sb3I6 IzFGNDk3RCI+V2FpdHMgZm9yIHRoZSBwYWNrZXQgdG8gcmV0dXJuIHRvIGl0PG86cD48L286cD48 L3NwYW4+PC9wPg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCI+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtc2l6ZTox MS4wcHQ7Zm9udC1mYW1pbHk6JnF1b3Q7Q2FsaWJyaSZxdW90OyxzYW5zLXNlcmlmO2NvbG9yOiMx RjQ5N0QiPjxvOnA+Jm5ic3A7PC9vOnA+PC9zcGFuPjwvcD4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwi PjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6MTEuMHB0O2ZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiZxdW90O0NhbGlicmkm cXVvdDssc2Fucy1zZXJpZjtjb2xvcjojMUY0OTdEIj5UaGUgaW5ncmVzcyBMU1IgaXMgYm90aCB0 aGUgcHJvZHVjZXIgYW5kIGNvbnN1bWVyIG9mIHRoZSBwYWNrZXQuPG86cD48L286cD48L3NwYW4+ PC9wPg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCI+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtc2l6ZToxMS4wcHQ7 Zm9udC1mYW1pbHk6JnF1b3Q7Q2FsaWJyaSZxdW90OyxzYW5zLXNlcmlmO2NvbG9yOiMxRjQ5N0Qi PjxvOnA+Jm5ic3A7PC9vOnA+PC9zcGFuPjwvcD4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiPjxzcGFu IHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6MTEuMHB0O2ZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiZxdW90O0NhbGlicmkmcXVvdDss c2Fucy1zZXJpZjtjb2xvcjojMUY0OTdEIj5JbiBhbiBlYXJsaWVyIHZlcnNpb24gb2YgdGhlIGRy YWZ0LCB0aGUgaW5ncmVzcyBMU1Igc2VsZWN0ZWQgYSBVRFAgcG9ydCBmcm9tIHRoZSBkeW5hbWlj IHJhbmdlICg0OTE1Mi0gNjU1MzUpLiBJbXBsZW1lbnRhdGlvbnMgY291bGQgcGljayBhIHNpbmds ZSBwb3J0IGFuZCB1c2UNCiBpdCBhbGwgdGhlIHRpbWUgb3IgcGljayBhIHBvcnQgZm9yIGVhY2gg TFNQIFNlbGYtcGluZyBzZXNzaW9uLiBIb3dldmVyLCBpZiBhbiBpbXBsZW1lbnRhdGlvbiBkaWQg dGhpcywgaXQgd291bGQgYmUgZGlmZmljdWx0IHRvIGlkZW50aWZ5IGFuZCBmaWx0ZXIgTFNQIFNl bGYtcGluZyBwYWNrZXRzIGF0IHRoZSBkb21haW4gZWRnZS4gU28sIHRoZSBXRyBkZWNpZGVkIHRv IHB1dCBhbGwgTFNQIFNlbGYtcGluZyB0cmFmZmljIG9uIFVEUCBwb3J0IDg1MDMsDQogc28gaXQg Y291bGQgYmUgZWFzaWx5IGlkZW50aWZpZWQgYW5kIGZpbHRlcmVkLjxvOnA+PC9vOnA+PC9zcGFu PjwvcD4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6MTEuMHB0 O2ZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiZxdW90O0NhbGlicmkmcXVvdDssc2Fucy1zZXJpZjtjb2xvcjojMUY0OTdE Ij48bzpwPiZuYnNwOzwvbzpwPjwvc3Bhbj48L3A+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIj48c3Bh biBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1zaXplOjExLjBwdDtmb250LWZhbWlseTomcXVvdDtDYWxpYnJpJnF1b3Q7 LHNhbnMtc2VyaWY7Y29sb3I6IzFGNDk3RCI+Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7 Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5i c3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7 Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5i c3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7 Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Um9uPG86cD48L286cD48L3NwYW4+ PC9wPg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCI+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtc2l6ZToxMS4wcHQ7 Zm9udC1mYW1pbHk6JnF1b3Q7Q2FsaWJyaSZxdW90OyxzYW5zLXNlcmlmO2NvbG9yOiMxRjQ5N0Qi PjxvOnA+Jm5ic3A7PC9vOnA+PC9zcGFuPjwvcD4NCjxkaXYgc3R5bGU9ImJvcmRlcjpub25lO2Jv cmRlci1sZWZ0OnNvbGlkIGJsdWUgMS41cHQ7cGFkZGluZzowaW4gMGluIDBpbiA0LjBwdCI+DQo8 ZGl2Pg0KPGRpdiBzdHlsZT0iYm9yZGVyOm5vbmU7Ym9yZGVyLXRvcDpzb2xpZCAjRTFFMUUxIDEu MHB0O3BhZGRpbmc6My4wcHQgMGluIDBpbiAwaW4iPg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCI+PGI+ PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtc2l6ZToxMS4wcHQ7Zm9udC1mYW1pbHk6JnF1b3Q7Q2FsaWJyaSZx dW90OyxzYW5zLXNlcmlmIj5Gcm9tOjwvc3Bhbj48L2I+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtc2l6ZTox MS4wcHQ7Zm9udC1mYW1pbHk6JnF1b3Q7Q2FsaWJyaSZxdW90OyxzYW5zLXNlcmlmIj4gU3BlbmNl ciBEYXdraW5zIGF0IElFVEYgW21haWx0bzpzcGVuY2VyZGF3a2lucy5pZXRmQGdtYWlsLmNvbV0N Cjxicj4NCjxiPlNlbnQ6PC9iPiBUaHVyc2RheSwgT2N0b2JlciAxNSwgMjAxNSA1OjQ0IFBNPGJy Pg0KPGI+VG86PC9iPiBSb25hbGQgQm9uaWNhICZsdDtyYm9uaWNhQGp1bmlwZXIubmV0Jmd0Ozxi cj4NCjxiPkNjOjwvYj4gbXBsc0BpZXRmLm9yZzsgaWVzZ0BpZXRmLm9yZzxicj4NCjxiPlN1Ympl Y3Q6PC9iPiBSZTogW21wbHNdIFNwZW5jZXIgRGF3a2lucycgTm8gT2JqZWN0aW9uIG9uIGRyYWZ0 LWlldGYtbXBscy1zZWxmLXBpbmctMDU6ICh3aXRoIENPTU1FTlQpPG86cD48L286cD48L3NwYW4+ PC9wPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiPjxvOnA+Jm5ic3A7PC9v OnA+PC9wPg0KPGRpdj4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiPkhpLCBSb24sPG86cD48L286cD48 L3A+DQo8ZGl2Pg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCI+PG86cD4mbmJzcDs8L286cD48L3A+DQo8 ZGl2Pg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCI+T24gVGh1LCBPY3QgMTUsIDIwMTUgYXQgNDoxNCBQ TSwgUm9uYWxkIEJvbmljYSAmbHQ7PGEgaHJlZj0ibWFpbHRvOnJib25pY2FAanVuaXBlci5uZXQi IHRhcmdldD0iX2JsYW5rIj5yYm9uaWNhQGp1bmlwZXIubmV0PC9hPiZndDsgd3JvdGU6PG86cD48 L286cD48L3A+DQo8YmxvY2txdW90ZSBzdHlsZT0iYm9yZGVyOm5vbmU7Ym9yZGVyLWxlZnQ6c29s aWQgI0NDQ0NDQyAxLjBwdDtwYWRkaW5nOjBpbiAwaW4gMGluIDYuMHB0O21hcmdpbi1sZWZ0OjQu OHB0O21hcmdpbi1yaWdodDowaW4iPg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCI+SGkgU3BlbmNlciw8 YnI+DQo8YnI+DQpUaGFua3MgZm9yIHlvdXIgdGhvdWdodGZ1bCByZXZpZXcuPGJyPg0KPGJyPg0K SW4gdGhlIFNlY3VyaXR5IENvbnNpZGVyYXRpb25zIHNlY3Rpb24sIHlvdSB3aWxsIGZpbmQgdGhl IGZvbGxvd2luZyB0ZXh0Ojxicj4NCjxicj4NCiZxdW90O0xTUCBTZWxmLXBpbmcgbWVzc2FnZXMg YXJlIGVhc2lseSBmb3JnZWQuJm5ic3A7IFRoZXJlZm9yZSwgYW4gYXR0YWNrZXIgY2FuIHNlbmQg dGhlIGluZ3Jlc3MgTFNSIGEgZm9yZ2VkIExTUCBTZWxmLXBpbmcgbWVzc2FnZSwgY2F1c2luZyB0 aGUgaW5ncmVzcyBMU1IgdG8gdGVybWluYXRlIHRoZSBMU1AgU2VsZi1waW5nIHNlc3Npb24gcHJl bWF0dXJlbHkuJm5ic3A7IEluIG9yZGVyIHRvIG1pdGlnYXRlIHRoZXNlIHRocmVhdHMsIGltcGxl bWVudGF0aW9ucyBTSE9VTEQNCiBOT1QgYXNzaWduIFNlc3Npb24tSUQncyBpbiBhIHByZWRpY3Rh YmxlIG1hbm5lci4gRnVydGhlcm1vcmUsIG9wZXJhdG9ycyBTSE9VTEQgZmlsdGVyIExTUCBTZWxm LXBpbmcgcGFja2V0cyBhdCBuZXR3b3JrIGluZ3Jlc3MgcG9pbnRzLiZxdW90Ozxicj4NCjxicj4N ClRoZSBhc3NpZ25tZW50IG9mIGFsbCBMU1AgU2VsZi1waW5nIHRyYWZmaWMgdG8gVURQIFBvcnQg ODUwMyBmYWNpbGl0YXRlcyB0aGUgYWJvdmUtbWVudGlvbmVkIGZpbHRlcmluZy48bzpwPjwvbzpw PjwvcD4NCjwvYmxvY2txdW90ZT4NCjxkaXY+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIj48bzpwPiZu YnNwOzwvbzpwPjwvcD4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiPllvdSB3 ZXJlIGFuc3dlcmluZyBhIGRpZmZlcmVudCBxdWVzdGlvbiB0aGFuIHRoZSBvbmUgSSB3YXMgYXNr aW5nIChJIHdhcyB0aGlua2luZyBvZiBjb2xsaXNpb25zIG9uIHBvcnQgbnVtYmVycyksIGJ1dCB5 b3UgcHJvdmlkZWQgYW4gYW5zd2VyIHRoYXQgbWFrZXMgbXkgcXVlc3Rpb24gZ28gYXdheS48bzpw PjwvbzpwPjwvcD4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiPjxvOnA+Jm5i c3A7PC9vOnA+PC9wPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2Pg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCI+R29vZCBq b2IhIFdlcmUgeW91IG9uY2UgYW4gQUQ/Jm5ic3A7PG86cD48L286cD48L3A+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjxk aXY+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIj48bzpwPiZuYnNwOzwvbzpwPjwvcD4NCjwvZGl2Pg0K PGRpdj4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiPjstKTxvOnA+PC9vOnA+PC9wPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8 ZGl2Pg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCI+PG86cD4mbmJzcDs8L286cD48L3A+DQo8L2Rpdj4N CjxkaXY+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIj5TcGVuY2VyPG86cD48L286cD48L3A+DQo8L2Rp dj4NCjxkaXY+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIj4mbmJzcDs8bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwvcD4NCjwv ZGl2Pg0KPGJsb2NrcXVvdGUgc3R5bGU9ImJvcmRlcjpub25lO2JvcmRlci1sZWZ0OnNvbGlkICND Q0NDQ0MgMS4wcHQ7cGFkZGluZzowaW4gMGluIDBpbiA2LjBwdDttYXJnaW4tbGVmdDo0LjhwdDtt YXJnaW4tcmlnaHQ6MGluIj4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiIHN0eWxlPSJtYXJnaW4tYm90 dG9tOjEyLjBwdCI+Jm5ic3A7ICZuYnNwOyAmbmJzcDsgJm5ic3A7ICZuYnNwOyAmbmJzcDsgJm5i c3A7ICZuYnNwOyAmbmJzcDsgJm5ic3A7ICZuYnNwOyAmbmJzcDsgJm5ic3A7ICZuYnNwOyAmbmJz cDsgJm5ic3A7ICZuYnNwOyAmbmJzcDsgJm5ic3A7ICZuYnNwOyAmbmJzcDsgJm5ic3A7ICZuYnNw OyAmbmJzcDsgJm5ic3A7ICZuYnNwOyAmbmJzcDsgJm5ic3A7ICZuYnNwOyAmbmJzcDsgJm5ic3A7 ICZuYnNwOyAmbmJzcDsgJm5ic3A7ICZuYnNwOyAmbmJzcDsgJm5ic3A7ICZuYnNwOyAmbmJzcDsg Jm5ic3A7ICZuYnNwOyAmbmJzcDsgJm5ic3A7ICZuYnNwOyAmbmJzcDsgJm5ic3A7ICZuYnNwO1Jv bjxicj4NCjxicj4NCjxicj4NCi0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0t LS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLTxicj4NCiZndDsgQ09NTUVOVDo8YnI+DQomZ3Q7 IC0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0t LS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS08YnI+DQomZ3Q7PGJyPg0KJmd0OyBJIHdhcyBsb29raW5nIGF0PGJyPg0K Jmd0Ozxicj4NCiZndDsmbmJzcDsgJm5ic3A7IG8mbmJzcDsgVGhlIFVEUCBEZXN0aW5hdGlvbiBQ b3J0IE1VU1QgYmUgbHNwLXNlbGYtcGluZyAoODUwMykgW0lBTkEuUE9SVFNdPGJyPg0KJmd0Ozxi cj4NCiZndDsgYW5kIHdvbmRlcmluZyB3aHkgdGhpcyBpcyBhIE1VU1QuIElzIHRoZSBhbnN3ZXIg dGhhdCB0aGlzIG1lY2hhbmlzbSB3b3Jrczxicj4NCiZndDsgd2l0aGluIGFuIGFkbWluaXN0cmF0 aXZlIGRvbWFpbiwgc28geW91IGNhbiBqdXN0IHRlbGwgdGhlIG90aGVyIGVuZCB3aGF0IHRoZTxi cj4NCiZndDsgcG9ydCBudW1iZXIgbmVlZHMgdG8gYmU/PGJyPg0KJmd0Ozxicj4NCiZndDs8YnI+ DQomZ3Q7PGJyPg0KJmd0Ozxicj4NCiZndDsgLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0t PGJyPg0KJmd0OzxvOnA+PC9vOnA+PC9wPg0KPC9ibG9ja3F1b3RlPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8cCBjbGFz cz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIj48bzpwPiZuYnNwOzwvbzpwPjwvcD4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8L2Rp dj4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPC9ib2R5Pg0KPC9odG1sPg0K --_000_BLUPR05MB19855202B394EEFCEB71B009AE3D0BLUPR05MB1985namp_-- From nobody Fri Oct 16 09:02:47 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ABCE31B32AB; Fri, 16 Oct 2015 09:02:44 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -101.902 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.902 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=ham 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 3rOnK1VWtXqP; Fri, 16 Oct 2015 09:02:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from na01-bn1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-bn1on0773.outbound.protection.outlook.com [IPv6:2a01:111:f400:fc10::773]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C59591B32C7; Fri, 16 Oct 2015 09:02:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from BLUPR05MB1985.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.162.224.27) by BLUPR05MB1985.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.162.224.27) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.300.14; Fri, 16 Oct 2015 16:01:52 +0000 Received: from BLUPR05MB1985.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([10.162.224.27]) by BLUPR05MB1985.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([10.162.224.27]) with mapi id 15.01.0300.010; Fri, 16 Oct 2015 16:01:52 +0000 From: Ronald Bonica To: "mpls@ietf.org" , "iesg@ietf.org" , "Kathleen.Moriarty.ietf@gmail.com" Thread-Topic: [mpls] Kathleen Moriarty's No Objection on draft-ietf-mpls-self-ping-05: (with COMMENT) Thread-Index: AdEIK/YEvROYU6m2Tcqmu32XzfwG+w== Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2015 16:01:51 +0000 Message-ID: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=rbonica@juniper.net; x-originating-ip: [66.129.241.11] x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; BLUPR05MB1985; 5:clphwA/08c6wo3N6p7yWM3oRbCC5wW4guGaYZDGQPy9uXhOXubwbk81Kk9Kns1rfR1ebpgW/j1S7KAhLxCaVAlWDojE9A9twFPNmqMe5QqxrVMUtUCp9YzK0/wXrNdzmFMiKLc+e2H5HKofo2o1AyA==; 24:k9fAGT90y32Rj3ViRzpB5Ed8qpfVklyLID5V3kw2lNCMBRPhG2Y6+Lmhw1i6cn4133Tr6v1+AS9DaH6ixFb2rTpLR67Q6iHqH7DPrcXZOis=; 20:mvxd3hYPktDpSVZsMNj2ep5vk3K51Dm6UWYarjzBH+XGFSOT4q4AeObOXlbjWQxrqFE1hBUcjpxaoeLR9hco3g== x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:BLUPR05MB1985; x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:; x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(601004)(2401047)(520078)(5005006)(8121501046)(3002001); SRVR:BLUPR05MB1985; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:BLUPR05MB1985; x-forefront-prvs: 0731AA2DE6 x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(6009001)(199003)(189002)(51914003)(86362001)(15975445007)(106356001)(92566002)(102836002)(77096005)(46102003)(40100003)(87936001)(66066001)(122556002)(2201001)(5003600100002)(107886002)(81156007)(19580395003)(230783001)(99286002)(5002640100001)(33656002)(189998001)(5004730100002)(5001770100001)(97736004)(5001960100002)(74316001)(5007970100001)(101416001)(10400500002)(2501003)(54356999)(64706001)(76576001)(50986999)(2900100001)(11100500001)(5008740100001)(105586002); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:BLUPR05MB1985; H:BLUPR05MB1985.namprd05.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; A:1; MX:1; LANG:en; received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: juniper.net does not designate permitted sender hosts) spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:23 spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: juniper.net X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 16 Oct 2015 16:01:51.8209 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: bea78b3c-4cdb-4130-854a-1d193232e5f4 X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BLUPR05MB1985 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [mpls] Kathleen Moriarty's No Objection on draft-ietf-mpls-self-ping-05: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2015 16:02:44 -0000 Hi Kathleen, Thanks for the thoughtful review. Response inline. Ron > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > COMMENT: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >=20 > I see that the Security Considerations section says, > "operators SHOULD > filter LSP Self-ping packets at network ingress points" >=20 > I think it would be helpful to have the draft explicitly state the scope = for this > new function - within a single operator's network is my assumption. If t= hat > assumption is not correct, I may come back with more questions. >=20 [RPB]=20 Good catch. The statement that you quote, above, reflects the mental model = that I had in my head when I wrote it. That is: - MPLS-SIGNALING-DOMAIN =3D=3D OPERATORS-NETWORK-DOMAIN While this is generally true, it may not be 100% of the time. We can fix th= e problem by editing the text as follows: OLD> operators SHOULD filter LSP Self-ping packets at network ingress points" operators SHOLD filter LSP Self-ping packets at the edges of the MPLS signa= ling domain. There was also a suggestion made int he SecDir review that you may want t= o > consider: > https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/search/?email_list=3Dsecdir >=20 >=20 [RPB]=20 Good idea. I will add a sentence to the text. Ron >=20 From nobody Fri Oct 16 09:12:49 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 47B6F1A1BD1; Fri, 16 Oct 2015 09:12:48 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 94HKZzH3yCFE; Fri, 16 Oct 2015 09:12:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-vk0-x22a.google.com (mail-vk0-x22a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400c:c05::22a]) (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 BE5FB1A0275; Fri, 16 Oct 2015 09:12:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: by vkat63 with SMTP id t63so71252147vka.1; Fri, 16 Oct 2015 09:12:46 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=cuevXf8Xb8I7cfbvpYVaZQ/dPkXGzLUFSthjeXu5Ddo=; b=Fzr1wP2jST+wDszoPXscyCEvrQ195M900x2zvyuIA3EgqWRsJyO/ZgC7HKRKSKXYu4 guW/Gvg804uUE/J7kQYDjYTfWorxIE+rSk/Ykkbe3EmwIJgO5lqzgCvv2dPzS9qxYWRK bUr8+6dlp1kNZhqk5rwIVInGx5GPTOAJDq2sWZnkuIjtOlpFyt9ZiQpEE5GkvXaIfV4s CKyDF3K9cqazz3QWpShh48vwubLv/6EO1AqcheYBIcbumnbeAgtcb03FsCOXrJqOJ0PW J67agGP97oifJDeP717Ksfxg9FMO+hasy9QAelW2EO87QDtXtxO/ccY8x7sEryQ6bDgy gzsA== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.31.107.18 with SMTP id g18mr11159809vkc.6.1445011965990; Fri, 16 Oct 2015 09:12:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.31.54.8 with HTTP; Fri, 16 Oct 2015 09:12:45 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2015 11:12:45 -0500 Message-ID: From: Spencer Dawkins at IETF To: Ronald Bonica Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1147871eedddd605223b10eb Archived-At: Cc: "mpls@ietf.org" , "iesg@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [mpls] Spencer Dawkins' No Objection on draft-ietf-mpls-self-ping-05: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2015 16:12:48 -0000 --001a1147871eedddd605223b10eb Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Hi, Ron, On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 10:44 AM, Ronald Bonica wrote: > Hi Spence, > > > > I guess you deserve a better answer ;-) > > > > In LSP Self-ping, the ingress LSR: > > > > - Formats a packet addressed to itself > > - Sends the packet through the LSP under test > > - Waits for the packet to return to it > > > > The ingress LSR is both the producer and consumer of the packet. > > > > In an earlier version of the draft, the ingress LSR selected a UDP port > from the dynamic range (49152- 65535). Implementations could pick a single > port and use it all the time or pick a port for each LSP Self-ping session. > However, if an implementation did this, it would be difficult to identify > and filter LSP Self-ping packets at the domain edge. So, the WG decided to > put all LSP Self-ping traffic on UDP port 8503, so it could be easily > identified and filtered. > > > > Ron > I was reading your first answer that way, but I didn't have the history that the WG had considered this in detail, and appreciate you providing that pointer. Thanks, Spencer --001a1147871eedddd605223b10eb Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi, Ron,

On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 10:44 AM, Ronald Bonica &= lt;rbonica@juniper= .net> wrote:

Hi Spence,

=C2=A0

I guess you deserve a better answer ;= -)

=C2=A0

In LSP Self-ping, the ingress LSR:=

=C2=A0

-=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 Formats a packet addressed to it= self

-=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 Sends the packet through the LSP= under test

-=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 Waits for the packet to return t= o it

=C2=A0

The ingress LSR is both the producer = and consumer of the packet.

=C2=A0

In an earlier version of the draft, t= he ingress LSR selected a UDP port from the dynamic range (49152- 65535). I= mplementations could pick a single port and use it all the time or pick a port for each LSP Self-ping session. However, if= an implementation did this, it would be difficult to identify and filter L= SP Self-ping packets at the domain edge. So, the WG decided to put all LSP = Self-ping traffic on UDP port 8503, so it could be easily identified and filtered.

=C2=A0

=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0= =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2= =A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0= =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2= =A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0Ron


I was reading your first answer that way, but I didn't= have the history that the WG had considered this in detail, and appreciate= you providing that pointer.

Thanks,
Spencer=C2=A0
--001a1147871eedddd605223b10eb-- From nobody Fri Oct 16 11:10:32 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 254801B32F4; Fri, 16 Oct 2015 11:10:31 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 DBTfdvoCKlOF; Fri, 16 Oct 2015 11:10:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pa0-x230.google.com (mail-pa0-x230.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c03::230]) (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 B06071B32F0; Fri, 16 Oct 2015 11:10:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: by pabrc13 with SMTP id rc13so127003463pab.0; Fri, 16 Oct 2015 11:10:29 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=from:content-type:mime-version:subject:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=ebvI848MXRLEWqxRNJZ5ihGw/QNJqyFhVXolP6nKBEI=; b=GiOXpaPhirBudmUq+i3Ah441wU5GKV8EwYdc4XF2kPyyt3RKpG/6TNtiHDhQljSM4j l/LE5K6H706Nbyq9fhpkXfw4RIl31PfOIYYiQLPnQo2Ixnj8Xk9yRFbli0A/5H16MNGO 9BfQLTTwuv3GsAWgHKCc/VG9wxK1yWyE1lJhQ/MJr8pq7rsomJr89+EMQ0zkwTaEMLj1 hrNv1fJRqVlz8dWrPaOJUgFzuSCI7jYEK3kazgS6t58n28gXBLxCcWKijvL5m5h5cI3F Tt2V4r4FQ/fWNET7uhYThDcXxn5J8c2o+GkaYVAtfvqS+4iSb40WSDbjU6ZvJ8t4QTQt IZwA== X-Received: by 10.66.222.70 with SMTP id qk6mr18123866pac.68.1445019029342; Fri, 16 Oct 2015 11:10:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.43.61.154] (gbcc-66-78-229-141.smartcity.com. [66.78.229.141]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id lo9sm22552773pab.19.2015.10.16.11.10.27 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Fri, 16 Oct 2015 11:10:28 -0700 (PDT) From: Kathleen Moriarty X-Google-Original-From: Kathleen Moriarty Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (12H143) In-Reply-To: Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2015 13:10:24 -0500 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <1560B9A4-E6D4-4FEB-845A-FC93D9FD7ACD@gmail.com> References: To: Ronald Bonica Archived-At: Cc: "mpls@ietf.org" , "iesg@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [mpls] Kathleen Moriarty's No Objection on draft-ietf-mpls-self-ping-05: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2015 18:10:31 -0000 Thank you, Ron! Sent from my iPhone > On Oct 16, 2015, at 11:01 AM, Ronald Bonica wrote: >=20 > Hi Kathleen, >=20 > Thanks for the thoughtful review. Response inline. >=20 > Ron >=20 >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> COMMENT: >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>=20 >> I see that the Security Considerations section says, >> "operators SHOULD >> filter LSP Self-ping packets at network ingress points" >>=20 >> I think it would be helpful to have the draft explicitly state the scope f= or this >> new function - within a single operator's network is my assumption. If t= hat >> assumption is not correct, I may come back with more questions. > [RPB]=20 >=20 > Good catch. The statement that you quote, above, reflects the mental model= that I had in my head when I wrote it. That is: >=20 > - MPLS-SIGNALING-DOMAIN =3D=3D OPERATORS-NETWORK-DOMAIN >=20 > While this is generally true, it may not be 100% of the time. We can fix t= he problem by editing the text as follows: >=20 > OLD> > operators SHOULD filter LSP Self-ping packets at network ingress points" > NEW> > operators SHOLD filter LSP Self-ping packets at the edges of the MPLS sign= aling domain. > =20 >> There was also a suggestion made int he SecDir review that you may want t= o >> consider: >> https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/search/?email_list=3Dsecdir > [RPB]=20 > Good idea. I will add a sentence to the text. >=20 > Ron >=20 From nobody Fri Oct 16 12:52:27 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 78C8F1B3365 for ; Fri, 16 Oct 2015 12:52:25 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.502 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.502 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_05=-0.5, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 1w_vLc3jy0wh for ; Fri, 16 Oct 2015 12:52:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from na01-by2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-by2on0123.outbound.protection.outlook.com [207.46.100.123]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DAF251B3393 for ; Fri, 16 Oct 2015 12:52:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from CY1PR0501MB1098.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.160.144.140) by CY1PR0501MB2121.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.164.3.143) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.300.14; Fri, 16 Oct 2015 19:52:22 +0000 Authentication-Results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=erosen@juniper.net; Received: from [172.29.36.57] (66.129.241.14) by CY1PR0501MB1098.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.160.144.140) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.293.16; Fri, 16 Oct 2015 19:52:20 +0000 To: Martin Vigoureux , Loa Andersson , RFC Errata System , , , , , References: <20151013210728.27DF9187E28@rfc-editor.org> <561E1CC9.7080600@pi.nu> <561E4773.1090904@alcatel-lucent.com> From: Eric C Rosen Message-ID: <5621556E.1000600@juniper.net> Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2015 15:52:14 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <561E4773.1090904@alcatel-lucent.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [66.129.241.14] X-ClientProxiedBy: CY1PR17CA0020.namprd17.prod.outlook.com (25.163.68.30) To CY1PR0501MB1098.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (25.160.144.140) X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: 1; CY1PR0501MB1098; 2:9thbzG4GsW4/vGUnH6POFll23pdcjOncoipdkTsZ/nwJUPiCj/rBIY4+nqJAQY2zDRfIKPY59uBOoHT2c8xIxjh3ALT2vLMqswQGGSXtyttKtZPAiQ/qH8S+5V4zqLYXiAiV+I+BY5tK0VroTGkv77C9xleTOeoCIvMtteteRVI=; 3:eqTHLf2xMWeQbxL+mOFgAiKRygFftSM3mm4bM7rYd/t0XhLL4jk5I2lrSS8ZZEcorymV5yw8+phGJh51k0wCgjm6YNkHPcM3ED9d4OP8dtJKRt75zni3Gy6pELIEwXX6l7+rSNq9ZJkr7GT0yAIekA==; 25:BIoFKlhs9C9w6IhC3WnH0fWzh6QQQYlhzZ6rqK9nyqoPuBMKzipzT7YNQVh5woVfSSuPe4O+J7ykyVcoW/jnp7lCHMYoM8z4TVn1F/NzfybxyneercXNO93hgZjhQQNemchleTT+RLUtIzZlJJrZmVVoOcRZsI/mVvnX8jZn1QNeNmusaAaHCszmts+rbOYmYvpOOpGA4/Qr4iK3jfY0u1ROz/jY3zp2XpXWLEgYQTCTdDn39Cz8/QzP0O3syLnb X-Microsoft-Antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:CY1PR0501MB1098; X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: 1; CY1PR0501MB1098; 20: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; 4:HH+DuIzqfoIbz4aUx3b7FxwvyZ4HMZY/MVdUqs+tFn+NyFLM152POm6KuxBlSwO8KTzXkWyr4HEg1UjhZKUC6VwGF01nPl6ZafZDpcDijHsHw149RHOmu7Yi7dbdxABgR61ZHKC3kfFj2McGtrM3wFcuNgDKjNeIwraUh3vzBjEjPzWVaPxh/D02/QSbSZ0hobf39dZCwMkr6owKtnY8UNn4yIIuyIyPLMJtBOhPHcMyFsZEbaQiaDVDw7wHh1TS+bgD7xbcxS94ngoi2QTPrZkDpBUY+2RoFFohjo1aR4+5vcXr88CzI63bMaMTk7uE9lVdgIIJpqBJAYSPdh4qrOUm8agTE5uwmEyjlXhGbyk= X-Microsoft-Antispam-PRVS: X-Exchange-Antispam-Report-Test: UriScan:; X-Exchange-Antispam-Report-CFA-Test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(601004)(2401047)(520078)(8121501046)(5005006)(3002001); SRVR:CY1PR0501MB1098; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:CY1PR0501MB1098; X-Forefront-PRVS: 0731AA2DE6 X-Forefront-Antispam-Report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(6009001)(6049001)(189002)(479174004)(377454003)(199003)(24454002)(106356001)(1941001)(5008740100001)(92566002)(54356999)(2950100001)(40100003)(64126003)(36756003)(65956001)(64706001)(66066001)(47776003)(99136001)(86362001)(46102003)(5007970100001)(50986999)(5004730100002)(65806001)(76176999)(65816999)(42186005)(5001960100002)(87266999)(23746002)(80316001)(2201001)(59896002)(4001350100001)(105586002)(87976001)(189998001)(33656002)(122386002)(83506001)(4001450100002)(81156007)(97736004)(101416001)(77096005)(50466002)(5001770100001); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:CY1PR0501MB1098; H:[172.29.36.57]; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; MX:1; A:1; LANG:en; Received-SPF: None (protection.outlook.com: juniper.net does not designate permitted sender hosts) X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: =?Windows-1252?Q?1; CY1PR0501MB1098; 23:hFsevTwsG/Um6YywhHUn3npCdxDImym645b?= =?Windows-1252?Q?3jhSAEwvvwcxyA0QAAY3vxn8xDMBn51j3IK2MmPOLVnQMIdVCG750W9q?= =?Windows-1252?Q?2VHaeLbPCDF+Iatfv24Z21EHh7zqW0U1Uqt4HVpzkOADgGnWf7R4aJNw?= =?Windows-1252?Q?Vn0aqtSd1Giwws45YQJDiZFFdmcvhdTwP6lx2mmlPqGMnpVx1/3YJImJ?= =?Windows-1252?Q?nabiwC0mUTenZS2YBH3Xl2luawtooguZUHvuZ5Lt6/+AzHX4VoSy8PC3?= =?Windows-1252?Q?yXSwWEJ4cYggo8zxCKxfMGbbB5RIsTTFS04KYwc5tC4dbHUksqaxG8+w?= =?Windows-1252?Q?4JlKzaEJZyET+WR+WMXjhrN7sj5YzSPIuVIbbrVlYdZIRUT07Wlsb5hG?= =?Windows-1252?Q?fiJ/wCvvim91K4OXcAsyFwrlcc/Js/V1ZrDGisXwopXlvuSUIR35IOYL?= =?Windows-1252?Q?qpuD3Mv3dr2lpdf+bjjndlLlvptLYHHTlFT3CiPgcNtaGAI4AP2zsh79?= =?Windows-1252?Q?46t+IFYvC2SkobbO1h0yOuju1BEQ1hPkfv12gnCBhgX76UsZAl4eUx4u?= =?Windows-1252?Q?YGGz4nXOzucvJmS7Bx1VYVxvN+aaVJuFBJeIEunjiUX9BIMcQsfEm5lt?= =?Windows-1252?Q?Ally9LqDzIW2FidjTOhh5RzG9ZRtf7eT+4tBP/aIVroAFmPhn1No7rfU?= =?Windows-1252?Q?vQ4W99CvQtC/6ZlYpell5M2icDcrpAxlopednoLY+Tv20ko2jjwOGzWz?= =?Windows-1252?Q?IKb6nIYWujLqUfmrYcp2vQkYV++mQVTmTPvDQ1LVAQosqTTB+BevyRrS?= =?Windows-1252?Q?NcVbeU5A63XJ7fZ7k0tQQpM1igiew4V6UajHg8dlerhTqKphccS97Fi3?= =?Windows-1252?Q?YvTOIPSLBOb1XIR5KxQjow/GsTffmUc5nOtOD4iE0O5Gc9Km3NjqcXgq?= =?Windows-1252?Q?5rjz9dqmd9lx2KLC3qi2MZGjf2ftXpAngvuFJuCvMKMLl4UMiCvR6XiU?= =?Windows-1252?Q?XI/rA5XywqM/zjp72zx4ydamIr2yMwAuNMd34ZCcHHM+PbATp0vr4zk7?= =?Windows-1252?Q?GbcSt+SaTB9fQkwcJlBsglpPvn2WWLTMLPeBa0orG1xC+vpzvQycV8OR?= =?Windows-1252?Q?RxNBjuA2KKTWjBifSUvC3+TfWG6ph9fQr35LXskw5Xx1alxthwq2pufU?= =?Windows-1252?Q?XYlu5toeiTu/Morkds6i78PM3puFU//twQJSJSqkrBZD6Ve2y+4APq+E?= =?Windows-1252?Q?IAL54qACi+LOM4Gn9hYMAUJF5PIE392+g9Is8TTooM/fXJSmJRu5Nb1Z?= =?Windows-1252?Q?ohZ4oFDTd/Hpb/wODMnpZigQp6FENx12mEq8o5D08v2DIO12JAM+PQOA?= =?Windows-1252?Q?XnN1ZJr/2i9cLv3GLlJsjWJ2w6jV61avDMTBzxMA7t8CTYWqjUqsbhCY?= =?Windows-1252?Q?=3D?= X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: 1; CY1PR0501MB1098; 5:DJRXCe0ziuHL+gYi7IQr0KtCDiANW27v6JoQjcbWZpVSk6UXypRIaj5EAJDcTtDCB0LjeL54r5z/hFU0bryNtpM7ElaNIvBoTd4av+Kde4fIrP3GT4UPLzz3/TzXsxqpMPrT19SN0+WfmbgaHyBM0Q==; 24:tSZxGhL/lAQKsWyQgsUH4dh38Jjmg+TgMXm208AlwctXz3AwP2ol3zvkOXOsKVImvccJQgnFrJpzqiQESOr9LLolkfnB9qZ8MLC8Exe3U7w=; 20:0gR19Yc3TW+bkwq9JxE9HCbPtzgE4RS4zlDfAeJdvAKB5RDhypfv9DMZSvk+8ARHklyapgtndcRfutDUo0Sgeg== X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalArrivalTime: 16 Oct 2015 19:52:20.9172 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-FromEntityHeader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: CY1PR0501MB1098 X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: 1; CY1PR0501MB2121; 2:YNFwoueOORvwFeuK2Z91gDFi/Q7G16d7LX7/e9vQSo5zg+NzbUSrmoi/o02iwD8XUJGcSNfhavFRDzORqFGG59DDFbrIPl6kjsZYur7SFbmAE5ioGTnw6vshKV/IWoi3uzwGPh/083nFuGyprtQDT4ctqnS5y7NU7f6/ELyeLRM=; 23:/jxfSGMkVJ3niwveONWHJ61nGzPkwVjNB07iLJMj5FRhTkXjrSuAEwGWM1OHN8d99S7R7jlPiRcyhwsB+Hp1BYneOU0mrc1HaMKCcOkvLSltPGYSkyqd0XGyWsMmrh0rKU00oKL1pKU/IEGtOHq4mpW0qMO/Zq798ap98woGOGU38gyB5SALpfH1mFubVIGq X-OriginatorOrg: juniper.net Archived-At: Cc: alexander.okonnikov@gmail.com, mpls@ietf.org Subject: Re: [mpls] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC3107 (4497) X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2015 19:52:25 -0000 On 10/14/2015 8:15 AM, Martin Vigoureux wrote: > I think we should stick to changing [RFC 2283] into [BGP-MP]. Otherwise > it could open the door to creating erratas for any reference that would > have been updated/obsoleted. Of course, one could also ask whether it is worthwhile to accept an erratum that changes one obsolete reference to another. Whether one looks in the RFC index for RFC2283 or for RFC2858, one will eventually follow the change of tags to RFC4760. From nobody Fri Oct 16 13:16:36 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CEC1D1A002F for ; Fri, 16 Oct 2015 13:16:33 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.902 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.902 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 iOWD5LWfkAeu for ; Fri, 16 Oct 2015 13:16:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from na01-by2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-by2on0117.outbound.protection.outlook.com [207.46.100.117]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4E4611A002D for ; Fri, 16 Oct 2015 13:16:31 -0700 (PDT) Authentication-Results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=erosen@juniper.net; Received: from [172.29.36.57] (66.129.241.14) by DM2PR0501MB1102.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.160.245.12) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.300.14; Fri, 16 Oct 2015 20:16:26 +0000 To: RFC Errata System , , , , , , References: <20151013220529.01C13188CF0@rfc-editor.org> From: Eric C Rosen Message-ID: <56215B13.4080901@juniper.net> Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2015 16:16:19 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20151013220529.01C13188CF0@rfc-editor.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [66.129.241.14] X-ClientProxiedBy: CY1PR21CA0068.namprd21.prod.outlook.com (25.163.250.164) To DM2PR0501MB1102.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (25.160.245.12) X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: 1; DM2PR0501MB1102; 2:87TxC9m/G2Webt27s90R25+JGK1bJIibIuVhRQp8DNUqAmshqdNE68jqXeP2hKevLiFl8oBwbM0+Ps2PPZ7EdM0cxhhTkipNR4AreJQgjD3zpD5TF7JzIFJVpwmYCA/Y+FxS7DyI5HRZ87tbiBUZ2q8Oo9CJyGYUcaVdU5FwFRc=; 3:sVBQ2p7I7UKCd54XTcXvwLiq1vaWhIj9PD64LeVeYN7zl11ue8k3FFlFMTe2Vv8lQRET4uSNUQLGUlTXiqOzB7yQFginxglF7xcB7wOalM4zSgXKuzNRsgQcTCTsKGYiK/U+eXO81TW6UQdfhvVfIQ==; 25:RB4kZP9Hf9cseiQTyC/G7ylbefviJuLKztcucBrRR25Y9bd5Ja9QPlxLS9IbYL9KkMPsF/X6KfIBkpgydCvP/aTJnx4zmn5Cs55jZlj0WSmjflH6XP1GiYLfwE7n3dTZS7WPe9r/3z52mAt8P91UaDvx02kIrmaP2x2EyZLU+wotJFbXsbYdthZfVAukBFVRZtRfklwlMCH0wPns/CeoXe60knAr3C77jrdgtClNiss0gmDgm781R47hk/XZRUPaxe6ip2+Hm4+iI5ZnuANdaA== X-Microsoft-Antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:DM2PR0501MB1102; X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: 1; DM2PR0501MB1102; 20: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; 4:4ctMO9HDoHvG0UqtyRhByoP8f//vJpf1vBa5F76z/XSQOiP50m7zys6K1S1GPfuYAJC1R04e2BkrtROgQ7e5iBVQoymDvkYY8E+I2Z6yszhFV7vVZfAOa1clEVfdqyBuTuB1ZrVJn98zdc42R8WdzztD25RS42QvT6ouYTTnj0d4BoNKEY7R0fL69tua0rXKm6dR9EtKLKN71AaTV7Y7HB+vj8ZMZnZgnri8AGVAwQLutllSWCCkhltab3l71Aj//Y0P9TGYQxEl+3rhl1nH0RK4o7deed5XEhwRx/9+ngh/+LbMTP13LYTXdbKTmV8L4RiaJp/4s4vPqU1/OZsMgc0TDQA9FZV4GhlAl8XfRzI= X-Microsoft-Antispam-PRVS: X-Exchange-Antispam-Report-Test: UriScan:(202767206196957); X-Exchange-Antispam-Report-CFA-Test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(601004)(2401047)(5005006)(520078)(8121501046)(3002001); SRVR:DM2PR0501MB1102; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:DM2PR0501MB1102; X-Forefront-PRVS: 0731AA2DE6 X-Forefront-Antispam-Report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(6009001)(6049001)(189002)(24454002)(479174004)(377454003)(199003)(122386002)(2950100001)(83506001)(189998001)(59896002)(40100003)(87976001)(77096005)(106356001)(105586002)(50466002)(65956001)(66066001)(5004730100002)(47776003)(64706001)(5007970100001)(65806001)(42186005)(46102003)(5001960100002)(4001450100002)(33656002)(5008740100001)(99136001)(101416001)(15975445007)(76176999)(50986999)(87266999)(54356999)(23746002)(65816999)(16799955002)(92566002)(2201001)(15188155005)(36756003)(1941001)(97736004)(5001920100001)(5001770100001)(19580395003)(80316001)(19580405001)(64126003)(86362001)(4001350100001)(81156007); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:DM2PR0501MB1102; H:[172.29.36.57]; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; MX:1; A:1; LANG:en; Received-SPF: None (protection.outlook.com: juniper.net does not designate permitted sender hosts) X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: =?Windows-1252?Q?1; DM2PR0501MB1102; 23:BZ4Hhw6C069uyMVl8YykrTzWRn3P0XDaFIJ?= =?Windows-1252?Q?3zqk/R3p8mjUNSMqwjvzl/kOQleBiEOgZ2Nzqy/D+sD5e5z8m3PRjuyS?= =?Windows-1252?Q?5Wqbt3G2ENgUk/jHMQeZnipG6IvPky5wFG6RDunRDgDAgw2izxJtbLHt?= =?Windows-1252?Q?nicl6J6+iCqV7+1hCoLiAJn4fhHbbyk7tcb3+ad7uyNlQGTOmMmFXkFz?= =?Windows-1252?Q?NPHt1EXGM/DQ1LR9RuQNnfLObk93FJEaPtqWe9AJV7jieW6ezKsRcl9C?= =?Windows-1252?Q?EeQ8F+vpO2l2Y0KP1YnwIoHs8+Zd9LX8TCijnQXtt++PK103NVIlxXsR?= =?Windows-1252?Q?AUbWQO47pBOM8V6gDJmWZXDW7//10z4r2Fov6Te+LCUprepMTBK9tWQc?= =?Windows-1252?Q?9a58ZB3waE6b7yciJI9EhLdoguq0eRYgqyZMphEIIxFeU3pxNvv4AMgT?= =?Windows-1252?Q?J3HAtlTLkM1ObXkmYtXMOmRcZvV9V9FMPUy4+VtBH5kAmeRv0ewIVzHH?= =?Windows-1252?Q?0G/W8NLZXwxPSP+DzR8v9Vk6srXNKpujo8D4Cumr3cETaeQY/Yhjr6LL?= =?Windows-1252?Q?z3n16MUsCW6OWU6+UxsPZYJUl3yNZx7+BJdI8vvMsNaypzPU6+Rm+8lj?= =?Windows-1252?Q?JzX7elgb0r7tpDVRUyHPHwjNRbr1+Zp400SrfkjcFnbqWcc0nBjJwrFc?= =?Windows-1252?Q?m6J+qAf5IMjfYvpM7drJlDYoD0xJZTNBcmz6Knj3BzJohRfHM5AcF7nj?= =?Windows-1252?Q?wdxLXbY/hBUvWfsn7ZxwQhEjzoJ36D2FxI9oSEVszLOI2b7B380H+jvR?= =?Windows-1252?Q?JrFL1BeiQs8orykGPx0Oy54rub0SvMBd0Taw7PfaE2avoLI/2szk+OH1?= =?Windows-1252?Q?YUgjuwHiGVCaijJYk8CNNPunCqjEwkazF6hQElP/Wr8+5uunmjKrxZSC?= =?Windows-1252?Q?NF1iv1ZceeyqRQGKnZE+xTIZ1Ay8ZGSJAjeCChjkJSL06j8rs5uXFoa7?= =?Windows-1252?Q?mGSc1XzmlLaoDd+eazzS8V2/KXoxN2uVtyoBm+wA+yuEa+xsq6MzCfQv?= =?Windows-1252?Q?Yw9l2SgWyEx7jdT+JHqH+zaqYUz/E7kticFQvTWcoh6kWOFXBwy3jj7+?= =?Windows-1252?Q?VRDKsJOKeYAFsPZR3CSyVqLXcwUBowXY0GZtDbcpmm+QCIpgZx4ca1Ee?= =?Windows-1252?Q?vs6mcmOufrg2MsHBE4XL2k9/a8S/mcQKrMYaM8XN0zBbDxnj1vD3kac0?= =?Windows-1252?Q?D49Fii8UXGpU8/IagbvYsAB3jkxrEDAnmsXz25ywcpr8gTqPD19VPRwS?= =?Windows-1252?Q?LjHPj71fy9du03bomWIy1yDaTnvaDn5so2AZLvGilOqIHuD2Ic9/NZZ9?= =?Windows-1252?Q?CfNC9QaflEg/N7PmuK1sxtyJ45Rvp8G8qjiicguKYCH8jr6bvfe2WGt3?= =?Windows-1252?Q?3UmBf/O7wwijZLIXMPdX6YMvTFaE4Nu3fYvYEfeSwLMvlkQPZfHIg3a+?= =?Windows-1252?Q?iXW8GdgNPBVN/z3ylimKdUWLLhwS32tDSzoe3vImn1ESFmdNJtGZ2p1v?= =?Windows-1252?Q?EJgfUMJ6weIxo9QOPfNpoWhLMtkAvkI3D3yNWsOltHuLZbbrssMXtCrC?= =?Windows-1252?Q?T6w=3D=3D?= X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: 1; DM2PR0501MB1102; 5:gOO9gqh+RGfmEvYmvM2vkxPulYkK2BGdTYs5FRLHhb79fl0csuNkkxPvWlxVQIHbxS0MtXoHfvrFKkeRCiH+CdfxJjiO6iLik+YpavSNI9crgQL2AYu+LICA1VJqIxM0K7cfImdg213W1xBd/Bu+ZQ==; 24:XHjN3c36EDuDseEvRZho8ZHDRJyG/e45vhZ05/3O0V1V13oA8z2hMlkskaISlwwBpcExS9o/FX7niZPDwx/36wyvTV5siAuJqJYFWkVbqKE=; 20:3e7rilbT+PBv5vTK9TiujEBB3DpSV4P0eE0bGCWe9auwuIxhSDJ6qE29WEutp5luhY1kRpwNQnSNCuGJK7d4Rw== X-OriginatorOrg: juniper.net X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalArrivalTime: 16 Oct 2015 20:16:26.5584 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-FromEntityHeader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: DM2PR0501MB1102 Archived-At: Cc: alexander.okonnikov@gmail.com, mpls@ietf.org Subject: Re: [mpls] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC3107 (4499) X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2015 20:16:34 -0000 Nice bit of detective work figuring out where the 0x800000 value came from. However, I don't think the erratum can be accepted, given its potential for causing interoperability issues. To the best of my knowledge, section 4 ("Advertising Multiple Routes to a Destination") is not widely implemented (to say the least), so the issue of "which route to the prefix did you intend to withdraw?" doesn't really come up. On 10/13/2015 6:05 PM, RFC Errata System wrote: > The following errata report has been submitted for RFC3107, > "Carrying Label Information in BGP-4". > > -------------------------------------- > You may review the report below and at: > http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=3107&eid=4499 > > -------------------------------------- > Type: Technical > Reported by: Alexander Okonnikov > > Section: 3 > > Original Text > ------------- > A BGP speaker can withdraw a previously advertised route (as well as > the binding between this route and a label) by either (a) advertising > a new route (and a label) with the same NLRI as the previously > advertised route, or (b) listing the NLRI of the previously > advertised route in the Withdrawn Routes field of an Update message. > The label information carried (as part of NLRI) in the Withdrawn > Routes field should be set to 0x800000. (Of course, terminating the > BGP session also withdraws all the previously advertised routes.) > > > Corrected Text > -------------- > A BGP speaker can withdraw a previously advertised route (as well as > the binding between this route and a label) by either (a) advertising > a new route (and a label) with the same NLRI as the previously > advertised route, or (b) listing the NLRI of the previously > advertised route in the Withdrawn Routes field of > an MR_UNREACH_NLRI attribute of an Update message. > The label information carried (as part of NLRI) in the Withdrawn > Routes field should be set to 0x000001. (Of course, terminating the > BGP session also withdraws all the previously advertised routes.) > > > Notes > ----- > 1. Labeled routes are withdrawn by virtue of MR_UNREACH_NLRI attribute. > 2. Label value should be set to 0x00000 with BoS=1. Value 0x800000 was carried from draft, where BoS was high-order bit. > > Instructions: > ------------- > This erratum is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, please > use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or > rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party (IESG) > can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary. > > -------------------------------------- > RFC3107 (draft-ietf-mpls-bgp4-mpls-04) > -------------------------------------- > Title : Carrying Label Information in BGP-4 > Publication Date : May 2001 > Author(s) : Y. Rekhter, E. Rosen > Category : PROPOSED STANDARD > Source : Multiprotocol Label Switching > Area : Routing > Stream : IETF > Verifying Party : IESG > > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > From nobody Fri Oct 16 13:18:10 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A3E701A001D for ; Fri, 16 Oct 2015 13:18:08 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.902 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.902 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 0ExwnpMVY4IN for ; Fri, 16 Oct 2015 13:18:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from na01-by2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-by2on0106.outbound.protection.outlook.com [207.46.100.106]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EEDB91A0022 for ; Fri, 16 Oct 2015 13:18:06 -0700 (PDT) Authentication-Results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=erosen@juniper.net; Received: from [172.29.36.57] (66.129.241.14) by DM2PR0501MB1104.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.160.245.140) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.300.14; Fri, 16 Oct 2015 20:18:00 +0000 To: RFC Errata System , , , , , , References: <20151013221920.C2B7C180206@rfc-editor.org> From: Eric C Rosen Message-ID: <56215B73.9020600@juniper.net> Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2015 16:17:55 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20151013221920.C2B7C180206@rfc-editor.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [66.129.241.14] X-ClientProxiedBy: CY1PR21CA0050.namprd21.prod.outlook.com (25.163.250.146) To DM2PR0501MB1104.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (25.160.245.140) X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: 1; DM2PR0501MB1104; 2:20oFrHoejudsaPXvbfZ4GbUxPWDOsCUbGtnFRLI9Mr+uJecMfbTNtbdQndFr76A8F5YzKDIeg4JmacrXMoauvgOmfbEScaETcAS3KX03Q8CsR2gTKKbSyfpAvj1cJX6QzbqPdKzkXxE/7phyJ6DcVbztG4tzEqV30cvEPZObJnU=; 3:jDXdAYLYyOlowHi4TgwfSq7mpJC1NBCjdC0w1EsMEK5Tr0IMo89Uj9yFuty7afHltbQx64p5P+b7T7faSvtLHL6xR34NzGWahtcF8N24luau1AOlXLc8gFcEP0nQxu2s/edyRB5OsxjDRHircr7V9w==; 25:IKZs5fvANuk3QTeeX4Vp7dCH8EicRG1JNtliH3TsXiYIvfwZnOk2a1+SEPcpZZt0mULUQsyxewi9bFCCbnvtTVsSpOAqgV8jGod1Uqjdx8eALbDeqtcTDBY1jMMuwG9gBNXfluA+rrzbjEkSH1kdlZS09pUoEUTzbHtOlLv0oVqDQCR3Ygy8Zc4r8ada5x0BIDi5wVXvUAfZQXWf2ErpC8O74twCMCxEoY03rU/5mdh/aR7KLs7Lc8jq4KhFXYDvuRxB77FkdvrhPkZFRbq6Yg== X-Microsoft-Antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:DM2PR0501MB1104; X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: 1; DM2PR0501MB1104; 20: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; 4:qmbsDZjOYN4lay4OaXgD6poAb/69UgomJku0mXQ85PceyaZPvU7cCDME6ehUleJAbi+2nwQGMCVylJBlA19+NjfQAd6+y4J7JSFaFpSwa+X+aqRgufINI5tLl0D6Twc1neduV0em+9nsjumrYaTqze/i1Si4tMp38ouY91mIgPV4EzYf2al92pALGPTfgsYX13r2OFcnA1YIqkjBnzYfDQzgmv++MeSzgJRHH7/5tRh6a5BAK1FOaPZPUjUKEmuXMRXZyeOeBeSlAbEb5W7HpAsgUzSf+xUH5NMaLcuM3uYXNMyGKQp20AmNepc41n29fnIMVrpunJuEtJpD1z4BL1lHHTHEs+ou7ZOrWS8d/iw= X-Microsoft-Antispam-PRVS: X-Exchange-Antispam-Report-Test: UriScan:(202767206196957); X-Exchange-Antispam-Report-CFA-Test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(601004)(2401047)(8121501046)(520078)(5005006)(3002001); SRVR:DM2PR0501MB1104; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:DM2PR0501MB1104; X-Forefront-PRVS: 0731AA2DE6 X-Forefront-Antispam-Report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(6009001)(6049001)(479174004)(377454003)(189002)(199003)(24454002)(105586002)(5007970100001)(46102003)(23746002)(42186005)(16799955002)(40100003)(1941001)(83506001)(87976001)(15975445007)(2201001)(36756003)(92566002)(77096005)(64706001)(65806001)(47776003)(66066001)(15188155005)(33656002)(99136001)(4001450100002)(122386002)(64126003)(189998001)(65956001)(5001770100001)(5001960100002)(81156007)(101416001)(5004730100002)(50986999)(97736004)(59896002)(80316001)(54356999)(4001350100001)(19580405001)(87266999)(106356001)(86362001)(76176999)(5008740100001)(65816999)(19580395003)(2950100001)(50466002); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:DM2PR0501MB1104; H:[172.29.36.57]; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; MX:1; A:1; LANG:en; Received-SPF: None (protection.outlook.com: juniper.net does not designate permitted sender hosts) X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: =?Windows-1252?Q?1; DM2PR0501MB1104; 23:73Hn5RhqZnx7dEORSqua3CJxKJKhsUh1ION?= =?Windows-1252?Q?f2Oz+0ua+S5rS/hQZvbjcNU54Y2TG+gI+u3vOfB2U533Aazzk+yOXjAc?= =?Windows-1252?Q?M6ss4lPBXAs28swlNvWlxQImM3u8fGon+5LWlYjjoCel5Yx/C0RVX4v5?= =?Windows-1252?Q?e5o+aYqRqlysMqkk2G4RgxsEt+PqVUOuzLMWYF1AEnBTRqakbOYXKaPM?= =?Windows-1252?Q?ihIcgL4lupnWZevAu2Lt+iX3ya993oB7T+x115gVnfjawBJy2x0YpfCK?= =?Windows-1252?Q?SaRvzrUeAjTYO4wQ1hpC4pvJi5liRgQRf8a5Ff1AkDBb0hBurZHlnaIe?= =?Windows-1252?Q?mZENX6YoW97kRVblpmxIh3QcY/WvvypuTy6XGecYgKI25UcxJ3IDW5Aj?= =?Windows-1252?Q?GUa2dednENh/WZLL5BFzhQyq6Q8isubwiCR3j0uFubeZa09ZkC5kvAuy?= =?Windows-1252?Q?fX/tfLIVc7YHt3eI5tErmE0eNyKj8iHmWdVzn/EnCVzOknmBg0dv2erj?= =?Windows-1252?Q?F8e+V1HiHFZesQ1NQJ0X7P+V5D32GC7ULjiUXSOMxP92tdHM949C6n5N?= =?Windows-1252?Q?Hz3CphcW6C9KGCsxtH+V9Z+8cc2bkrknLsafriY62bNPHB/p/aW8yKSz?= =?Windows-1252?Q?3yJL6EVSbnfayjk+8OmPHLdwznvJovwmOn7SWhBXtL34ummIXqdrellv?= =?Windows-1252?Q?XrjG6pLZuHw2DsG2Q2KysnxygEN2UjOXmbeEd7wWrf0KAs2g4+WoSegU?= =?Windows-1252?Q?FMxkJ/t1KxS6WNb1HKXxmC3t83p0BU0FvzNqPTGaSPcXFA/5LAsnqE+6?= =?Windows-1252?Q?FNNHeaRaFUTQdxoSQH3yXB1wBpW/vxtjamLIDrYEX/iSX/a3soCHu7OM?= =?Windows-1252?Q?XeYIHAPmw+VPyrxBSdDbueL1QRXRWfUn7PB8tv+EHww+xEkNCL17WNbD?= =?Windows-1252?Q?KkQiMeR3MuRwThWH8JrFWeSViTtOUyy49aK8I5JrAr8R5ujx4H7QeJ5Z?= =?Windows-1252?Q?o9YCH+MsHQZIPHvgQGcVOJltQhVBiUd4sxW9+5WIiMdMuHDVAlCcZv50?= =?Windows-1252?Q?kJSOHYwGkW8Xvt1bCB1i+pzSOUOUssKhg0WPhtYmPSQapdtW75MO60ln?= =?Windows-1252?Q?E2vGCUmfUzv0Tem6YyZYiplpl1i1h23qr/shKTmLcVY4SD1HWjfv/RuB?= =?Windows-1252?Q?kFsmk2T0lNfOYHL6aT7+oYm34PCB1RzsggvgW/yii75R+ZRZMbSa963A?= =?Windows-1252?Q?D4VlwGo8UdWc5gfCSNFIFIaPYCzWTAtl+HLEE39W0Rd9IJjggeXc4xxB?= =?Windows-1252?Q?8ZxctsQzgOVbBqhuoM6zG4EB3M/o1evT9L4HGJdqucZSqogQlkKZBU+j?= =?Windows-1252?Q?PqGOVeIlamScAxJ4mBqkKwXqqLIxGvKL0tM/uC9RqnBH81dqF1i88srT?= =?Windows-1252?Q?MZ5X5YjRmOoaUkDMamq5bPO2ga8x3WNyXL8iXY693wmnAOagmUNopKlO?= =?Windows-1252?Q?cDuBdZ88ogZ8P9zV02axLQkDL5W1rsErDguMK170rvIZun6241UpSdFB?= =?Windows-1252?Q?VXC6atV3w2FJxxGg=3D?= X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: 1; DM2PR0501MB1104; 5:3dmhuvkrvEFXhu0dugtJ82Kef2hi2sBmfH+ySPnvWCiIpMgZjrnzn430V7Upr+46RW4bhfUUOSylBEUNfGmMpFnhw2tNdHGj80kSFsXik+RF9el0+aehZ/aMhOQ584PeBtLQJxvqwfUVivMHMVm4Sg==; 24:LhvpzFZ4rD1EgaDbi+cIHHmBLDJL7lkh4LfyZUZuObHJyEmuGrDaU+S7XSISazc/SVS+oHJS8JBfgJBIVrII/zuGc3zd4naOPkfKHu2rkcI=; 20:ZY0KcN3uwodkzI6biQC0IIECuwH2Wy0deYfdiul7s5apNGMLA9lcR0oosXlb3z/JugV+GnFDxooGkGt5q5d4mQ== X-OriginatorOrg: juniper.net X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalArrivalTime: 16 Oct 2015 20:18:00.6602 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-FromEntityHeader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: DM2PR0501MB1104 Archived-At: Cc: alexander.okonnikov@gmail.com, mpls@ietf.org Subject: Re: [mpls] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC3107 (4500) X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2015 20:18:08 -0000 I suspect that this capability code has never actually been used, in which case it might be best to avoid doing anything that might be interpreted as encouraging its use. On 10/13/2015 6:19 PM, RFC Errata System wrote: > The following errata report has been submitted for RFC3107, > "Carrying Label Information in BGP-4". > > -------------------------------------- > You may review the report below and at: > http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=3107&eid=4500 > > -------------------------------------- > Type: Technical > Reported by: Alexander Okonnikov > > Section: 5 > > Original Text > ------------- > A BGP speaker that is capable of handling multiple routes to a > destination (as described above) should use the Capabilities Optional > Parameter, as defined in [BGP-CAP], to inform its peers about this > capability. The value of this capability is 4. > > Corrected Text > -------------- > A BGP speaker that is capable of handling multiple routes to a > destination (as described above) should use the Capabilities Optional > Parameter, as defined in [BGP-CAP], to inform its peers about this > capability. This capability is advertised using the Capability Code > 4 and Capability Length 0. > > Notes > ----- > To remove confusion what word value means - Capability Value or value of Capability Code. > Also, format of multiple routes capability is not described, so length = 0 is assumed. > > Instructions: > ------------- > This erratum is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, please > use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or > rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party (IESG) > can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary. > > -------------------------------------- > RFC3107 (draft-ietf-mpls-bgp4-mpls-04) > -------------------------------------- > Title : Carrying Label Information in BGP-4 > Publication Date : May 2001 > Author(s) : Y. Rekhter, E. Rosen > Category : PROPOSED STANDARD > Source : Multiprotocol Label Switching > Area : Routing > Stream : IETF > Verifying Party : IESG > > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > From nobody Fri Oct 16 13:27:55 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A76E51A01F6 for ; Fri, 16 Oct 2015 13:27:51 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 hVeHn-sE9lZn for ; Fri, 16 Oct 2015 13:27:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-lf0-x232.google.com (mail-lf0-x232.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c07::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 7FAFE1A0276 for ; Fri, 16 Oct 2015 13:27:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: by lffz202 with SMTP id z202so2258367lff.3 for ; Fri, 16 Oct 2015 13:27:45 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=cstpFSz0jZxSmS9hJdxjfHKrpyKQtgHTPmgWbEjOh5g=; b=u7lEsGbyOkK6DXSo1XZToL0iL3OQE8m1B8JM0CspJWWW3GbxgUjlb8RTZSTez2V37I x5PpzbHCvkKFnWtphUPM6Z5RKzp5OemOhVoPs2FTJj73sZqwbWq7Wmg/l61tQ4NOfTaS fyhG3WZjBC9Mt1ODVghqgceWArTWWrwaXW+c3vdKfjJdLnlvwUdju0SihcyoFTiDmITo mly8KA73dVs3UJHMb08NV9EhcvKPqRUsgJ/mYE/IhNW2rxZLlifp5DElUlkGwaSkvVZo s1UqDz1ZCiYMz4AKtHW7lg8Db8E4V4DMTfpyXgiXvyTsreM9A8EVgVWdLP5YdEkAjrYb SydA== X-Received: by 10.25.27.72 with SMTP id b69mr6103638lfb.90.1445027265700; Fri, 16 Oct 2015 13:27:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.0.1.5] (85-114-21-254.obit.ru. [85.114.21.254]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id a138sm3152411lfe.19.2015.10.16.13.27.44 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 16 Oct 2015 13:27:44 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <56215DC0.40100@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2015 23:27:44 +0300 From: Alexander Okonnikov User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Icedove/31.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Eric C Rosen , Martin Vigoureux , Loa Andersson , RFC Errata System , akatlas@gmail.com, db3546@att.com, aretana@cisco.com, swallow@cisco.com, rcallon@juniper.net References: <20151013210728.27DF9187E28@rfc-editor.org> <561E1CC9.7080600@pi.nu> <561E4773.1090904@alcatel-lucent.com> <5621556E.1000600@juniper.net> In-Reply-To: <5621556E.1000600@juniper.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: Cc: mpls@ietf.org Subject: Re: [mpls] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC3107 (4497) X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2015 20:27:51 -0000 Hello Eric, I thought that this is not always correct to recursively refer to actual document. For example, RFC 4271 obsoletes RFC 1771, but these two have significant differences, and if some document depends on RFC 1771, then it doesn't mean that RFC 4271 could be equally used in place of RFC 1771. Another example is BGP Capabilities Advertisement where RFC 5492 is significantly differs from RFC 3392 and RFC 2842. Goal to submit errata was that [RFC 2283] is inexistent reference (RFC 2858 is referred by [BGP-MP] throughout document instead). If there would be written RFC 2283, it would be correct, but [RFC 2283] seems to be incorrect. Thank you. On 10/16/2015 10:52 PM, Eric C Rosen wrote: > On 10/14/2015 8:15 AM, Martin Vigoureux wrote: >> I think we should stick to changing [RFC 2283] into [BGP-MP]. Otherwise >> it could open the door to creating erratas for any reference that would >> have been updated/obsoleted. > > Of course, one could also ask whether it is worthwhile to accept an > erratum that changes one obsolete reference to another. Whether one > looks in the RFC index for RFC2283 or for RFC2858, one will eventually > follow the change of tags to RFC4760. > From nobody Fri Oct 16 13:40:09 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E6DFF1A06E9 for ; Fri, 16 Oct 2015 13:40:07 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 xCmiVLFwQoxD for ; Fri, 16 Oct 2015 13:40:05 -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 32F611A0270 for ; Fri, 16 Oct 2015 13:40:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: by lbbwb3 with SMTP id wb3so46910372lbb.1 for ; Fri, 16 Oct 2015 13:40:03 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=ovTxmfvCtrci7hzQaUF4PJh4Lo5wCEj/+XHXp02rJIc=; b=xzSIQ41UUwTLfsqNeHbAuHmNfkTjcFhK7atbHV31KxnoQiMRBo/645xmfsqcCDZDmb tTsknmfmIDQXLcubYW5ecWrhQEGVMHU43h32Cbxywn4vEK9t8qRhy5akThOEmGqKwEce LWIaBCUuXDMWDPOsqkQIYv8gOtTpmhV6hnl5txtLbb4pZg4hvJwTG+JDX1cIpjRSOY7j w8iojLvqWnBsZx6c337gnCtsxWFogZKXfH9VtoT12LPUEboY0Iev5nRszYFmM56GRX8+ 4GB0iCnx01LMJe3wki97QuslpH+MhGqFN6cFBmSsIhlots2lNHI1LD8bHeFxyyDugYTZ u9Bg== X-Received: by 10.112.150.168 with SMTP id uj8mr9352996lbb.101.1445028003282; Fri, 16 Oct 2015 13:40:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.0.1.5] (85-114-21-254.obit.ru. [85.114.21.254]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id yp7sm2959603lbb.47.2015.10.16.13.40.02 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 16 Oct 2015 13:40:02 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <562160A1.2090502@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2015 23:40:01 +0300 From: Alexander Okonnikov User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Icedove/31.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Eric C Rosen , RFC Errata System , akatlas@gmail.com, db3546@att.com, aretana@cisco.com, loa@pi.nu, swallow@cisco.com, rcallon@juniper.net References: <20151013220529.01C13188CF0@rfc-editor.org> <56215B13.4080901@juniper.net> In-Reply-To: <56215B13.4080901@juniper.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: Cc: mpls@ietf.org Subject: Re: [mpls] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC3107 (4499) X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2015 20:40:08 -0000 Good. I know that at least three major vendors interwork correctly. One of them use 0x800000, and two others - 0x000000. No problems with interoperability were noticed. My point was to make label stack encoding consistent for both cases - when single and multiple routes are advertised. By the way, it is not clear for me why don't encode label from previously advertised route when this one is being withdrawn. Thank you. On 10/16/2015 11:16 PM, Eric C Rosen wrote: > Nice bit of detective work figuring out where the 0x800000 value came > from. > > However, I don't think the erratum can be accepted, given its > potential for causing interoperability issues. > > To the best of my knowledge, section 4 ("Advertising Multiple Routes > to a Destination") is not widely implemented (to say the least), so > the issue of "which route to the prefix did you intend to withdraw?" > doesn't really come up. > > On 10/13/2015 6:05 PM, RFC Errata System wrote: >> The following errata report has been submitted for RFC3107, >> "Carrying Label Information in BGP-4". >> >> -------------------------------------- >> You may review the report below and at: >> http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=3107&eid=4499 >> >> -------------------------------------- >> Type: Technical >> Reported by: Alexander Okonnikov >> >> Section: 3 >> >> Original Text >> ------------- >> A BGP speaker can withdraw a previously advertised route (as well as >> the binding between this route and a label) by either (a) >> advertising >> a new route (and a label) with the same NLRI as the previously >> advertised route, or (b) listing the NLRI of the previously >> advertised route in the Withdrawn Routes field of an Update message. >> The label information carried (as part of NLRI) in the Withdrawn >> Routes field should be set to 0x800000. (Of course, terminating the >> BGP session also withdraws all the previously advertised routes.) >> >> >> Corrected Text >> -------------- >> A BGP speaker can withdraw a previously advertised route (as well as >> the binding between this route and a label) by either (a) >> advertising >> a new route (and a label) with the same NLRI as the previously >> advertised route, or (b) listing the NLRI of the previously >> advertised route in the Withdrawn Routes field of >> an MR_UNREACH_NLRI attribute of an Update message. >> The label information carried (as part of NLRI) in the Withdrawn >> Routes field should be set to 0x000001. (Of course, terminating the >> BGP session also withdraws all the previously advertised routes.) >> >> >> Notes >> ----- >> 1. Labeled routes are withdrawn by virtue of MR_UNREACH_NLRI attribute. >> 2. Label value should be set to 0x00000 with BoS=1. Value 0x800000 >> was carried from draft, where BoS was high-order bit. >> >> Instructions: >> ------------- >> This erratum is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, please >> use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or >> rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party (IESG) >> can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary. >> >> -------------------------------------- >> RFC3107 (draft-ietf-mpls-bgp4-mpls-04) >> -------------------------------------- >> Title : Carrying Label Information in BGP-4 >> Publication Date : May 2001 >> Author(s) : Y. Rekhter, E. Rosen >> Category : PROPOSED STANDARD >> Source : Multiprotocol Label Switching >> Area : Routing >> Stream : IETF >> Verifying Party : IESG >> >> _______________________________________________ >> mpls mailing list >> mpls@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls >> From nobody Fri Oct 16 13:44:56 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B6661A1A75 for ; Fri, 16 Oct 2015 13:44:54 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 pmPA8owSkhpJ for ; Fri, 16 Oct 2015 13:44:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-lb0-x22c.google.com (mail-lb0-x22c.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c04::22c]) (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 40D8C1A1A6F for ; Fri, 16 Oct 2015 13:44:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: by lbbpp2 with SMTP id pp2so80093459lbb.0 for ; Fri, 16 Oct 2015 13:44:50 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=BqL1StJag2Q9GWBjvHvbigX2ysG1bbJrC41hFPIIFKs=; b=b2XaqhLQIZPC5vpODFa/hozre4nQVuGPAqk+zyliNNaCS5EGvMGwxf2Wxewrf1UgnU A+2kNUGL3Mvjgwad6D3cPM+2Nc4RprJ793veZ3viUxDuaJVCeSsveHx0Vz0aiiOxjhTy jXdM6GWofMi061BI+p/1a0xWNxD0ZhZq8qFxx4+ZEV2qPR99umJQAxkk4sMJCvA0b6un FyAzw1vEofZ75JkTk6NNGnhodopZOWp9UZ0gJ9sAZ4FrXdljOfH0AoLypyaJk8ew0tCB tQI6mf75c9Fx8J7HqFbI1tm/WtPRthlzCSezbnN5Df3fIVAAciKoQgvfJiK0Gx/sZsMy rVRQ== X-Received: by 10.112.133.42 with SMTP id oz10mr9303475lbb.62.1445028290370; Fri, 16 Oct 2015 13:44:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.0.1.5] (85-114-21-254.obit.ru. [85.114.21.254]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id h196sm3161446lfg.21.2015.10.16.13.44.49 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 16 Oct 2015 13:44:49 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <562161C0.4080603@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2015 23:44:48 +0300 From: Alexander Okonnikov User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Icedove/31.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Eric C Rosen , RFC Errata System , akatlas@gmail.com, db3546@att.com, aretana@cisco.com, loa@pi.nu, swallow@cisco.com, rcallon@juniper.net References: <20151013221920.C2B7C180206@rfc-editor.org> <56215B73.9020600@juniper.net> In-Reply-To: <56215B73.9020600@juniper.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: Cc: mpls@ietf.org Subject: Re: [mpls] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC3107 (4500) X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2015 20:44:54 -0000 Understand. Thank you. On 10/16/2015 11:17 PM, Eric C Rosen wrote: > I suspect that this capability code has never actually been used, in > which case it might be best to avoid doing anything that might be > interpreted as encouraging its use. > > On 10/13/2015 6:19 PM, RFC Errata System wrote: >> The following errata report has been submitted for RFC3107, >> "Carrying Label Information in BGP-4". >> >> -------------------------------------- >> You may review the report below and at: >> http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=3107&eid=4500 >> >> -------------------------------------- >> Type: Technical >> Reported by: Alexander Okonnikov >> >> Section: 5 >> >> Original Text >> ------------- >> A BGP speaker that is capable of handling multiple routes to a >> destination (as described above) should use the Capabilities >> Optional >> Parameter, as defined in [BGP-CAP], to inform its peers about this >> capability. The value of this capability is 4. >> >> Corrected Text >> -------------- >> A BGP speaker that is capable of handling multiple routes to a >> destination (as described above) should use the Capabilities >> Optional >> Parameter, as defined in [BGP-CAP], to inform its peers about this >> capability. This capability is advertised using the Capability Code >> 4 and Capability Length 0. >> >> Notes >> ----- >> To remove confusion what word value means - Capability Value or value >> of Capability Code. >> Also, format of multiple routes capability is not described, so >> length = 0 is assumed. >> >> Instructions: >> ------------- >> This erratum is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, please >> use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or >> rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party (IESG) >> can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary. >> >> -------------------------------------- >> RFC3107 (draft-ietf-mpls-bgp4-mpls-04) >> -------------------------------------- >> Title : Carrying Label Information in BGP-4 >> Publication Date : May 2001 >> Author(s) : Y. Rekhter, E. Rosen >> Category : PROPOSED STANDARD >> Source : Multiprotocol Label Switching >> Area : Routing >> Stream : IETF >> Verifying Party : IESG >> >> _______________________________________________ >> mpls mailing list >> mpls@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls >> From nobody Fri Oct 16 14:57:08 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C9231B33FC; Fri, 16 Oct 2015 14:57:05 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -101.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=ham 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 Xd1sD5dlwmbg; Fri, 16 Oct 2015 14:57:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E8F9C1A1EEE; Fri, 16 Oct 2015 14:57:03 -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: 6.6.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <20151016215703.16714.92587.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2015 14:57:03 -0700 Archived-At: Cc: mpls@ietf.org, draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-reply-mode-simple@ietf.org, mpls-chairs@ietf.org, The IESG , rcallon@juniper.net, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org Subject: [mpls] Protocol Action: 'Label Switched Path (LSP) Ping/Traceroute Reply Mode Simplification' to Proposed Standard (draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-reply-mode-simple-05.txt) X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2015 21:57:05 -0000 The IESG has approved the following document: - 'Label Switched Path (LSP) Ping/Traceroute Reply Mode Simplification' (draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-reply-mode-simple-05.txt) as Proposed Standard This document is the product of the Multiprotocol Label Switching 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-mpls-lsp-ping-reply-mode-simple/ Technical Summary The Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) Label Switched Path (LSP) Ping and Traceroute use the Reply Mode field to signal the method to be used in the MPLS echo reply. This document updates the "Reply via Specified Path (5)" Reply Mode value to easily indicate the reverse LSP. This document also adds an optional TLV which can carry ordered list of Reply Mode values. Working Group Summary No controversy. The document has significant support. Document Quality RFC 7110 (which this document updates) is broadly implemented and widely deployed. Multiple vendors have indicated the intention to implement this enhancement. Experts from vendors and network operators have carefully reviewed the document. The document has been updated in response to last call (and other) comments. Personnel Who is the Document Shepherd for this document? Ross Callon Who is the Responsible Area Director? Deborah Brungard From nobody Fri Oct 16 22:15:29 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 016B61A1A1E for ; Fri, 16 Oct 2015 22:15:28 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.91 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham 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 rqO2ADKIH6Mo for ; Fri, 16 Oct 2015 22:15:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pipi.pi.nu (pipi.pi.nu [83.168.239.141]) (using TLSv1.1 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AB7491A1A1D for ; Fri, 16 Oct 2015 22:15:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.10] (unknown [112.205.73.125]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: loa@pi.nu) by pipi.pi.nu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2CFF118013B2; Sat, 17 Oct 2015 07:15:19 +0200 (CEST) To: Eric C Rosen , Martin Vigoureux , RFC Errata System , akatlas@gmail.com, db3546@att.com, aretana@cisco.com, swallow@cisco.com, rcallon@juniper.net References: <20151013210728.27DF9187E28@rfc-editor.org> <561E1CC9.7080600@pi.nu> <561E4773.1090904@alcatel-lucent.com> <5621556E.1000600@juniper.net> From: Loa Andersson Message-ID: <5621D95B.8090209@pi.nu> Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2015 13:15:07 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <5621556E.1000600@juniper.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: Cc: alexander.okonnikov@gmail.com, mpls@ietf.org Subject: Re: [mpls] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC3107 (4497) X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2015 05:15:28 -0000 Eric, On 2015-10-17 03:52, Eric C Rosen wrote: > On 10/14/2015 8:15 AM, Martin Vigoureux wrote: >> I think we should stick to changing [RFC 2283] into [BGP-MP]. Otherwise >> it could open the door to creating erratas for any reference that would >> have been updated/obsoleted. > > Of course, one could also ask whether it is worthwhile to accept an > erratum that changes one obsolete reference to another. Whether one > looks in the RFC index for RFC2283 or for RFC2858, one will eventually > follow the change of tags to RFC4760. I take this to mean "Accept - hold for a potential 3107bis", right? /Loa > From nobody Sat Oct 17 03:34:02 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB3251ACDC8; Sat, 17 Oct 2015 03:34:01 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.91 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham 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 MDOO2GO_okpi; Sat, 17 Oct 2015 03:34:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pipi.pi.nu (pipi.pi.nu [83.168.239.141]) (using TLSv1.1 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 772541ACDC7; Sat, 17 Oct 2015 03:34:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.10] (unknown [112.205.73.125]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: loa@pi.nu) by pipi.pi.nu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7CA9518013B2; Sat, 17 Oct 2015 12:33:57 +0200 (CEST) To: "mpls@ietf.org" References: <561281C8.3020404@pi.nu> From: Loa Andersson Message-ID: <56222407.3090902@pi.nu> Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2015 18:33:43 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <561281C8.3020404@pi.nu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: Cc: "draft-ietf-mpls-rfc6374-udp-return-path@tools.ietf.org" , "mpls-chairs@ietf.org" Subject: [mpls] Implementation Poll on draft-ietf-mpls-rfc6374-udp-return-path was:(Re: preparing the shepherd wwrite-up for draft-ietf-mpls-rfc6374-udp-return-path) X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2015 10:34:02 -0000 Folks, I've seen no responses on this, we had an early allocation motivated by implementations, so it might have been because of a cryptic subject. Resending with a clearer subject. /Loa On 2015-10-05 21:57, Loa Andersson wrote: > Working Group, > > We are preparing the Shepherd Write-Up for draft-ietf-mpls-rfc6374- > udp-return-path. One question we need to answer is if we have know > implementations and/or deployments of the specification. > > This mail starts an implementation poll on draft-ietf-mpls-rfc6374- > udp-return-path. If you have an implementation or plan to implement > the draft please respond to this mail. > > /Loa > mpls wg co-chair From nobody Sat Oct 17 21:12:29 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1FFC31A893F; Sat, 17 Oct 2015 21:12:28 -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] autolearn=ham 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 CwOW61Gd2ON8; Sat, 17 Oct 2015 21:12:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 27CC41A893C; Sat, 17 Oct 2015 21:12:27 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: IETF Secretariat To: , , X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.6.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <20151018041227.7284.58275.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2015 21:12:27 -0700 Archived-At: Subject: [mpls] The MPLS WG has adopted draft-tiruveedhula-mpls-mldp-mib X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2015 04:12:28 -0000 The MPLS WG has adopted draft-tiruveedhula-mpls-mldp-mib (entered by Loa Andersson) The document is available at https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-tiruveedhula-mpls-mldp-mib/ Comment: IPR Poll started. From nobody Sun Oct 18 09:50:07 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2FDC81A9086; Sun, 18 Oct 2015 09:50:06 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -14.51 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.51 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham 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 RBOIZ5F4mayZ; Sun, 18 Oct 2015 09:50:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from alln-iport-6.cisco.com (alln-iport-6.cisco.com [173.37.142.93]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7B3111A9080; Sun, 18 Oct 2015 09:50:04 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=7473; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1445187004; x=1446396604; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:mime-version; bh=mwNgg2Xj3Ch+Rr+SM3k68s4kK2r5OvuX5YmzV2lngBk=; b=mLuuU+t6WlohUNcNW6Duc5gze+3JRP1EeYcJm55wEWWVzECBz9edjkpl SwbK7IkS3KntY6YqktPyK74cDIdu0QMIdiAu5LPaRbay7grQzy6PJI+Gs dkX9N/0GDJ3U9r0eqRUFc6y476eLMfLdEL0q8HvD1DDznlFOqM1acE5D3 0=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0D9AQCZzCNW/5ldJa1egmlNVGEOBrlThCEBDYFaIYV9gRQ4FAEBAQEBAQGBCoQtAQIEeRIBCBEDAQIoORQJCgQBDQWIMA3DBQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBARQEhneEfoR8DQSENQWNEokRAYUYiASBWIQ8khWDbgEfAQFChANyAYRggQYBAQE X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.17,698,1437436800"; d="scan'208,217";a="199064980" Received: from rcdn-core-2.cisco.com ([173.37.93.153]) by alln-iport-6.cisco.com with ESMTP; 18 Oct 2015 16:50:03 +0000 Received: from XCH-RCD-003.cisco.com (xch-rcd-003.cisco.com [173.37.102.13]) by rcdn-core-2.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id t9IGo3en006684 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Sun, 18 Oct 2015 16:50:03 GMT Received: from xch-rcd-001.cisco.com (173.37.102.11) by XCH-RCD-003.cisco.com (173.37.102.13) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1104.5; Sun, 18 Oct 2015 11:49:46 -0500 Received: from xch-rcd-001.cisco.com ([173.37.102.11]) by XCH-RCD-001.cisco.com ([173.37.102.11]) with mapi id 15.00.1104.000; Sun, 18 Oct 2015 11:49:46 -0500 From: "Tarek Saad (tsaad)" To: "Tarek Saad (tsaad)" , "mpls@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [mpls] Building agenda for MPLS WG sessions - Yokohama IETF94 Thread-Index: AQHRCcT+eGJeFV22oE+a0leeXvbhLw== Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2015 16:49:46 +0000 Message-ID: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.5.4.150722 x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1 x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted x-originating-ip: [10.82.244.191] Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_D24944D847977tsaadciscocom_" MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: Cc: "mpls-chairs@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [mpls] Building agenda for MPLS WG sessions - Yokohama IETF94 X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2015 16:50:06 -0000 --_000_D24944D847977tsaadciscocom_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi all, We are still accepting requests for slots to present at MPLS WG sessions @ = Yokohama IETF94. Please forward you requests asap so it is added on the age= nda. Some important dates below: 2015-10-19 (Monday): Draft Working Group agendas due by UTC 23:59, upload u= sing IETF Meeting Materials Management Tool. 2015-10-26 (Monday): Revised Working Group agendas due by UTC 23:59, upload= using IETF Meeting Materials Management Tool. Regards, Tarek From: mpls > on behalf = of Tarek Saad > Date: Monday, October 5, 2015 at 9:25 AM To: "mpls@ietf.org" > Cc: "mpls-chairs@ietf.org" > Subject: [mpls] Building agenda for MPLS WG sessions - Yokohama IETF94 Hi all, We are starting to build the MPLS WG agenda for Yokohama IETF94. The prelim= inary agenda, is available at: https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/94/agenda.html The MPLS WG sessions are tentatively scheduled for: Wednesday, November 4, 2015 (JST), 9:00-11:30Wednesday Morning session I and Thursday, November 5, 2015 (JST), 17:40-18:40Thursday Afternoon session III Please send (reply to this e-mail and copy myself and the MPLS chairs) your= requests for a presentation slot. Indicate: draft name, speaker and desired duration (covering presentation += Q&As). Please send your requests by October 19th, 2015. If presenting, your slides will be due by November 1, 2015. Please send sli= des to the addresses above. Regards, Tarek and MPLS chairs --_000_D24944D847977tsaadciscocom_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <42AE7FA43EAF64408A72AA700C28733C@emea.cisco.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi all,

We are still accepting requests for slots to present at MPLS WG sessio= ns @ Yokohama IETF94. Please forward you requests asap so it is added on th= e agenda.
Some important dates below:
2015-10-19 (Monday): Draft Working Group agendas due by UTC 23:59, upl= oad using IETF Meeting Materials Management Tool.
2015-10-26 (Monday): Revised Working Group agendas due by UTC 23:59, u= pload using IETF Meeting Materials Management Tool.

Regards,
Tarek

From: mpls <mpls-bounces@ietf.org> on behalf of Tarek Saad = <tsaad@cisco.com>
Date: Monday, October 5, 2015 at 9:= 25 AM
To: "mpls@ietf.org" <mpls@i= etf.org>
Cc: "mpls-chairs@ietf.org" <mpls-chairs@ietf.org>
Subject: [mpls] Building agenda for= MPLS WG sessions - Yokohama IETF94

Hi all,

We are starting to build the MPLS WG= agenda for Yokohama IETF94. The preliminary agenda, is available= at:

The MPLS WG sessions are tentatively sche= duled for:
Wednesday, November 4, 2015 (JST),&n= bsp;9:00-11:30Wednesday Morning session I
and
Thursday, November 5, 2015 (JST),&nb= sp;17:40-18:40Thursday Afternoon session II= I

Please send (reply to this e-mail and cop= y myself and the MPLS chairs) your requests for a presentation slot. <= /font>
Indicate: draft name, speaker and desired= duration (covering presentation + Q&As).
Please send your requests by October 19th, 2015.

If presenting, your slides will be due by= November 1, 2015. Please send slides to the addresses above.

Regards,
Tarek and MPLS chairs


 --_000_D24944D847977tsaadciscocom_-- From nobody Mon Oct 19 01:27:39 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 880F01A7028; Mon, 19 Oct 2015 01:27:37 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.86 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.86 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham 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 MLXsUcqmoN3O; Mon, 19 Oct 2015 01:27:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from tcmail33.telekom.de (tcmail33.telekom.de [80.149.113.247]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 89C831A7001; Mon, 19 Oct 2015 01:27:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from qdezc2.de.t-internal.com ([10.125.181.10]) by tcmail31.telekom.de with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA; 19 Oct 2015 10:27:27 +0200 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.17,701,1437429600"; d="scan'208";a="344164447" Received: from he113472.emea1.cds.t-internal.com ([10.134.93.130]) by qde0ps.de.t-internal.com with ESMTP/TLS/AES128-SHA; 19 Oct 2015 10:27:27 +0200 Received: from HE113667.emea1.cds.t-internal.com ([fe80::c943:1394:e86e:fce3]) by HE113472.emea1.cds.t-internal.com ([::1]) with mapi; Mon, 19 Oct 2015 10:27:26 +0200 From: To: , , Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2015 10:27:24 +0200 Thread-Topic: Re: IPR poll on draft-tiruveedhula-mpls-mldp-mib Thread-Index: AdEKR/sbXfcNDq3AS0yYSV1t0s9N/g== Message-ID: <058CE00BD4D6B94FAD033A2439EA1E4B0204A2B1C96C@HE113667.emea1.cds.t-internal.com> Accept-Language: de-DE Content-Language: de-DE X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: de-DE Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: Cc: mpls@ietf.org Subject: Re: [mpls] IPR poll on draft-tiruveedhula-mpls-mldp-mib X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2015 08:27:37 -0000 Dear WG, I am not aware of any IPR that applies to this draft. Cheers, Uwe From nobody Mon Oct 19 07:50:09 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E4311A9148; Mon, 19 Oct 2015 07:50:04 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -101.902 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.902 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=ham 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 XpXsTWL-JcFx; Mon, 19 Oct 2015 07:50:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from na01-bn1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-bn1bon0713.outbound.protection.outlook.com [IPv6:2a01:111:f400:fc10::1:713]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 47CF51A914F; Mon, 19 Oct 2015 07:50:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from BLUPR05MB1985.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.162.224.27) by BLUPR05MB1986.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.162.224.28) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.300.14; Mon, 19 Oct 2015 14:49:57 +0000 Received: from BLUPR05MB1985.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([10.162.224.27]) by BLUPR05MB1985.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([10.162.224.27]) with mapi id 15.01.0300.010; Mon, 19 Oct 2015 14:49:57 +0000 From: Ronald Bonica To: "iesg@ietf.org" , "mpls@ietf.org" , "Benoit Claise" Thread-Topic: [mpls] Benoit Claise's No Objection on draft-ietf-mpls-self-ping-05: (with COMMENT) Thread-Index: AdEKfWtlQTLSUcBaSeCa0G1qojkNVg== Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2015 14:49:56 +0000 Message-ID: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=rbonica@juniper.net; x-originating-ip: [66.129.241.10] x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; BLUPR05MB1986; 5:fCs3YrNrqfleKcchBG3wTkmUxqjg2VyuTvhAA1s7yHVFmJKTLY383dKy0f/R+JnNxSmIXkzWM0zIcecuohf37zvzEmGbOPG6l6C9f6nYlrm+A32ywhyY9riyEAuLtVT0hOxC3tMVUbT3Rrz0YtdtmQ==; 24:jxuFPplkcNl0N1KT+0mFDT6FLe7CwKsaqzFFKruR8hRrAu6SBNXjRsEA+81lz4wBOYwWjwiIyZAYb9PMe6GeghAIHYqOgFIvYF6x4J+tD28=; 20:hU0/MP0e70Bv+VA/48EMHuDKCrCdW3TuxxqQopLWlctxBgNbqk3v6oKJgevt5jRp3FHnbQ1bkii8H/ioMLt2AQ== x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:BLUPR05MB1986; x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:; x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(601004)(2401047)(5005006)(520078)(8121501046)(3002001); SRVR:BLUPR05MB1986; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:BLUPR05MB1986; x-forefront-prvs: 07349BFAD2 x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(6009001)(189002)(199003)(33656002)(87936001)(97736004)(5001920100001)(81156007)(5001770100001)(189998001)(107886002)(5001960100002)(5002640100001)(5007970100001)(2900100001)(5003600100002)(102836002)(11100500001)(77096005)(5004730100002)(76576001)(106356001)(99286002)(105586002)(54356999)(50986999)(74316001)(64706001)(101416001)(86362001)(10400500002)(46102003)(230783001)(2501003)(92566002)(66066001)(5008740100001)(40100003)(122556002); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:BLUPR05MB1986; H:BLUPR05MB1985.namprd05.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; MX:1; A:1; LANG:en; received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: juniper.net does not designate permitted sender hosts) spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:23 spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: juniper.net X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 19 Oct 2015 14:49:56.9752 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: bea78b3c-4cdb-4130-854a-1d193232e5f4 X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BLUPR05MB1986 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [mpls] Benoit Claise's No Objection on draft-ietf-mpls-self-ping-05: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2015 14:50:04 -0000 Benoit, RFC 6383 addresses the issue, but falls short of updating RFC 3209. If inst= ructed to do so by the WG, I would be glad to write a very short draft that= updates 3209. Maybe we should spin up a new email thread to discuss this. Ron > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > COMMENT: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >=20 > Did the WG consider updating RF C3209? >=20 > OLD: >=20 > The node SHOULD be prepared to > forward packets carrying the assigned label prior to sending the RESV > message. >=20 > NEW: >=20 > The node SHOULD be prepared to > forward packets carrying the assigned label prior to sending the RESV > message. When an ingress LSR receives an RESV message, it > MAY/SHOULD/MUST > invoke the LSP Self-ping procedures [this-RFC-to-be] to verify > that forwarding state has been installed on all downstream nodes. >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 From nobody Mon Oct 19 10:28:32 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EADD81A8AE5 for ; Mon, 19 Oct 2015 10:28:28 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.003 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.003 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_40=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 rcW9q0iiMi2W for ; Mon, 19 Oct 2015 10:28:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from na01-bn1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-bn1on0795.outbound.protection.outlook.com [IPv6:2a01:111:f400:fc10::795]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5FAE41A9218 for ; Mon, 19 Oct 2015 10:28:27 -0700 (PDT) Authentication-Results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=erosen@juniper.net; Received: from [172.29.33.74] (66.129.241.13) by BY2PR0501MB2008.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.163.197.19) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.300.14; Mon, 19 Oct 2015 17:28:08 +0000 To: Loa Andersson , Martin Vigoureux , RFC Errata System , , , , , References: <20151013210728.27DF9187E28@rfc-editor.org> <561E1CC9.7080600@pi.nu> <561E4773.1090904@alcatel-lucent.com> <5621556E.1000600@juniper.net> <5621D95B.8090209@pi.nu> From: Eric C Rosen Message-ID: <56252824.3050007@juniper.net> Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2015 13:28:04 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <5621D95B.8090209@pi.nu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [66.129.241.13] X-ClientProxiedBy: CO2PR05CA047.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.141.241.175) To BY2PR0501MB2008.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (25.163.197.19) X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: 1; BY2PR0501MB2008; 2:dlj5Lknc6zHeP6TRwBmUkBPy2fCYUt/+s/CYxCmkblg0miq2/TmxbN1WNYOpQI/nz3PlD+vTV56MXGiaxH02Wcm2ej79NrlJJnX4DRDaanWR9BNokNyrYa9A4XrkXfUTf0ZuCJPh9RLww/QhwW4yubc/1pQSXCAlCxiclTV0CVA=; 3:+X0TIiCjUz+Mv2norpIbuaVYgoPAfmMVTHD8DueiMB113BMEQ28m17fvJtjNM6GXSi4hEc4u4Rw4TrSyCE/LA4lHs4mvkAcmBlaVFqrzPHhDhJedt8twaFJppADsxwK9/jgfTITiydv7cvuVQtOP9g==; 25:jwka1mqwEtCKCggh6Hma9OcuzwndFXXhvnIMq40uwvNqrgKj17T5o6NrJye3Z2yfeXQp/RQqsbAhx0Tl0zryvkKUpOskKsyACEUl/Rj7z7BSKo5GPkBNoXBjLQMHHaORdN+vADnBWkbbtVsoX8KXn683J6lbPcm9TB1B5URmiTiJcW7if3xrjlGnHYsTix6STM6scCy6MlA6DjzDm8sQhRrliL34u7w2sLIKMHarbrAU2bhN4v3D00hb39oGFsmgg8fmvaujS8LwCB7MwsQ5/g== X-Microsoft-Antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:BY2PR0501MB2008; X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: 1; BY2PR0501MB2008; 20: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; 4:HHPK8URbNlMWNthLx0toTY3tbwK0DVUJyXhu1hJASJ9AfkdEBhQU/4r1PfObOT0vB5COz94mOIhnMIOEuFe5sta2pO9WBNmF3VaGPLlykR6T4ZMAeS9ILUY44EJw1xZwfp/mI9I+KRDKGg2+YKgxaSLhP31V5YWaoereaQnZMWhHkNoffq1gJDJV9RK2yzFxiS4aanghFEWRLfzlGNS3MH49pNIQeiQm7Wtld0B1neUlqJLtxoEQNHfdXFnIL96bnxFYaljjoQ7zrP2JReMhBo/9bqqzhR1tYfE0tTJM74vYHVMRbr4BGWFPWype3s1bcolzKQucwi9JxU+hy2jc2Z8ltv3nJo4uL9Nzxmy7ErM= X-Microsoft-Antispam-PRVS: X-Exchange-Antispam-Report-Test: UriScan:; X-Exchange-Antispam-Report-CFA-Test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(601004)(2401047)(520078)(5005006)(8121501046)(3002001); SRVR:BY2PR0501MB2008; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:BY2PR0501MB2008; X-Forefront-PRVS: 07349BFAD2 X-Forefront-Antispam-Report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(6009001)(6049001)(189002)(377454003)(479174004)(24454002)(199003)(40100003)(5008740100001)(65806001)(189998001)(5001960100002)(92566002)(77096005)(122386002)(83506001)(59896002)(2950100001)(87976001)(106356001)(117636001)(5007970100001)(105586002)(50466002)(66066001)(64706001)(36756003)(47776003)(5004730100002)(23746002)(99136001)(4001450100002)(76176999)(50986999)(42186005)(101416001)(65956001)(65816999)(87266999)(5001920100001)(2201001)(1941001)(86362001)(64126003)(93886004)(4001350100001)(81156007)(5001770100001)(46102003)(97736004)(54356999)(62816006); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:BY2PR0501MB2008; H:[172.29.33.74]; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; MX:1; A:1; LANG:en; Received-SPF: None (protection.outlook.com: juniper.net does not designate permitted sender hosts) X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: =?Windows-1252?Q?1; BY2PR0501MB2008; 23:3eUf5RzJpLSs5d4Rejk0KLQp8xIzvd38+cV?= =?Windows-1252?Q?36pGkFRFRdsf3Y0y4cUUBndKyBydxh4d4QgtlldpIaWyt9Ti9duQFQMK?= =?Windows-1252?Q?q4WQeh5CYO1zRF/gIjtmltnLqhjCOQ8mcalnQf/fme18WCONorw2cJEb?= =?Windows-1252?Q?mhLxJTms7cB19nZOW8zM+4ZOToL6TFhPmGm/zANLMNvqWeAMayw9XerE?= =?Windows-1252?Q?oI7KW19q04UEa99Gfw9gSeCk46Jsec6ApnGquxom8d8Ea5lmXitGyoOv?= =?Windows-1252?Q?5Ur4iDiwce6DEsFkVjr6UHINB6kaIxPrpd7FwVtQ/LwfsT8+glErBGQz?= =?Windows-1252?Q?owt4qPM6EsdaKT2yrMJqW25QgLqlNQxwgMTSwFIJ103pND7//OqfgcBH?= =?Windows-1252?Q?lboodZgecavKqw4AevFHA140iKMlS9uUvpFNb94xC8VVxgnk7V8vmW/Z?= =?Windows-1252?Q?wjv7pq1kHsvB4LLfiGRZVGMJ8vmcZdMlB0mkGXbuVxuz+IngilGP4yRU?= =?Windows-1252?Q?zsGUh2FfqHOwutIqlFkzmXsWSiv4/5ln6iQfVx0BH6u+8xdFw621D/xy?= =?Windows-1252?Q?h5z5IRyds1vZ35DazKtC2GuuobXYer6eWQJBvDGg71PMMZNZUAP+zSMS?= =?Windows-1252?Q?MYaN4burXvcnxT+OMWjPqOX+PYyDv7heqeSpDjRqRewyPRHBhpmj7982?= =?Windows-1252?Q?0W471CySwy9/7/Gur6jWsTNUoAFzvWoF9xgBwDxts8il5K2vn2jo0VvZ?= =?Windows-1252?Q?3mIN8Sx0f4LjkfgQpm2OYqxBPKSjok/P5el1/Pax+5MDJBXDw/rxS67+?= =?Windows-1252?Q?o9rta7OAa/T0cXhXtSDl+LeCFlwJwdnoTC8zjqu1xlLQwTTkXQz29eXZ?= =?Windows-1252?Q?nx7uIIQmSQK0BM3JqYuoy9AbZYj8lGgToCHPY4gln+0nvKSrj9BRlP/o?= =?Windows-1252?Q?sfYf399UE4c+qI1BQqSX5ylmSEnKWQNmwyfH/6Ve7+fIPrbBofbs3vSg?= =?Windows-1252?Q?bZpoOJtV1N2FenoRIwfL0nYV5ax2wlhEmF1zLbHYLZh87CfAXa5Rrj1R?= =?Windows-1252?Q?SB+DxpCryV6PckBfjgoRpAyr176QazAcjbiSk0GJ5TgzgiHmKFyyorLO?= =?Windows-1252?Q?NGG8ue/t8aJGF5k6o6Qt7P5oNuQr8e8Ri1QyK1TITASZdvXO7utW7yDA?= =?Windows-1252?Q?1vpmwhFYDVwRp6/E2EYZCiiQAm6wQIiLgo2CnZSnRqCosz1+vOJarGrg?= =?Windows-1252?Q?tPGFXeiJdcV55k1AmgJzmQzExoa98WhNXlPktJ8SyqydRqwKmzNgHOGv?= =?Windows-1252?Q?OYH3QvIl/I/m71t+3wlzEbq7Yhefm6NsEZSaT8I9HVYQ2Zao0TjAkJLU?= =?Windows-1252?Q?AaBi3O+JCS9NwvXn9ilwZh1lHFU7g00LSsakAVME/aD5kbr1j3xWixCc?= =?Windows-1252?Q?p4IZQm5hyKs0zFMuhVh/o0HhMJyLdGfWbx+Ku5+KWXEbD1rZaxObNxyr?= =?Windows-1252?Q?yO3zua2k=3D?= X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: 1; BY2PR0501MB2008; 5:9sU5BUJb6VLRLYarne3m/MjkLZUpXkV7tQAdOuT234ELlqTRtC8yz6O58hvIZeotkY6G83rXCuEKH937xsjnRF8BJIi1CvXyMA3SHgxGi2B7793MYWMuA6HRgBYZyCGwLcxibqpdFf5+9zK8SlSNAw==; 24:7XMu3oh30APsXoyxAHtr5riCr7YxJAkg5yob2JYqimOI9/BlwavYH2NORhPE3PeI7fcj+ML58+ZpOkLgcfIm86v2ewsOxWhxbKn8UI2ffos=; 20:lnlpBp3sHNWvgIbQ/IRVW4zZlCNm5jMPiZ05Rl0Yi0oBKenMQ8N2agsywKMaK2JRic+zJanZckyHVSJwSYnyYg== X-OriginatorOrg: juniper.net X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalArrivalTime: 19 Oct 2015 17:28:08.0031 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-FromEntityHeader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BY2PR0501MB2008 Archived-At: Cc: alexander.okonnikov@gmail.com, mpls@ietf.org Subject: Re: [mpls] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC3107 (4497) X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2015 17:28:29 -0000 On 10/17/2015 1:15 AM, Loa Andersson wrote: > [Loa] I take this to mean "Accept - hold for a potential 3107bis", right? Well, my reasoning would be: - No one will ever look at the erratum unless they are working on an update of the draft. - Anyone working on an update of the draft will bring the references up to date anyway. - Therefore, the erratum serves no real purpose, and is really just clutter. So I wouldn't accept it. Of course, I also believe that the erratum process is way overused. > [Alexander] I thought that this is not always correct to recursively > refer to actual document. For example, RFC 4271 obsoletes RFC 1771, > but these two have significant differences, and if some document > depends on RFC 1771, then it doesn't mean that RFC 4271 could be > equally used in place of RFC 1771. If one is doing a new implementation of RFC3107, one should base it on the most recent versions of the BGP specification and of the Multiprotocol BGP specification, rather than on the versions that were current at the time that RFC3107 was published. From nobody Mon Oct 19 10:35:55 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 367361AD0A3; Mon, 19 Oct 2015 10:35:53 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -14.511 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.511 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, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham 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 Zdfi4FmZlWrN; Mon, 19 Oct 2015 10:35:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from alln-iport-5.cisco.com (alln-iport-5.cisco.com [173.37.142.92]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 77B8C1AD0CD; Mon, 19 Oct 2015 10:35:49 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=985; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1445276149; x=1446485749; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-id:content-transfer-encoding: mime-version; bh=WcNvpTHKyL80o9rSX6BAcVXKdoYmjf3AufE3k2rnNCA=; b=fSODZEU0z4mReDYRvd/X0QnUbVMJCAtJRkB40Nj1B52dDRjj0FIf29pF yciXvnVQiLsKpZWLIRKUxrYPm/7YghMk8LTI4dIRmKOnvvRHBzTC9qHpJ qCK8ZKX0h1MSX9XEc9E5JGTMfh55vMx8jjHwmA1mpFJeXsQmt7ARf90ws k=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0D7AQCrKCVW/4sNJK1egzaBQwa+CQENgVqGHgKBOzgUAQEBAQEBAYEKhC4BAQR5EAIBCBgjCzIlAgQBDQWIMMQwAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBGIZ3hH6EKhACAVAHhC4BBI1LiFgBjRyBWIQ8iSSMXwEfAQFCghEdFoE/coRhgQYBAQE X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.17,703,1437436800"; d="scan'208";a="199394811" Received: from alln-core-6.cisco.com ([173.36.13.139]) by alln-iport-5.cisco.com with ESMTP; 19 Oct 2015 17:35:48 +0000 Received: from XCH-ALN-012.cisco.com (xch-aln-012.cisco.com [173.36.7.22]) by alln-core-6.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id t9JHZmAN010095 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Mon, 19 Oct 2015 17:35:48 GMT Received: from xch-rcd-011.cisco.com (173.37.102.21) by XCH-ALN-012.cisco.com (173.36.7.22) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1104.5; Mon, 19 Oct 2015 12:35:30 -0500 Received: from xch-rcd-011.cisco.com ([173.37.102.21]) by XCH-RCD-011.cisco.com ([173.37.102.21]) with mapi id 15.00.1104.000; Mon, 19 Oct 2015 12:35:30 -0500 From: "Sagar Soni (sagsoni)" To: Loa Andersson , "mpls@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: Implementation Poll on draft-ietf-mpls-rfc6374-udp-return-path was:(Re: preparing the shepherd wwrite-up for draft-ietf-mpls-rfc6374-udp-return-path) Thread-Index: AQHRCMdS2QgNIbTlkEePg2CLBsGLoZ5zKGoA Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2015 17:35:30 +0000 Message-ID: References: <561281C8.3020404@pi.nu> <56222407.3090902@pi.nu> In-Reply-To: <56222407.3090902@pi.nu> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.5.5.150821 x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1 x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted x-originating-ip: [161.44.193.153] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-ID: <6287E26390159347A7F447B502146E50@emea.cisco.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: Cc: "draft-ietf-mpls-rfc6374-udp-return-path@tools.ietf.org" , "mpls-chairs@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [mpls] Implementation Poll on draft-ietf-mpls-rfc6374-udp-return-path was:(Re: preparing the shepherd wwrite-up for draft-ietf-mpls-rfc6374-udp-return-path) X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2015 17:35:53 -0000 Hi Loa, Sorry looks like we missed this email previously. Currently we don=B9t have implementation but we do have plan to implement this in near future. We did have prototype of code internally. Thanks, Sagar On 2015-10-17, 6:33 AM, "Loa Andersson" wrote: >Folks, > >I've seen no responses on this, we had an early allocation motivated by >implementations, so it might have been because of a cryptic subject. >Resending with a clearer subject. > >/Loa > >On 2015-10-05 21:57, Loa Andersson wrote: >> Working Group, >> >> We are preparing the Shepherd Write-Up for draft-ietf-mpls-rfc6374- >> udp-return-path. One question we need to answer is if we have know >> implementations and/or deployments of the specification. >> >> This mail starts an implementation poll on draft-ietf-mpls-rfc6374- >> udp-return-path. If you have an implementation or plan to implement >> the draft please respond to this mail. >> >> /Loa >> mpls wg co-chair From nobody Mon Oct 19 10:46:18 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AEA571B29BB for ; Mon, 19 Oct 2015 10:46:16 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.502 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.502 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_05=-0.5, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 HSpck0qi3kXm for ; Mon, 19 Oct 2015 10:46:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from na01-bn1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-bn1bon0716.outbound.protection.outlook.com [IPv6:2a01:111:f400:fc10::1:716]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0FD4B1AD367 for ; Mon, 19 Oct 2015 10:46:15 -0700 (PDT) Authentication-Results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=erosen@juniper.net; Received: from [172.29.33.74] (66.129.241.13) by BLUPR0501MB2003.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.164.22.29) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.300.14; Mon, 19 Oct 2015 17:46:07 +0000 To: Alexander Okonnikov , RFC Errata System , , , , , , References: <20151013220529.01C13188CF0@rfc-editor.org> <56215B13.4080901@juniper.net> <562160A1.2090502@gmail.com> From: Eric C Rosen Message-ID: <56252C5B.2080200@juniper.net> Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2015 13:46:03 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <562160A1.2090502@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [66.129.241.13] X-ClientProxiedBy: DM2PR07CA0015.namprd07.prod.outlook.com (10.141.52.143) To BLUPR0501MB2003.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (25.164.22.29) X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: 1; BLUPR0501MB2003; 2:pRU9jzwfxtOgFPzJKwKmGcVb5IFOfKkSdrFCCOkunTcI2iLZnvmVpFaPx9dhzs+VVKN7GWHz1ILItj716MgD/9ctl18G501BBj2kKbcx9dl3+PwXJikRyLS0qvKCQNUybDb/Vc3cVf9N4vGZDlEk+tf3Y5OH/dKaVYt3ngvSa4w=; 3:uRKy1cZgAeyMGhKV1T+Ac29trte8x8slw7gytgK/CcAG/RhvSfErQzgnI/yA923EqgkBy7Sj3OoYaV9JcJL355DS9sJB/US/ORiTtvOsTgAaRT/6wHg07IqBmvnLGw5r0rXk3GjSyIZTLZKFjXlO3g==; 25:hzptun4idTXjbeNUEzA/XzodO00ZftWsw3U5q1pg4S4dyK9Ip4tYaVXoq/LCvHQgKZVZBaB2ZJgGgdQKhpBIU3zSvf+gM5qC/fM5sutf6LBQJ4Niwy3q9+QVXG5eRgJT+MQ2VnpY2uohoNQu51msIClwCCeZsAyad4cp4LaPsBC2qWNrFPEqza1+wPVkrdYaM8MeEKjSIkGWmnc9Dn61NeQHdKcfpcmaxbaYdND7SAy34WSeEuDE8yraavhF39ytuMk5U3dAljsroqjjFjrFXg== X-Microsoft-Antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:BLUPR0501MB2003; X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: 1; BLUPR0501MB2003; 20: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; 4:85KnYs1HdD8zecK6+v5d/UMOPvBl+mcVD6QT7tqoHehPUFJNITZ+PB2k3omkEhDiEVoBiP8tc6gIDxUoj1wDJDRkwwix7PZ0B4MHiff/ot/sMNB+qS5BrX0/lq/MJyqjdR+0zPaz8EZBS0AKHLY568SU1k7NLLekf2/xWZC70Y7rub30G5FSMDuZj80DwzH0px26zZdeeNrpLXLeyRHtHCKDQlSnzg4m8DNU+7RqALeGbYrFidciHSH74YFuJs33QK9pL44zl30SY2VbrYKzA00tcQrMvH7yYmnJumco9dNA1AxlV8uRea6JUCrMW5NdZFEU/fxD/HL4kWBKeMaORVHBMsmv37M6Yaz2Z7fe+xg= X-Microsoft-Antispam-PRVS: X-Exchange-Antispam-Report-Test: UriScan:; X-Exchange-Antispam-Report-CFA-Test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(601004)(2401047)(5005006)(520078)(8121501046)(3002001); SRVR:BLUPR0501MB2003; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:BLUPR0501MB2003; X-Forefront-PRVS: 07349BFAD2 X-Forefront-Antispam-Report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(6009001)(6049001)(52034003)(377454003)(479174004)(199003)(24454002)(189002)(47776003)(87266999)(5001960100002)(86362001)(77096005)(66066001)(42186005)(50466002)(46102003)(64706001)(64126003)(92566002)(23746002)(65806001)(59896002)(4001450100002)(40100003)(5007970100001)(65816999)(76176999)(2201001)(36756003)(65956001)(50986999)(54356999)(97736004)(5008740100001)(5004730100002)(105586002)(87976001)(4001350100001)(189998001)(83506001)(101416001)(5001770100001)(106356001)(99136001)(1941001)(122386002)(33656002)(81156007)(2950100001)(80316001); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:BLUPR0501MB2003; H:[172.29.33.74]; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; A:1; MX:1; LANG:en; Received-SPF: None (protection.outlook.com: juniper.net does not designate permitted sender hosts) X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: =?Windows-1252?Q?1; BLUPR0501MB2003; 23:E2fZvR8senYvEOpAiFCcB47BUbUkwMc5f8u?= =?Windows-1252?Q?yK7M/6+vGhIB1BNzNh5U40wDWN2jaY+R8unGUZfpU6oHvPSRqoWzrB1b?= =?Windows-1252?Q?XaZ6GvCsg2J96Z4cpxfD7iB6h2B2S1KqF4sTg29SXVAtKRzJDZi+U/FS?= =?Windows-1252?Q?+j0GMnaqal3Bq+C8agBq+ykO9VGszxBAi/prJsKrdE7u/MX2JE6vPmet?= =?Windows-1252?Q?WxctwNfGm8sDCI5Nex7UlBL9n52t1WXsTkwlp+gspxeISUOSEyLKTRAH?= =?Windows-1252?Q?hFq1SWJTa735TS6Oy5nfhwwIVZm+Z76CX6G35cXgJ5aKZg5phlR9WsIp?= =?Windows-1252?Q?U5i2ybwZ4NBJ/ir1NY0LCfj23MurpVHO1p6nAXj4+g6uLopkjYX3Yi4M?= =?Windows-1252?Q?jn43PqKXgo3PCoJ6kNqT8R8mUyW3TyZFL9M96jOC0lSth93HgBzXAsC3?= =?Windows-1252?Q?Hj5U0L4MYbFL6KoEx+WQMfkauqYw67DobiwZgW98YHdlx/Hg9xYHrHap?= =?Windows-1252?Q?RghHb0XAkfz/xtGmjeXtKCi/OanNF2USBMY0OH+pNbvle8lbIWxuuRB6?= =?Windows-1252?Q?osfTdWsjZHRJ6bWu9FewfdNt1btlGFK+78e58ygJ0iiD87dwxhqeboV2?= =?Windows-1252?Q?+Hgz2XWgtJmFZgZfmtkPolZtcmvb1rLjIupkV709UMFf3W1ZDaI+Zc3Q?= =?Windows-1252?Q?0J5Pd1rPsBEW8pLJUPgA0bzRIy+DN2DI8f1+AM7OCycgh3nwsGbwmxEr?= =?Windows-1252?Q?Q2gABl1nhvyupGmT+JEQtv7eR9zSRiBVlCV/UG4LNWzO5Hhl6iFL6lQ+?= =?Windows-1252?Q?k6KiAMQoHDH865ma0wuA4GUToHG8VOqDfXwgqH1s+1M4ksIOi2jR2i7I?= =?Windows-1252?Q?3Exd1VA8f60e3Zpi63DQ9WIL73imZA4qHpn9e26a5IzPLeY6pzicX8Y4?= =?Windows-1252?Q?61l8E7ivylR3otBj8fHmLAxvxIs5wTBNrZiqW6J95p6n1PPyDetdzLE7?= =?Windows-1252?Q?9zfvEOOaPRiK77R3J2QqdoCBrq3FHY+zrPhaiZkkOgOda/wNlQBdtTDw?= =?Windows-1252?Q?dathjN6z0bmqe8FcMMCCTLR9awj+Zz90i5qJxxTAsaPgAuwfoC3ZkzFk?= =?Windows-1252?Q?rROt4hJVIC3LbmMP2P8TPsoB+FIKeNeiIRPnQnyfwwcJOujtcVbrNb2e?= =?Windows-1252?Q?QET4CyeoFyTGcdNv2VaT8RStoZTJNIYUT7kXphH4+I2xnfrIAh9o8FpJ?= =?Windows-1252?Q?QCIT5dUJcoZiVBXey1JZPAOewJwwKXfcmZtn6vBo150A9Xkt9Mw8pEmk?= =?Windows-1252?Q?WFPHfTrNigZzV5zBoj/DsEzaGp4fEVFqnPhleHWOMdRqLhyCCrJ0mHif?= =?Windows-1252?Q?StRbZRA7D0ff9+tCQ9oETvEIOllz9SxXwNIZUZlved+r9PGK7iaOjMw2?= =?Windows-1252?Q?lnyM3KUDdAD5wvwjazMgg?= X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: 1; BLUPR0501MB2003; 5:VDLI9BZlB/kRn2jIF9twRYrm+a4VBi0+jjXfwdJlenLt1B8uZYxwQYtqf6p5bZ2D4mk8ERsUOz75nISDqT/imTSTC2Jf9y2SjHQjrV4AglS5NlLPeKfED39uwsEanbom/bCA2O+yAeV0XCwobx598A==; 24:gMI7DKBg7G3q2WkzMao2V2EbEp/h8TVMsxMP1uVuti6R5SY2c6GzDi8csZT5rhRpYLwoWjNAUmmzuSrNdWU0yzeWvNlEGat7/hmnEkAYuWg=; 20:hVy8MdH4vzeEZqzgQHAHc7LLxjIy5rJmNOuzAaR7jb8NwqVSYmlBB7IIElgeDVNxPl9zHf2ReOwA5VQ/p2sj/w== X-OriginatorOrg: juniper.net X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalArrivalTime: 19 Oct 2015 17:46:07.4247 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-FromEntityHeader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BLUPR0501MB2003 Archived-At: Cc: mpls@ietf.org Subject: Re: [mpls] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC3107 (4499) X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2015 17:46:16 -0000 On 10/16/2015 4:40 PM, Alexander Okonnikov wrote: > Good. I know that at least three major vendors interwork correctly. One > of them use 0x800000, and two others - 0x000000. No problems with > interoperability were noticed. Probably no one pays much attention to the label value in the Withdraw, because no one implements the capability to advertise multiple routes with the same prefix but different labels. > By the way, it is not clear for me why don't encode label > from previously advertised route when this one is being withdrawn. If you only advertise one label per prefix, there's no real need to specify that label in the withdraw. I think one of the implementers said that it would be easier if you didn't have to specify the label. But I'm pretty sure that there's no one who still remembers what the reasoning actually was at the time ;-) From nobody Mon Oct 19 10:52:56 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E7BA1A9069 for ; Mon, 19 Oct 2015 10:52:54 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.902 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.902 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 uVO15QfJFULn for ; Mon, 19 Oct 2015 10:52:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from na01-by2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-by2on0107.outbound.protection.outlook.com [207.46.100.107]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E1BFB1A6FBF for ; Mon, 19 Oct 2015 10:52:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from DM2PR05MB573.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.141.159.16) by CY1PR0501MB2010.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.164.2.28) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.300.14; Mon, 19 Oct 2015 17:52:49 +0000 Received: from DM2PR05MB573.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([10.141.159.16]) by DM2PR05MB573.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([10.141.159.16]) with mapi id 15.01.0300.010; Mon, 19 Oct 2015 17:52:49 +0000 From: Ross Callon To: Loa Andersson , Eric Rosen , "Martin Vigoureux" , RFC Errata System , "akatlas@gmail.com" , "db3546@att.com" , "aretana@cisco.com" , "swallow@cisco.com" Thread-Topic: [mpls] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC3107 (4497) Thread-Index: AQHRBfsys01n9sNOwUGc8tunRW5RUZ5qtUqAgAAy3ICAA6QyAIAAnUSAgAPz9PA= Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2015 17:52:49 +0000 Message-ID: References: <20151013210728.27DF9187E28@rfc-editor.org> <561E1CC9.7080600@pi.nu> <561E4773.1090904@alcatel-lucent.com> <5621556E.1000600@juniper.net> <5621D95B.8090209@pi.nu> In-Reply-To: <5621D95B.8090209@pi.nu> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=rcallon@juniper.net; x-originating-ip: [66.129.241.13] x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; CY1PR0501MB2010; 5:M4cMgwk9lndtgQVDQsLY4Z63Upfb3aJmIwSBkvwz2hyir6vbDMVOlZoeX0qAVDfyggW+N9VP6e6jjtkuXY8FyCjLDTxT1GkGB05LQYyCwhKPUXI9ITM7gE/H9cKNt6qsKSPpZy4xQAU9LWeuLiAktA==; 24:gtY/hMDQNh8zbQ3AoyajQourkTOj2NBb8nPgVWby9/UQS2m4fjAjLQYgu2IxIATjgqj13mfSrwRTgT0xoeo5+PuV0ttw5uvF/xQYQVd0aao=; 20:wac8qDLlB76zUOt98dp3NgJJp7Dt9FXI02z48RLehioMfgbsHECAaeqFP4CwghVqxkRiGaZhK2G2DbFcBoO9Eg== x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:CY1PR0501MB2010; x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:(97927398514766)(95692535739014)(202767206196957); x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(601004)(2401047)(8121501046)(5005006)(520078)(3002001); SRVR:CY1PR0501MB2010; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:CY1PR0501MB2010; x-forefront-prvs: 07349BFAD2 x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(6009001)(377454003)(51444003)(189002)(377424004)(199003)(13464003)(479174004)(24454002)(77096005)(2201001)(5002640100001)(5008740100001)(33656002)(1941001)(11100500001)(86362001)(19580395003)(106356001)(76176999)(81156007)(106116001)(99286002)(2501003)(105586002)(10400500002)(50986999)(97736004)(5007970100001)(101416001)(19580405001)(87936001)(54356999)(92566002)(46102003)(93886004)(4001150100001)(5001770100001)(102836002)(189998001)(64706001)(2950100001)(5003600100002)(74316001)(66066001)(76576001)(40100003)(122556002)(2900100001)(5004730100002)(5001960100002); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:CY1PR0501MB2010; H:DM2PR05MB573.namprd05.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; MX:1; A:1; LANG:en; received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: juniper.net does not designate permitted sender hosts) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: juniper.net X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 19 Oct 2015 17:52:49.6697 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: bea78b3c-4cdb-4130-854a-1d193232e5f4 X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: CY1PR0501MB2010 Archived-At: Cc: "alexander.okonnikov@gmail.com" , "mpls@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [mpls] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC3107 (4497) X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2015 17:52:54 -0000 Referring to the errata updating the reference: I think that at the time th= at RFC 3107 was published the reference to 2283 was wrong both because 2283= had already been updated, and because there is no actual reference to 2283= in the references section. The errata is therefore correct. The problem th= at I have with "hold for document update" is that by now, and therefore by = the time (if any) that we update 3107, the errata will also be out of date.= =20 My inclination is to think that at the time that 3107 was published the err= ata was correct, and thus we should accept it.=20 Ross -----Original Message----- From: Loa Andersson [mailto:loa@pi.nu]=20 Sent: Saturday, October 17, 2015 1:15 AM To: Eric Rosen; Martin Vigoureux; RFC Errata System; akatlas@gmail.com; db3= 546@att.com; aretana@cisco.com; swallow@cisco.com; Ross Callon Cc: alexander.okonnikov@gmail.com; mpls@ietf.org Subject: Re: [mpls] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC3107 (4497) Eric, On 2015-10-17 03:52, Eric C Rosen wrote: > On 10/14/2015 8:15 AM, Martin Vigoureux wrote: >> I think we should stick to changing [RFC 2283] into [BGP-MP]. Otherwise >> it could open the door to creating erratas for any reference that would >> have been updated/obsoleted. > > Of course, one could also ask whether it is worthwhile to accept an > erratum that changes one obsolete reference to another. Whether one > looks in the RFC index for RFC2283 or for RFC2858, one will eventually > follow the change of tags to RFC4760. I take this to mean "Accept - hold for a potential 3107bis", right? /Loa > From nobody Mon Oct 19 19:44:19 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 016551AD372; Mon, 19 Oct 2015 19:44:18 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.103 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.103 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_EQ_JP=1.244, HOST_EQ_JP=1.265, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=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 2hCU1fYCOEUb; Mon, 19 Oct 2015 19:44:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from tama500.ecl.ntt.co.jp (tama500.ecl.ntt.co.jp [129.60.39.148]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 779BD1AD36E; Mon, 19 Oct 2015 19:44:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from vc1.ecl.ntt.co.jp (vc1.ecl.ntt.co.jp [129.60.86.153]) by tama500.ecl.ntt.co.jp (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id t9K2iF7M028364; Tue, 20 Oct 2015 11:44:15 +0900 Received: from vc1.ecl.ntt.co.jp (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by vc1.ecl.ntt.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id C1DFF5F612; Tue, 20 Oct 2015 11:44:15 +0900 (JST) Received: from imail3.m.ecl.ntt.co.jp (imail3.m.ecl.ntt.co.jp [129.60.5.248]) by vc1.ecl.ntt.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id B3F995F58A; Tue, 20 Oct 2015 11:44:15 +0900 (JST) Received: from [129.60.85.24] ([129.60.85.24]) by imail3.m.ecl.ntt.co.jp (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id t9K2i4b3029632; Tue, 20 Oct 2015 11:44:15 +0900 Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2015 11:44:03 +0900 From: Kaoru Arai In-Reply-To: <561FD980.6090509@pi.nu> References: <561FD980.6090509@pi.nu> Message-Id: <20151020114403.BC94.6943A033@lab.ntt.co.jp> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Becky! ver. 2.68 [ja] To: Ross Callon X-TM-AS-MML: disable Archived-At: Cc: "mpls@ietf.org" , Loa Andersson , "mpls-chairs@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [mpls] repeat IPR poll on draft-ietf-mpls-tp-temporal-hitless-psm X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2015 02:44:18 -0000 Dear Ross, I respond IPR poll. I do not have any IPR related this document. Best regards, Kaoru Arai > Ross, > > I'm not aware of any IPR that relates to this document. > > /Loa > > On 2015-10-16 00:16, Ross Callon wrote: > > Oops, I hit "send" too quickly. The correct IPR poll should read: > > > > ----- > > > > Working Group, > > > > The authors have told the WG chairs that draft-ietf-mpls-tp-temporal-hitless-psm > > is ready for WG last call. A while back we did an IPR poll on this document. > > However, two new authors (Loa Andersson and Kaoru Arai) have been added since > > The original IPR poll. > > > > We are therefore repeating the IPR poll to allow Loa and Kaoru to respond. As always, > > any IETF participant who is aware of IPR that applies to this document should also > > respond. > > > > Are you aware of any IPR that applies to draft-ietf-mpls-tp-temporal-hitless-psm? > > > > If so, has this IPR been disclosed in compliance with IETF IPR rules (see > > RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669 and 5378 for more details)? (we will note however that there > > are currently no IPR disclosures that apply to this document). > > > > If you are listed as a document author or contributor and you did not > > respond to the previous poll then please respond to this email regardless > > of whether or not you are aware of any relevant IPR. *The response needs > > to be sent to the MPLS wg mailing list.* > > > > If you are on the MPLS WG email list but are not listed as an author or > > contributor, then please explicitly respond only if you are aware of any > > IPR that has not yet been disclosed in conformance with IETF rules. > > > > Ross > > (as mpls wg co-chair) > > > > _______________________________________________ > > mpls mailing list > > mpls@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > > ------------------------------ Kaoru Arai NTT (Nippon Telegraph and Telephone) Network Service Systems Laboratories Phone: +81 422 59 3825 FAX: +81 422 60 6033 E-mail: arai.kaoru@lab.ntt.co.jp 9-11, Midori-Cho 3-Chome Musashino-Shi, Tokyo, 180-8585 Japan From nobody Tue Oct 20 08:16:27 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D853D1B3453; Tue, 20 Oct 2015 08:16:26 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.91 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham 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 ScQvRh35sPmX; Tue, 20 Oct 2015 08:16:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pipi.pi.nu (pipi.pi.nu [83.168.239.141]) (using TLSv1.1 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 975B21B3461; Tue, 20 Oct 2015 08:07:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.10] (unknown [49.149.219.126]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: loa@pi.nu) by pipi.pi.nu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E5D6018013DA; Tue, 20 Oct 2015 17:07:34 +0200 (CEST) From: Loa Andersson To: "mpls@ietf.org" , "mpls-chairs@ietf.org" , "BRUNGARD, DEBORAH A" Message-ID: <562658A5.7050907@pi.nu> Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2015 23:07:17 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: Subject: [mpls] IPR discussions in calls for adoption and WGLCs X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2015 15:16:27 -0000 Working Group, For future MPLS WG IPR polls, when we have and IPR disclosure, we will add the following text: "The document shepherd and working group chairs are frequently asked about the working group discussions related to any IPR disclosures. We like to remind the working group that discussion on the content and validity of an IPR disclosure should not take place on the MPLS wg list or any IETF mailing lists. However we are looking for simple statements whether you think the working group should continue progress the document, regardless of an existing IPR disclosure. Please include this information in your 'support/do not support' when responding to working group adoption calls and last calls." Loa for the MPLS wg co-chairs -- Loa Andersson email: loa@mail01.huawei.com Senior MPLS Expert loa@pi.nu Huawei Technologies (consultant) phone: +46 739 81 21 64 From nobody Wed Oct 21 21:59:18 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0C2C91B2A3E for ; Wed, 21 Oct 2015 21:59:17 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.91 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham 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 AlH9YpPM699B for ; Wed, 21 Oct 2015 21:59:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pipi.pi.nu (pipi.pi.nu [83.168.239.141]) (using TLSv1.1 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 32D5F1B2A25 for ; Wed, 21 Oct 2015 21:59:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.10] (unknown [49.149.219.126]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: loa@pi.nu) by pipi.pi.nu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2BDC118013D1; Thu, 22 Oct 2015 06:59:08 +0200 (CEST) To: Ross Callon , Eric Rosen , Martin Vigoureux , RFC Errata System , "akatlas@gmail.com" , "db3546@att.com" , "aretana@cisco.com" , "swallow@cisco.com" References: <20151013210728.27DF9187E28@rfc-editor.org> <561E1CC9.7080600@pi.nu> <561E4773.1090904@alcatel-lucent.com> <5621556E.1000600@juniper.net> <5621D95B.8090209@pi.nu> From: Loa Andersson Message-ID: <56286D0A.8090506@pi.nu> Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2015 12:58:50 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: Cc: "alexander.okonnikov@gmail.com" , "mpls@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [mpls] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC3107 (4497) X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2015 04:59:17 -0000 Ross, To continue hair splitting. 1. Yes the errata is right 2. We need to accept the errata. 3. The new text should be: "Label distribution can be piggybacked in the BGP Update message by using the BGP-4 Multiprotocol Extensions attribute defined in RFC 2858 [BGP-MP]." That makes the document internally consistent, though all references are obsoleted. To take care of this we need a note: "Accept - hold for a potential 3107bis, the reference pointed to in this errata should be update to reflect the most recent versions of the BGP specification and of the Multiprotocol BGP specification." Deborah, Is this actionable? /Loa On 2015-10-20 01:52, Ross Callon wrote: > Referring to the errata updating the reference: I think that at the time that RFC 3107 was published the reference to 2283 was wrong both because 2283 had already been updated, and because there is no actual reference to 2283 in the references section. The errata is therefore correct. The problem that I have with "hold for document update" is that by now, and therefore by the time (if any) that we update 3107, the errata will also be out of date. > > My inclination is to think that at the time that 3107 was published the errata was correct, and thus we should accept it. > > Ross > > -----Original Message----- > From: Loa Andersson [mailto:loa@pi.nu] > Sent: Saturday, October 17, 2015 1:15 AM > To: Eric Rosen; Martin Vigoureux; RFC Errata System; akatlas@gmail.com; db3546@att.com; aretana@cisco.com; swallow@cisco.com; Ross Callon > Cc: alexander.okonnikov@gmail.com; mpls@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [mpls] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC3107 (4497) > > Eric, > > On 2015-10-17 03:52, Eric C Rosen wrote: >> On 10/14/2015 8:15 AM, Martin Vigoureux wrote: >>> I think we should stick to changing [RFC 2283] into [BGP-MP]. Otherwise >>> it could open the door to creating erratas for any reference that would >>> have been updated/obsoleted. >> >> Of course, one could also ask whether it is worthwhile to accept an >> erratum that changes one obsolete reference to another. Whether one >> looks in the RFC index for RFC2283 or for RFC2858, one will eventually >> follow the change of tags to RFC4760. > > I take this to mean "Accept - hold for a potential 3107bis", right? > > /Loa >> From nobody Wed Oct 21 23:52:04 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 41A251B37E3 for ; Wed, 21 Oct 2015 23:52:03 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.202 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.202 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 y3IXFgOZvnoy for ; Wed, 21 Oct 2015 23:52:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail1.bemta3.messagelabs.com (mail1.bemta3.messagelabs.com [195.245.230.163]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D11C61B37F2 for ; Wed, 21 Oct 2015 23:51:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [195.245.230.131] by server-3.bemta-3.messagelabs.com id 7A/21-01753-C8788265; Thu, 22 Oct 2015 06:51:56 +0000 X-Env-Sender: l.wood@surrey.ac.uk X-Msg-Ref: server-2.tower-78.messagelabs.com!1445496716!500655!1 X-Originating-IP: [131.227.200.39] X-StarScan-Received: X-StarScan-Version: 7.19.2; banners=-,-,- X-VirusChecked: Checked Received: (qmail 17190 invoked from network); 22 Oct 2015 06:51:56 -0000 Received: from exht012p.surrey.ac.uk (HELO EXHT012P.surrey.ac.uk) (131.227.200.39) by server-2.tower-78.messagelabs.com with AES128-SHA encrypted SMTP; 22 Oct 2015 06:51:56 -0000 Received: from EXHY022V.surrey.ac.uk (131.227.201.104) by EXHT012P.surrey.ac.uk (131.227.200.39) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.3.348.2; Thu, 22 Oct 2015 07:51:55 +0100 Received: from emea01-db3-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (131.227.201.241) by EXHY022v.surrey.ac.uk (131.227.201.104) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.224.2; Thu, 22 Oct 2015 07:51:55 +0100 Received: from DB4PR06MB457.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com (10.141.238.15) by DB4PR06MB460.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com (10.141.238.24) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.300.14; Thu, 22 Oct 2015 06:51:55 +0000 Received: from DB4PR06MB457.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com ([10.141.238.15]) by DB4PR06MB457.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com ([10.141.238.15]) with mapi id 15.01.0300.010; Thu, 22 Oct 2015 06:51:54 +0000 From: To: , , , , , , , , Thread-Topic: [mpls] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC3107 (4497) Thread-Index: AQHRBfs7YtY+I0XFTUy0w57w2zJFTp5qtUqAgAAy3ICAA6QyAIAAnUSAgAP4XYCAA96/AIAAHwxi Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2015 06:51:54 +0000 Message-ID: References: <20151013210728.27DF9187E28@rfc-editor.org> <561E1CC9.7080600@pi.nu> <561E4773.1090904@alcatel-lucent.com> <5621556E.1000600@juniper.net> <5621D95B.8090209@pi.nu> , <56286D0A.8090506@pi.nu> In-Reply-To: <56286D0A.8090506@pi.nu> Accept-Language: en-AU, en-US Content-Language: en-AU X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [132.245.226.69] x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; DB4PR06MB460; 5:82+8E0b6t2C/cQHuonUbk5y4RogFcSKpde4gti6cfH0iM8lh8mw320GJ72JEFE1hiPh0Yv3YCVc43/Q0f3OOey8pHPF/+MV6k45sMgMBpqJDlvxt6qoCLoZDXD/EoobIzSbtkMKBRG23UETvcdmTGg==; 24:CgEF/mqh/YHp8gCVam2CB1wD/KDcp9dMsF0JNtaX5q8gkBBGYNLwttbVf9+6IKloi8LUTHv0u4552aDpVh+r48AglEZqKEGSmAWmwXHg70g=; 20:mIFP7JmrRHc6Z2TN5EqpFIo2oRZC+A2up++YWa7iT2nBwEJBI+JKlgcpZQS/70LLhD5skCCfXNLoy0JQAGSSVQ== x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:DB4PR06MB460; x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:(97927398514766)(95692535739014); x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(601004)(2401047)(5005006)(520078)(8121501046)(3002001)(102215026); SRVR:DB4PR06MB460; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:DB4PR06MB460; x-forefront-prvs: 0737B96801 x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(6009001)(13464003)(189002)(24454002)(51444003)(43544003)(199003)(377454003)(479174004)(377424004)(64706001)(66066001)(74482002)(46102003)(5001770100001)(122556002)(5003600100002)(15198665003)(76576001)(40100003)(2501003)(5004730100002)(5007970100001)(15975445007)(5002640100001)(5008740100001)(33656002)(19580395003)(19580405001)(102836002)(97736004)(1941001)(81156007)(4001150100001)(10400500002)(87936001)(101416001)(2900100001)(77096005)(1720100001)(2950100001)(54356999)(106116001)(105586002)(74316001)(2201001)(5001960100002)(106356001)(86362001)(93886004)(50986999)(92566002)(76176999)(189998001)(15395725005)(7059030); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:DB4PR06MB460; H:DB4PR06MB457.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; MX:1; A:1; LANG:en; received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: surrey.ac.uk does not designate permitted sender hosts) spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:23 spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 22 Oct 2015 06:51:54.7811 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 6b902693-1074-40aa-9e21-d89446a2ebb5 X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: DB4PR06MB460 X-OrganizationHeadersPreserved: DB4PR06MB460.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com X-CrossPremisesHeadersFiltered: EXHY022v.surrey.ac.uk Archived-At: Cc: alexander.okonnikov@gmail.com, mpls@ietf.org Subject: Re: [mpls] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC3107 (4497) X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2015 06:52:03 -0000 To continue hair splitting, the singular of 'errata' is 'erratum'. Just lik= e 'data' and 'datum'. 'errata is' makes no sense. Did you mean that all errata are right? Or is I= ETF convention at odds with English? thanks Lloyd Wood http://about.me/lloydwood ________________________________________ From: mpls on behalf of Loa Andersson Sent: Thursday, 22 October 2015 3:58 PM To: Ross Callon; Eric Rosen; Martin Vigoureux; RFC Errata System; akatlas@g= mail.com; db3546@att.com; aretana@cisco.com; swallow@cisco.com Cc: alexander.okonnikov@gmail.com; mpls@ietf.org Subject: Re: [mpls] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC3107 (4497) Ross, To continue hair splitting. 1. Yes the errata is right 2. We need to accept the errata. 3. The new text should be: "Label distribution can be piggybacked in the BGP Update message by using the BGP-4 Multiprotocol Extensions attribute defined in RFC 2858 [BGP-MP]." That makes the document internally consistent, though all references are obsoleted. To take care of this we need a note: "Accept - hold for a potential 3107bis, the reference pointed to in this errata should be update to reflect the most recent versions of the BGP specification and of the Multiprotocol BGP specification." Deborah, Is this actionable? /Loa On 2015-10-20 01:52, Ross Callon wrote: > Referring to the errata updating the reference: I think that at the time = that RFC 3107 was published the reference to 2283 was wrong both because 22= 83 had already been updated, and because there is no actual reference to 22= 83 in the references section. The errata is therefore correct. The problem = that I have with "hold for document update" is that by now, and therefore b= y the time (if any) that we update 3107, the errata will also be out of dat= e. > > My inclination is to think that at the time that 3107 was published the e= rrata was correct, and thus we should accept it. > > Ross > > -----Original Message----- > From: Loa Andersson [mailto:loa@pi.nu] > Sent: Saturday, October 17, 2015 1:15 AM > To: Eric Rosen; Martin Vigoureux; RFC Errata System; akatlas@gmail.com; d= b3546@att.com; aretana@cisco.com; swallow@cisco.com; Ross Callon > Cc: alexander.okonnikov@gmail.com; mpls@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [mpls] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC3107 (4497) > > Eric, > > On 2015-10-17 03:52, Eric C Rosen wrote: >> On 10/14/2015 8:15 AM, Martin Vigoureux wrote: >>> I think we should stick to changing [RFC 2283] into [BGP-MP]. Otherwise >>> it could open the door to creating erratas for any reference that would >>> have been updated/obsoleted. >> >> Of course, one could also ask whether it is worthwhile to accept an >> erratum that changes one obsolete reference to another. Whether one >> looks in the RFC index for RFC2283 or for RFC2858, one will eventually >> follow the change of tags to RFC4760. > > I take this to mean "Accept - hold for a potential 3107bis", right? > > /Loa >> _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From nobody Thu Oct 22 01:01:29 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 99DE81B2EC1 for ; Thu, 22 Oct 2015 01:01:28 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.91 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham 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 dLB8RLybGMq7 for ; Thu, 22 Oct 2015 01:01:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pipi.pi.nu (pipi.pi.nu [83.168.239.141]) (using TLSv1.1 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B453B1B2EC3 for ; Thu, 22 Oct 2015 01:01:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.10] (unknown [49.149.219.126]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: loa@pi.nu) by pipi.pi.nu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 381DD18013D1; Thu, 22 Oct 2015 10:01:18 +0200 (CEST) To: l.wood@surrey.ac.uk, rcallon@juniper.net, erosen@juniper.net, martin.vigoureux@alcatel-lucent.com, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org, akatlas@gmail.com, db3546@att.com, aretana@cisco.com, swallow@cisco.com References: <20151013210728.27DF9187E28@rfc-editor.org> <561E1CC9.7080600@pi.nu> <561E4773.1090904@alcatel-lucent.com> <5621556E.1000600@juniper.net> <5621D95B.8090209@pi.nu> <56286D0A.8090506@pi.nu> From: Loa Andersson Message-ID: <562897BB.4050102@pi.nu> Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2015 16:00:59 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: Cc: alexander.okonnikov@gmail.com, mpls@ietf.org Subject: Re: [mpls] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC3107 (4497) X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2015 08:01:28 -0000 Lloyd, I thinks so, I've tried criteria and criterium a couple of time, and consistently having reviews suggesting to change criteria to criterias alternatively criterium to criteriums. However errata 4497 is just one errata, and that is what we are talking about, if you sort out the grammar and reach IETF consensus please let me know. /Loa On 2015-10-22 14:51, l.wood@surrey.ac.uk wrote: > To continue hair splitting, the singular of 'errata' is 'erratum'. Just like 'data' and 'datum'. > > 'errata is' makes no sense. Did you mean that all errata are right? Or is IETF convention at odds with English? > > thanks > > Lloyd Wood > http://about.me/lloydwood > ________________________________________ > From: mpls on behalf of Loa Andersson > Sent: Thursday, 22 October 2015 3:58 PM > To: Ross Callon; Eric Rosen; Martin Vigoureux; RFC Errata System; akatlas@gmail.com; db3546@att.com; aretana@cisco.com; swallow@cisco.com > Cc: alexander.okonnikov@gmail.com; mpls@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [mpls] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC3107 (4497) > > Ross, > > To continue hair splitting. > > 1. Yes the errata is right > > 2. We need to accept the errata. > > 3. The new text should be: > "Label distribution can be piggybacked in the BGP Update message by > using the BGP-4 Multiprotocol Extensions attribute defined in > RFC 2858 [BGP-MP]." > > That makes the document internally consistent, though all references > are obsoleted. To take care of this we need a note: > "Accept - hold for a potential 3107bis, the reference pointed to in > this errata should be update to reflect the most recent versions of > the BGP specification and of the Multiprotocol BGP specification." > > Deborah, > > Is this actionable? > > /Loa > > > On 2015-10-20 01:52, Ross Callon wrote: >> Referring to the errata updating the reference: I think that at the time that RFC 3107 was published the reference to 2283 was wrong both because 2283 had already been updated, and because there is no actual reference to 2283 in the references section. The errata is therefore correct. The problem that I have with "hold for document update" is that by now, and therefore by the time (if any) that we update 3107, the errata will also be out of date. >> >> My inclination is to think that at the time that 3107 was published the errata was correct, and thus we should accept it. >> >> Ross >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Loa Andersson [mailto:loa@pi.nu] >> Sent: Saturday, October 17, 2015 1:15 AM >> To: Eric Rosen; Martin Vigoureux; RFC Errata System; akatlas@gmail.com; db3546@att.com; aretana@cisco.com; swallow@cisco.com; Ross Callon >> Cc: alexander.okonnikov@gmail.com; mpls@ietf.org >> Subject: Re: [mpls] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC3107 (4497) >> >> Eric, >> >> On 2015-10-17 03:52, Eric C Rosen wrote: >>> On 10/14/2015 8:15 AM, Martin Vigoureux wrote: >>>> I think we should stick to changing [RFC 2283] into [BGP-MP]. Otherwise >>>> it could open the door to creating erratas for any reference that would >>>> have been updated/obsoleted. >>> >>> Of course, one could also ask whether it is worthwhile to accept an >>> erratum that changes one obsolete reference to another. Whether one >>> looks in the RFC index for RFC2283 or for RFC2858, one will eventually >>> follow the change of tags to RFC4760. >> >> I take this to mean "Accept - hold for a potential 3107bis", right? >> >> /Loa >>> > > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > From nobody Thu Oct 22 05:21:44 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4EF851B3671 for ; Thu, 22 Oct 2015 05:21:40 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.202 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.202 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 iWIey2huIld6 for ; Thu, 22 Oct 2015 05:21:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail1.bemta14.messagelabs.com (mail1.bemta14.messagelabs.com [193.109.254.105]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B07FD1B366D for ; Thu, 22 Oct 2015 05:21:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [193.109.255.147] by server-1.bemta-14.messagelabs.com id 77/11-28791-DC4D8265; Thu, 22 Oct 2015 12:21:33 +0000 X-Env-Sender: l.wood@surrey.ac.uk X-Msg-Ref: server-15.tower-72.messagelabs.com!1445516492!1917520!1 X-Originating-IP: [131.227.200.35] X-StarScan-Received: X-StarScan-Version: 7.19.2; banners=-,-,- X-VirusChecked: Checked Received: (qmail 3105 invoked from network); 22 Oct 2015 12:21:33 -0000 Received: from exht021p.surrey.ac.uk (HELO EXHT021P.surrey.ac.uk) (131.227.200.35) by server-15.tower-72.messagelabs.com with AES128-SHA encrypted SMTP; 22 Oct 2015 12:21:33 -0000 Received: from EXHY021V.surrey.ac.uk (131.227.200.104) by EXHT021P.surrey.ac.uk (131.227.200.35) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.3.348.2; Thu, 22 Oct 2015 13:21:32 +0100 Received: from emea01-am1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (131.227.200.4) by EXHY021v.surrey.ac.uk (131.227.200.104) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.224.2; Thu, 22 Oct 2015 13:21:32 +0100 Received: from DB4PR06MB457.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com (10.141.238.15) by DB4PR06MB459.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com (10.141.238.21) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.300.14; Thu, 22 Oct 2015 12:21:31 +0000 Received: from DB4PR06MB457.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com ([10.141.238.15]) by DB4PR06MB457.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com ([10.141.238.15]) with mapi id 15.01.0300.010; Thu, 22 Oct 2015 12:21:31 +0000 From: To: , , , , , , , , Thread-Topic: [mpls] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC3107 (4497) Thread-Index: AQHRBfs7YtY+I0XFTUy0w57w2zJFTp5qtUqAgAAy3ICAA6QyAIAAnUSAgAP4XYCAA96/AIAAHwxigAAT2ICAAEd2Cg== Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2015 12:21:31 +0000 Message-ID: References: <20151013210728.27DF9187E28@rfc-editor.org> <561E1CC9.7080600@pi.nu> <561E4773.1090904@alcatel-lucent.com> <5621556E.1000600@juniper.net> <5621D95B.8090209@pi.nu> <56286D0A.8090506@pi.nu> , <562897BB.4050102@pi.nu> In-Reply-To: <562897BB.4050102@pi.nu> Accept-Language: en-AU, en-US Content-Language: en-AU X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [124.149.33.17] x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; DB4PR06MB459; 5:Ac+w1v4qt+o1bx2t8QEXkjcufdmCzJn331GY013Be480cW05BiMUStPoBx4MJDi0zZ29qT4Yy5MWhjZrDluBh2U6h8Kxv0jrD5mkFzHOSmPkLe/hilpeKT/JDj/igdPRh4TKlonXmgRdqDFS5rZ/qA==; 24:qW3KdcZIrtr6XEtioeskAFUADGD8DO2ao7+ZXUgeBnLPny20uyZvD+pVgQEOw76dBwI49sjHA1jAE4uCjH0N57nNdkp60fBfcIqOW1mL8d0=; 20:ZvqwQSpA2r59QT8MrZOqLlxe/13CfseZs+wHKi4+Uc0fT3cF/Xs+Q6IUsTge+8nhwTjh1iaoxM6AXbSSVNar1Q== x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:DB4PR06MB459; x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:(138986009662008)(97927398514766)(95692535739014); x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(601004)(2401047)(5005006)(520078)(8121501046)(3002001)(102215026); SRVR:DB4PR06MB459; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:DB4PR06MB459; x-forefront-prvs: 0737B96801 x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(979002)(6009001)(377454003)(479174004)(377424004)(189002)(43544003)(51444003)(13464003)(24454002)(199003)(1720100001)(102836002)(74482002)(50986999)(46102003)(15975445007)(122556002)(5001960100002)(77096005)(76176999)(189998001)(64706001)(54356999)(87936001)(2950100001)(19580405001)(11100500001)(19580395003)(66066001)(74316001)(92566002)(5007970100001)(5004730100002)(1941001)(2900100001)(101416001)(10400500002)(5003600100002)(5008740100001)(76576001)(15198665003)(33656002)(5001770100001)(97736004)(93886004)(86362001)(2201001)(81156007)(4001150100001)(15395725005)(105586002)(106356001)(2501003)(40100003)(106116001)(5002640100001)(7059030)(969003)(989001)(999001)(1009001)(1019001); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:DB4PR06MB459; H:DB4PR06MB457.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; MX:1; A:1; LANG:en; received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: surrey.ac.uk does not designate permitted sender hosts) spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:23 spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 22 Oct 2015 12:21:31.0379 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 6b902693-1074-40aa-9e21-d89446a2ebb5 X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: DB4PR06MB459 X-OrganizationHeadersPreserved: DB4PR06MB459.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com X-OriginatorOrg: surrey.ac.uk X-CrossPremisesHeadersPromoted: EXHY021v.surrey.ac.uk X-CrossPremisesHeadersFiltered: EXHY021v.surrey.ac.uk Archived-At: Cc: alexander.okonnikov@gmail.com, mpls@ietf.org Subject: Re: [mpls] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC3107 (4497) X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2015 12:21:40 -0000 The singular of criteria is criterion. ('Just one errata' - sigh) what this indicates about the quality of technical writing in the IETF is l= ess than flattering... This isn't a matter for IETF consensus. it's a matter for a dictionary. ________________________________________ From: Loa Andersson Sent: Thursday, 22 October 2015 7:00:59 PM To: Wood L Dr (Elec Electronic Eng); rcallon@juniper.net; erosen@juniper.n= et; martin.vigoureux@alcatel-lucent.com; rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org; akatlas= @gmail.com; db3546@att.com; aretana@cisco.com; swallow@cisco.com Cc: alexander.okonnikov@gmail.com; mpls@ietf.org Subject: Re: [mpls] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC3107 (4497) Lloyd, I thinks so, I've tried criteria and criterium a couple of time, and consistently having reviews suggesting to change criteria to criterias alternatively criterium to criteriums. However errata 4497 is just one errata, and that is what we are talking about, if you sort out the grammar and reach IETF consensus please let me know. /Loa On 2015-10-22 14:51, l.wood@surrey.ac.uk wrote: > To continue hair splitting, the singular of 'errata' is 'erratum'. Just l= ike 'data' and 'datum'. > > 'errata is' makes no sense. Did you mean that all errata are right? Or is= IETF convention at odds with English? > > thanks > > Lloyd Wood > http://about.me/lloydwood > ________________________________________ > From: mpls on behalf of Loa Andersson > Sent: Thursday, 22 October 2015 3:58 PM > To: Ross Callon; Eric Rosen; Martin Vigoureux; RFC Errata System; akatlas= @gmail.com; db3546@att.com; aretana@cisco.com; swallow@cisco.com > Cc: alexander.okonnikov@gmail.com; mpls@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [mpls] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC3107 (4497) > > Ross, > > To continue hair splitting. > > 1. Yes the errata is right > > 2. We need to accept the errata. > > 3. The new text should be: > "Label distribution can be piggybacked in the BGP Update message by > using the BGP-4 Multiprotocol Extensions attribute defined in > RFC 2858 [BGP-MP]." > > That makes the document internally consistent, though all references > are obsoleted. To take care of this we need a note: > "Accept - hold for a potential 3107bis, the reference pointed to in > this errata should be update to reflect the most recent versions of > the BGP specification and of the Multiprotocol BGP specification." > > Deborah, > > Is this actionable? > > /Loa > > > On 2015-10-20 01:52, Ross Callon wrote: >> Referring to the errata updating the reference: I think that at the time= that RFC 3107 was published the reference to 2283 was wrong both because 2= 283 had already been updated, and because there is no actual reference to 2= 283 in the references section. The errata is therefore correct. The problem= that I have with "hold for document update" is that by now, and therefore = by the time (if any) that we update 3107, the errata will also be out of da= te. >> >> My inclination is to think that at the time that 3107 was published the = errata was correct, and thus we should accept it. >> >> Ross >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Loa Andersson [mailto:loa@pi.nu] >> Sent: Saturday, October 17, 2015 1:15 AM >> To: Eric Rosen; Martin Vigoureux; RFC Errata System; akatlas@gmail.com; = db3546@att.com; aretana@cisco.com; swallow@cisco.com; Ross Callon >> Cc: alexander.okonnikov@gmail.com; mpls@ietf.org >> Subject: Re: [mpls] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC3107 (4497) >> >> Eric, >> >> On 2015-10-17 03:52, Eric C Rosen wrote: >>> On 10/14/2015 8:15 AM, Martin Vigoureux wrote: >>>> I think we should stick to changing [RFC 2283] into [BGP-MP]. Otherwis= e >>>> it could open the door to creating erratas for any reference that woul= d >>>> have been updated/obsoleted. >>> >>> Of course, one could also ask whether it is worthwhile to accept an >>> erratum that changes one obsolete reference to another. Whether one >>> looks in the RFC index for RFC2283 or for RFC2858, one will eventually >>> follow the change of tags to RFC4760. >> >> I take this to mean "Accept - hold for a potential 3107bis", right? >> >> /Loa >>> > > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > From nobody Thu Oct 22 08:35:52 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2D14A1ACEF9; Thu, 22 Oct 2015 08:33:21 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.901 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 CfvCphwRHHaT; Thu, 22 Oct 2015 08:33:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from na01-by2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-by2on0145.outbound.protection.outlook.com [207.46.100.145]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BD1AA1B38CF; Thu, 22 Oct 2015 08:33:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from DM2PR05MB573.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.141.159.16) by DM2PR05MB576.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.141.159.26) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.306.13; Thu, 22 Oct 2015 15:33:11 +0000 Received: from DM2PR05MB573.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([10.141.159.16]) by DM2PR05MB573.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([10.141.159.16]) with mapi id 15.01.0306.003; Thu, 22 Oct 2015 15:33:11 +0000 From: Ross Callon To: "mpls@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: working group last call on draft-ietf-mpls-tp-temporal-hitless-psm-07.txt Thread-Index: AdEM3vQ4r5okhukgSou3JT2PtoQN4g== Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2015 15:33:10 +0000 Message-ID: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=rcallon@juniper.net; x-originating-ip: [66.129.241.11] x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; DM2PR05MB576; 5:oRcTdU0hp2T1/h9Lyq0j1d3SuQp4GlDKQzKv/EYzcUPmVa+BEwGBl0O3T8zD76zqsnyIAvlth82CsiOBxM9R9oK+Oqh9R/1i2s71UdbcMLD5kSHGPq2+RYMmIgGbGOqVJXDxizeSHHzzhG9ImRog+Q==; 24:hexkMHtRDQX6M+2ILUUugLPmbxd25vOp89GzovfBW99IlmxQPLJcmDb7moN7lgP/RuCcIFhp/aJvadM0I7CcAeKBkHMdf8HbqPmZccoPWak=; 20:p5szk0f3BvdZEfQs/6Qxsgo7Vyz5AeOz1vHpzDO/W8EJTKdaLHcz7AAouqDch/lztFTUQ3EkNIzOlM86otH1CQ== x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:DM2PR05MB576; x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:(108003899814671); x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(601004)(2401047)(520078)(8121501046)(5005006)(3002001)(102215026); SRVR:DM2PR05MB576; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:DM2PR05MB576; x-forefront-prvs: 0737B96801 x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(6009001)(189002)(199003)(19580405001)(229853001)(87936001)(575784001)(189998001)(110136002)(64706001)(105586002)(5001960100002)(5003600100002)(230783001)(86362001)(99286002)(5004730100002)(66066001)(5002640100001)(19580395003)(15975445007)(2351001)(76576001)(5007970100001)(77096005)(10400500002)(102836002)(97736004)(81156007)(5008740100001)(122556002)(11100500001)(33656002)(2501003)(106356001)(40100003)(92566002)(101416001)(74316001)(46102003)(50986999)(54356999)(2900100001); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:DM2PR05MB576; H:DM2PR05MB573.namprd05.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; MX:1; A:1; LANG:en; received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: juniper.net does not designate permitted sender hosts) spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:23 spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_DM2PR05MB5739C30D97BF78A3F1378AFA5270DM2PR05MB573namprd_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: juniper.net X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 22 Oct 2015 15:33:10.7084 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: bea78b3c-4cdb-4130-854a-1d193232e5f4 X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: DM2PR05MB576 Archived-At: Cc: "mpls-chairs@ietf.org" , Loa Andersson , "koike.yoshinori@lab.ntt.co.jp" , "Manuel.Paul@telekom.de" , "satoshi.ueno@ntt.com" , "arai.kaoru@lab.ntt.co.jp" Subject: [mpls] working group last call on draft-ietf-mpls-tp-temporal-hitless-psm-07.txt X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2015 15:33:21 -0000 --_000_DM2PR05MB5739C30D97BF78A3F1378AFA5270DM2PR05MB573namprd_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Working Group, This is to initiate a working group last call on draft-ietf-mpls-tp-tempora= l-hitless-psm-07.txt. Please send your comments to the mpls wg mailing list (mpls@ietf.org). There are no IPR disclosures against this document. All the authors have st= ated that they are not aware of any IPR that relates to this draft. Since the last call will overlap with the IETF meeting, this working group = last call will be extended to three weeks and will end Friday November 13, 2015. This document went through WGLC a couple of years ago, but due to a series = of events (including an illness, and addition of two additional co-authors) was not p= rogressed for publication at the time. As with any WGLC, working group participants are r= equested to read the document and comment, and if you feel that the document is ready f= or publication it is appropriate to respond to any WGLC with a short and simple email indi= cating support. Ross for the MPLS WG chairs --_000_DM2PR05MB5739C30D97BF78A3F1378AFA5270DM2PR05MB573namprd_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Working Group,
 
This is to initiate a working group last call on draft-ietf-mpls-tp-te= mporal-hitless-psm-07.txt.
 
Please send your comments to the mpls wg mailing list (mpls@ietf.org).=
 
There are no IPR disclosures against this document. All the authors ha= ve stated that they
are not aware of any IPR that relates to this draft.
 
Since the last call will overlap with the IETF meeting, this working g= roup last call will be
extended to three weeks and will end Friday  November 13, 2015.&n= bsp;
 
This document went through WGLC a couple of years ago, but due to a se= ries of events
(including an illness, and addition of two additional co-authors) was = not progressed for
publication at the time. As with any WGLC, working group participants = are requested to
read the document and comment, and if you feel that the document is re= ady for publication
it is appropriate to respond to any WGLC with a short and simple email= indicating support.
 
Ross
for the MPLS WG chairs
 
 
 --_000_DM2PR05MB5739C30D97BF78A3F1378AFA5270DM2PR05MB573namprd_-- From nobody Thu Oct 22 18:06:49 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3F2E61ACC88; Thu, 22 Oct 2015 18:06:45 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.699 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.699 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=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 xLxlV4YIpU3f; Thu, 22 Oct 2015 18:06:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pa0-x242.google.com (mail-pa0-x242.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c03::242]) (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 104AE1AC44D; Thu, 22 Oct 2015 18:06:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: by padda3 with SMTP id da3so10763777pad.1; Thu, 22 Oct 2015 18:06:43 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=subject:from:cc:to:date:mime-version:message-id:references :in-reply-to:content-type; bh=IaZTd4pTcAzAtpnhzGZxsUUgmGwTMoTmh43gVw5sTls=; b=DYKP/ZejZtkmoOtWOB7vl+OvjF4TQ8ns2lqKuXkPbRNcXX91Kkq/5IH9Q+9GluG68o eMiFi25rXPIebyvrONrhNcOKLN4e0j1/AxN7QgEQ5hmmkG7r/sQ0C8I8qZzavSZ55Ypx vA1L/6gHFVY2ySdz1DBF3BgbiPQuT9BdoEH+X0iX5xQN0FbdkKnqQvL5mtv6DtIUph1H TB3Clc7lR04DKYciQNtwpHRwmT5VX6ffoRMwY/xWMKYosgKAum9Lhz18tV1/+yufBMgy n+knMgb6So3MR867wJg2llVNZsX0Vgx9f1jO774SD3R3QTspvaFrx2eFUPaGuadt97jj 1jsA== X-Received: by 10.66.243.225 with SMTP id xb1mr1466695pac.1.1445562403749; Thu, 22 Oct 2015 18:06:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([117.136.81.246]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id kp4sm15880476pbc.34.2015.10.22.18.06.40 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 22 Oct 2015 18:06:43 -0700 (PDT) From: weiqiang cheng To: Ross Callon Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2015 09:06:41 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3 Message-ID: <1445562396972.kntydnb11rclmnxk4mxpax5f@android.mail.163.com> References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="__MESSAGE_BODY_PART__1" Archived-At: Cc: "mpls@ietf.org" , "satoshi.ueno@ntt.com" , "mpls-chairs@ietf.org" , Loa Andersson , "koike.yoshinori@lab.ntt.co.jp" , "Manuel.Paul@telekom.de" , "arai.kaoru@lab.ntt.co.jp" Subject: [mpls] =?utf-8?b?5Zue5aSNOiAgd29ya2luZyBncm91cCBsYXN0IGNhbGwgb24g?= =?utf-8?q?draft-ietf-mpls-tp-temporal-hitless-psm-07=2Etxt?= X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2015 01:06:45 -0000 --__MESSAGE_BODY_PART__1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 WWVzLCBzdXBwb3J0LiBXZWlxaWFuZyBDaGVuZyDlnKgyMDE15bm0MTDmnIgyMuaXpSAyMzozMyDv vIxSb3NzIENhbGxvbuWGmemBk++8miBXb3JraW5nIEdyb3VwLCBUaGlzIGlzIHRvIGluaXRpYXRl IGEgd29ya2luZyBncm91cCBsYXN0IGNhbGwgb24gZHJhZnQtaWV0Zi1tcGxzLXRwLXRlbXBvcmFs LWhpdGxlc3MtcHNtLTA3LnR4dC4gUGxlYXNlIHNlbmQgeW91ciBjb21tZW50cyB0byB0aGUgbXBs cyB3ZyBtYWlsaW5nIGxpc3QgKG1wbHNAaWV0Zi5vcmcpLiBUaGVyZSBhcmUgbm8gSVBSIGRpc2Ns b3N1cmVzIGFnYWluc3QgdGhpcyBkb2N1bWVudC4gQWxsIHRoZSBhdXRob3JzIGhhdmUgc3RhdGVk IHRoYXQgdGhleSBhcmUgbm90IGF3YXJlIG9mIGFueSBJUFIgdGhhdCByZWxhdGVzIHRvIHRoaXMg ZHJhZnQuIFNpbmNlIHRoZSBsYXN0IGNhbGwgd2lsbCBvdmVybGFwIHdpdGggdGhlIElFVEYgbWVl dGluZywgdGhpcyB3b3JraW5nIGdyb3VwIGxhc3QgY2FsbCB3aWxsIGJlIGV4dGVuZGVkIHRvIHRo cmVlIHdlZWtzIGFuZCB3aWxsIGVuZCBGcmlkYXnCoCBOb3ZlbWJlciAxMywgMjAxNS7CoCBUaGlz IGRvY3VtZW50IHdlbnQgdGhyb3VnaCBXR0xDIGEgY291cGxlIG9mIHllYXJzIGFnbywgYnV0IGR1 ZSB0byBhIHNlcmllcyBvZiBldmVudHMgKGluY2x1ZGluZyBhbiBpbGxuZXNzLCBhbmQgYWRkaXRp b24gb2YgdHdvIGFkZGl0aW9uYWwgY28tYXV0aG9ycykgd2FzIG5vdCBwcm9ncmVzc2VkIGZvciBw dWJsaWNhdGlvbiBhdCB0aGUgdGltZS4gQXMgd2l0aCBhbnkgV0dMQywgd29ya2luZyBncm91cCBw YXJ0aWNpcGFudHMgYXJlIHJlcXVlc3RlZCB0byByZWFkIHRoZSBkb2N1bWVudCBhbmQgY29tbWVu dCwgYW5kIGlmIHlvdSBmZWVsIHRoYXQgdGhlIGRvY3VtZW50IGlzIHJlYWR5IGZvciBwdWJsaWNh dGlvbiBpdCBpcyBhcHByb3ByaWF0ZSB0byByZXNwb25kIHRvIGFueSBXR0xDIHdpdGggYSBzaG9y dCBhbmQgc2ltcGxlIGVtYWlsIGluZGljYXRpbmcgc3VwcG9ydC4gUm9zcyBmb3IgdGhlIE1QTFMg V0cgY2hhaXJz --__MESSAGE_BODY_PART__1 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 PGh0bWw+DQo8aGVhZD4NCjxtZXRhIGh0dHAtZXF1aXY9IkNvbnRlbnQtVHlwZSIgY29udGVudD0i dGV4dC9odG1sOyBjaGFyc2V0PXVzLWFzY2lpIj4NCjxtZXRhIG5hbWU9IkdlbmVyYXRvciIgY29u dGVudD0iTWljcm9zb2Z0IEV4Y2hhbmdlIFNlcnZlciI+DQo8IS0tIGNvbnZlcnRlZCBmcm9tIHJ0 ZiAtLT4NCjxzdHlsZT48IS0tIC5FbWFpbFF1b3RlIHsgbWFyZ2luLWxlZnQ6IDFwdDsgcGFkZGlu Zy1sZWZ0OiA0cHQ7IGJvcmRlci1sZWZ0OiAjODAwMDAwIDJweCBzb2xpZDsgfSAtLT48L3N0eWxl Pg0KPC9oZWFkPg0KPGJvZHk+PGRpdiBzdHlsZT0nbGluZS1oZWlnaHQ6MS40Jz48YnIvPlllcywg c3VwcG9ydC48YnIvPjxici8+V2VpcWlhbmcgQ2hlbmc8YnIvPjxici8+PGJyLz48YnIvPjxici8+ PGJyLz48L2Rpdj7lnKgyMDE15bm0MTDmnIgyMuaXpSAyMzozMyDvvIw8YSBocmVmPSJtYWlsdG86 cmNhbGxvbkBqdW5pcGVyLm5ldCI+Um9zcyBDYWxsb248L2E+5YaZ6YGT77yaPGJyPjxicj48Ymxv Y2txdW90ZSBpZD0nbnRlcy1hbmRyaW9kbWFpbC1xdW90ZScgc3R5bGU9Im1hcmdpbjowcHg7cGFk ZGluZy1sZWZ0OjFleDtib3JkZXItbGVmdDojY2NjIDFweCBzb2xpZCI+DQo8Zm9udCBmYWNlPSJD YWxpYnJpIiBzaXplPSIyIj48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1zaXplOjExcHQ7Ij4NCjxkaXY+V29y a2luZyBHcm91cCw8L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXY+Jm5ic3A7PC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2PlRoaXMgaXMgdG8gaW5p dGlhdGUgYSB3b3JraW5nIGdyb3VwIGxhc3QgY2FsbCBvbiBkcmFmdC1pZXRmLW1wbHMtdHAtdGVt cG9yYWwtaGl0bGVzcy1wc20tMDcudHh0LiA8L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXY+Jm5ic3A7PC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2 PlBsZWFzZSBzZW5kIHlvdXIgY29tbWVudHMgdG8gdGhlIG1wbHMgd2cgbWFpbGluZyBsaXN0ICht cGxzQGlldGYub3JnKS48L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXY+Jm5ic3A7PC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2PlRoZXJlIGFyZSBu byBJUFIgZGlzY2xvc3VyZXMgYWdhaW5zdCB0aGlzIGRvY3VtZW50LiBBbGwgdGhlIGF1dGhvcnMg aGF2ZSBzdGF0ZWQgdGhhdCB0aGV5IDwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj5hcmUgbm90IGF3YXJlIG9mIGFueSBJ UFIgdGhhdCByZWxhdGVzIHRvIHRoaXMgZHJhZnQuPC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2PiZuYnNwOzwvZGl2Pg0K PGRpdj5TaW5jZSB0aGUgbGFzdCBjYWxsIHdpbGwgb3ZlcmxhcCB3aXRoIHRoZSBJRVRGIG1lZXRp bmcsIHRoaXMgd29ya2luZyBncm91cCBsYXN0IGNhbGwgd2lsbCBiZSA8L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXY+ZXh0 ZW5kZWQgdG8gdGhyZWUgd2Vla3MgYW5kIHdpbGwgZW5kIEZyaWRheSZuYnNwOyBOb3ZlbWJlciAx MywgMjAxNS4mbmJzcDsgPC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2PiZuYnNwOzwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj5UaGlzIGRvY3Vt ZW50IHdlbnQgdGhyb3VnaCBXR0xDIGEgY291cGxlIG9mIHllYXJzIGFnbywgYnV0IGR1ZSB0byBh IHNlcmllcyBvZiBldmVudHMgPC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2PihpbmNsdWRpbmcgYW4gaWxsbmVzcywgYW5k IGFkZGl0aW9uIG9mIHR3byBhZGRpdGlvbmFsIGNvLWF1dGhvcnMpIHdhcyBub3QgcHJvZ3Jlc3Nl ZCBmb3IgPC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2PnB1YmxpY2F0aW9uIGF0IHRoZSB0aW1lLiBBcyB3aXRoIGFueSBX R0xDLCB3b3JraW5nIGdyb3VwIHBhcnRpY2lwYW50cyBhcmUgcmVxdWVzdGVkIHRvIDwvZGl2Pg0K PGRpdj5yZWFkIHRoZSBkb2N1bWVudCBhbmQgY29tbWVudCwgYW5kIGlmIHlvdSBmZWVsIHRoYXQg dGhlIGRvY3VtZW50IGlzIHJlYWR5IGZvciBwdWJsaWNhdGlvbiA8L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXY+aXQgaXMg YXBwcm9wcmlhdGUgdG8gcmVzcG9uZCB0byBhbnkgV0dMQyB3aXRoIGEgc2hvcnQgYW5kIHNpbXBs ZSBlbWFpbCBpbmRpY2F0aW5nIHN1cHBvcnQuIDwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj4mbmJzcDs8L2Rpdj4NCjxk aXY+Um9zczwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj5mb3IgdGhlIE1QTFMgV0cgY2hhaXJzPC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2PiZu YnNwOzwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj4mbmJzcDs8L2Rpdj4NCjwvc3Bhbj48L2ZvbnQ+DQo8L2Jsb2NrcXVv dGU+PC9ib2R5Pg0KPC9odG1sPg0K --__MESSAGE_BODY_PART__1-- From nobody Thu Oct 22 20:19:11 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8192C1B3170; Thu, 22 Oct 2015 20:19:09 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -104.2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-104.2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=ham 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 jvTFdv1zgKjK; Thu, 22 Oct 2015 20:19:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from usevmg20.ericsson.net (usevmg20.ericsson.net [198.24.6.45]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1C0481B316E; Thu, 22 Oct 2015 20:19:07 -0700 (PDT) X-AuditID: c618062d-f79ef6d000007f54-c1-5629467c711f Received: from EUSAAHC007.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain [147.117.188.93]) by usevmg20.ericsson.net (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id AB.0F.32596.C7649265; Thu, 22 Oct 2015 22:26:36 +0200 (CEST) Received: from EUSAAMB103.ericsson.se ([147.117.188.120]) by EUSAAHC007.ericsson.se ([147.117.188.93]) with mapi id 14.03.0248.002; Thu, 22 Oct 2015 23:19:05 -0400 From: Gregory Mirsky To: Ross Callon , "mpls@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: working group last call on draft-ietf-mpls-tp-temporal-hitless-psm-07.txt Thread-Index: AdEM3vQ4r5okhukgSou3JT2PtoQN4gAYjHVw Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2015 03:19:04 +0000 Message-ID: <7347100B5761DC41A166AC17F22DF1122190E95C@eusaamb103.ericsson.se> References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [147.117.188.11] Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_7347100B5761DC41A166AC17F22DF1122190E95Ceusaamb103erics_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFjrMIsWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUyuXRPrG6Nm2aYwbp9mhbHrmxgt/j6u4HJ YuukOUwWP998ZrVYd/kUm8WtpStZLf6uuMJisfjkM2YHDo8lS34yeVxvusru0fziOYvHjs0P WD32nGPzaHupEMAWxWWTkpqTWZZapG+XwJWxs6+dtWBJUEXP7gtsDYyrPLsYOTkkBEwk5h75 yQhhi0lcuLeerYuRi0NI4CijRMvcG0wQznJGicPzlrKAVLEJGEm82NjDDmKLCLhJzOk/AVbE LLCLSWLJlB1go4QFIiRObAcp4gAqipT428gLUW8kMaGxjxUkzCKgKjFvZiZImFfAV+Li7UNs ILaQQJTEke/zwaZwCkRLzD3zignEZgQ67vupNWA2s4C4xK0n85kgjhaQWLLnPDOELSrx8vE/ VghbSeLj7/nsEPX5EidvtDFC7BKUODnzCcsERtFZSEbNQlI2C0kZRFxHYsHuT2wQtrbEsoWv mWHsMwceMyGLL2BkX8XIUVqcWpabbmSwiREYtcck2HR3MO55aXmIUYCDUYmHd8El9TAh1sSy 4srcQ4wSHMxKIrwhzZphQrwpiZVVqUX58UWlOanFhxilOViUxHn3L7kfKiSQnliSmp2aWpBa BJNl4uCUamBkNQz66rV948PQfJmUGQdqTx+aX1KR6FEXXndH3qB0Ad8c3kfOfPpfFl8Jyd8R fvzmwv5oUakYqTxB83XLDxYq5X24VHV5udSXj6tziqPWpsz7X28nsWn2jVbRaR9eBZ4SOHZ0 nciyOJmXDxUvr+nrPPDd+EfCtbv3Vlx3Zfqpqy07U98i2mKREktxRqKhFnNRcSIAoEZs+tYC AAA= Archived-At: Cc: "satoshi.ueno@ntt.com" , "mpls-chairs@ietf.org" , Loa Andersson , "koike.yoshinori@lab.ntt.co.jp" , "Manuel.Paul@telekom.de" , "arai.kaoru@lab.ntt.co.jp" Subject: Re: [mpls] working group last call on draft-ietf-mpls-tp-temporal-hitless-psm-07.txt X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2015 03:19:09 -0000 --_000_7347100B5761DC41A166AC17F22DF1122190E95Ceusaamb103erics_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Ross, et. al, I support publication of this document. I'd recommend changing from Standar= ds to Informational track. Regards, Greg From: mpls [mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Ross Callon Sent: Thursday, October 22, 2015 8:33 AM To: mpls@ietf.org Cc: mpls-chairs@ietf.org; Loa Andersson; koike.yoshinori@lab.ntt.co.jp; Man= uel.Paul@telekom.de; satoshi.ueno@ntt.com; arai.kaoru@lab.ntt.co.jp Subject: [mpls] working group last call on draft-ietf-mpls-tp-temporal-hitl= ess-psm-07.txt Working Group, This is to initiate a working group last call on draft-ietf-mpls-tp-tempora= l-hitless-psm-07.txt. Please send your comments to the mpls wg mailing list (mpls@ietf.org). There are no IPR disclosures against this document. All the authors have st= ated that they are not aware of any IPR that relates to this draft. Since the last call will overlap with the IETF meeting, this working group = last call will be extended to three weeks and will end Friday November 13, 2015. This document went through WGLC a couple of years ago, but due to a series = of events (including an illness, and addition of two additional co-authors) was not p= rogressed for publication at the time. As with any WGLC, working group participants are r= equested to read the document and comment, and if you feel that the document is ready f= or publication it is appropriate to respond to any WGLC with a short and simple email indi= cating support. Ross for the MPLS WG chairs --_000_7347100B5761DC41A166AC17F22DF1122190E95Ceusaamb103erics_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi Ross, et. al,

I support publication of = this document. I’d recommend changing from Standards to Informational= track.

 <= /p>

    &= nbsp;           Regards,<= o:p>

    &= nbsp;           &nbs= p;            &= nbsp;  Greg

 <= /p>

From: mpls [ma= ilto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Ross Callon
Sent: Thursday, October 22, 2015 8:33 AM
To: mpls@ietf.org
Cc: mpls-chairs@ietf.org; Loa Andersson; koike.yoshinori@lab.ntt.co.= jp; Manuel.Paul@telekom.de; satoshi.ueno@ntt.com; arai.kaoru@lab.ntt.co.jp<= br> Subject: [mpls] working group last call on draft-ietf-mpls-tp-tempor= al-hitless-psm-07.txt

 

Working Group,

 

This is to initiate a working group las= t call on draft-ietf-mpls-tp-temporal-hitless-psm-07.txt.

 

Please send your comments to the mpls w= g mailing list (mpls@ietf.org).

 

There are no IPR disclosures against th= is document. All the authors have stated that they

are not aware of any IPR that relates t= o this draft.

 

Since the last call will overlap with t= he IETF meeting, this working group last call will be

extended to three weeks and will end Fr= iday  November 13, 2015. 

 

This document went through WGLC a coupl= e of years ago, but due to a series of events

(including an illness, and addition of = two additional co-authors) was not progressed for

publication at the time. As with any WG= LC, working group participants are requested to

read the document and comment, and if y= ou feel that the document is ready for publication

it is appropriate to respond to any WGL= C with a short and simple email indicating support.

 

Ross

for the MPLS WG chairs

 

 

--_000_7347100B5761DC41A166AC17F22DF1122190E95Ceusaamb103erics_-- From nobody Fri Oct 23 02:20:53 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0BA281B33B8; Fri, 23 Oct 2015 02:20:52 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.33 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.33 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_EQ_IT=0.635, HOST_EQ_IT=1.245, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham 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 8b4_8XNpbosz; Fri, 23 Oct 2015 02:20:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from teledg002ba020.telecomitalia.it (teledg002ba020.telecomitalia.it [156.54.233.211]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AFA8A1B33B6; Fri, 23 Oct 2015 02:20:48 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="_e82b0936-e17f-47ca-8599-d9d3c8847c05_" Received: from TELCAH003BA020.telecomitalia.local (10.188.101.218) by teledg002ba020.telecomitalia.it (10.188.101.211) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.181.6; Fri, 23 Oct 2015 11:20:46 +0200 Received: from TELMBB005BA020.telecomitalia.local ([169.254.2.178]) by telcah003ba020.telecomitalia.local ([10.188.101.218]) with mapi id 14.03.0266.001; Fri, 23 Oct 2015 11:20:46 +0200 From: Milan Fabrizio To: Ross Callon , "mpls@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: working group last call on draft-ietf-mpls-tp-temporal-hitless-psm-07.txt Thread-Index: AdEM3vQ4r5okhukgSou3JT2PtoQN4gAlQMEg Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2015 09:20:45 +0000 Message-ID: <03916A46591C90409758A6A08E8180DD36EA7E78@telmbb005ba020.telecomitalia.local> References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: it-IT, en-US Content-Language: it-IT X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.19.10.126] x-ti-disclaimer: Disclaimer1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: Cc: "satoshi.ueno@ntt.com" , "mpls-chairs@ietf.org" , Loa Andersson , "koike.yoshinori@lab.ntt.co.jp" , "Manuel.Paul@telekom.de" , "arai.kaoru@lab.ntt.co.jp" Subject: [mpls] R: working group last call on draft-ietf-mpls-tp-temporal-hitless-psm-07.txt X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2015 09:20:52 -0000 --_e82b0936-e17f-47ca-8599-d9d3c8847c05_ Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_03916A46591C90409758A6A08E8180DD36EA7E78telmbb005ba020t_" --_000_03916A46591C90409758A6A08E8180DD36EA7E78telmbb005ba020t_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Yes, I support. Br Fabrizio Milan Da: mpls [mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org] Per conto di Ross Callon Inviato: gioved=EC 22 ottobre 2015 17:33 A: mpls@ietf.org Cc: mpls-chairs@ietf.org; Loa Andersson; koike.yoshinori@lab.ntt.co.jp; Man= uel.Paul@telekom.de; satoshi.ueno@ntt.com; arai.kaoru@lab.ntt.co.jp Oggetto: [mpls] working group last call on draft-ietf-mpls-tp-temporal-hitl= ess-psm-07.txt Working Group, This is to initiate a working group last call on draft-ietf-mpls-tp-tempora= l-hitless-psm-07.txt. Please send your comments to the mpls wg mailing list (mpls@ietf.org). There are no IPR disclosures against this document. All the authors have st= ated that they are not aware of any IPR that relates to this draft. Since the last call will overlap with the IETF meeting, this working group = last call will be extended to three weeks and will end Friday November 13, 2015. This document went through WGLC a couple of years ago, but due to a series = of events (including an illness, and addition of two additional co-authors) was not p= rogressed for publication at the time. As with any WGLC, working group participants are r= equested to read the document and comment, and if you feel that the document is ready f= or publication it is appropriate to respond to any WGLC with a short and simple email indi= cating support. Ross for the MPLS WG chairs Questo messaggio e i suoi allegati sono indirizzati esclusivamente alle per= sone indicate. La diffusione, copia o qualsiasi altra azione derivante dall= a conoscenza di queste informazioni sono rigorosamente vietate. Qualora abb= iate ricevuto questo documento per errore siete cortesemente pregati di dar= ne immediata comunicazione al mittente e di provvedere alla sua distruzione= , Grazie. This e-mail and any attachments is confidential and may contain privileged = information intended for the addressee(s) only. Dissemination, copying, pri= nting or use by anybody else is unauthorised. If you are not the intended r= ecipient, please delete this message and any attachments and advise the sen= der by return e-mail, Thanks. [rispetta l'ambiente]Rispetta l'ambiente. Non stampare questa mail se non = =E8 necessario. --_000_03916A46591C90409758A6A08E8180DD36EA7E78telmbb005ba020t_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Yes, I support.

Br

Fabrizio Milan=

 <= /p>

Da: mpls [= mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org] Per conto di Ross Callon
Inviato: gioved=EC 22 ottobre 2015 17:33
A: mpls@ietf.org
Cc: mpls-chairs@ietf.org; Loa Andersson; koike.yoshinori@lab.ntt.co.= jp; Manuel.Paul@telekom.de; satoshi.ueno@ntt.com; arai.kaoru@lab.ntt.co.jp<= br> Oggetto: [mpls] working group last call on draft-ietf-mpls-tp-tempor= al-hitless-psm-07.txt

 

Working Group,

 

This is to initiate a working group las= t call on draft-ietf-mpls-tp-temporal-hitless-psm-07.txt.

 

Please send your comments to the mpls w= g mailing list (mpls@ietf.org).

 

There are no IPR disclosures against th= is document. All the authors have stated that they

are not aware of any IPR that relates t= o this draft.

 

Since the last call will overlap with t= he IETF meeting, this working group last call will be

extended to three weeks and will end Fr= iday  November 13, 2015. 

 

This document went through WGLC a coupl= e of years ago, but due to a series of events

(including an illness, and addition of = two additional co-authors) was not progressed for

publication at the time. As with any WG= LC, working group participants are requested to

read the document and comment, and if y= ou feel that the document is ready for publication

it is appropriate to respond to any WGL= C with a short and simple email indicating support.

 

Ross

for the MPLS WG chairs

 

 

= Questo messaggio e i suoi allegati sono indirizzati esclusivamente alle per= sone indicate. La diffusione, copia o qualsiasi altra azione derivante dalla conoscenza di queste informazioni sono rigoro= samente vietate. Qualora abbiate ricevuto questo documento per errore siete= cortesemente pregati di darne immediata comunicazione al mittente e di pro= vvedere alla sua distruzione, Grazie.

This e-mail and any attachments is confidential and may contain privileged information intended for the addressee(s) only.= Dissemination, copying, printing or use by anybody else is unauthorised. I= f you are not the intended recipient, please delete this message and any at= tachments and advise the sender by return e-mail, Thanks.

3D"rispettaRispetta= l'ambiente. Non stampare questa mail se non =E8 necessario.

--_000_03916A46591C90409758A6A08E8180DD36EA7E78telmbb005ba020t_-- --_e82b0936-e17f-47ca-8599-d9d3c8847c05_ Content-Description: logo Ambiente_foglia2.jpg Content-Type: image/jpeg; name="logo Ambiente_foglia2.jpg" Content-Disposition: inline; filename="logo Ambiente_foglia2.jpg" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-ID: 00000000000000000000000000000003@TI.Disclaimer R0lGODlhGgAoANU5AEiFNnikNyRvNcvYOafCOEOEW3DO3jB2NqjGs9ny9o+zOIOrN+L1+G+ggbzo 8GCUN1SNNv///zx+NrPJOL/ROYPV44zY5YuzmrfQwCZxQlKNaMXZzOfy8NTi2TV6TuLs5vX8/ez5 +4yzmtTj2cXr8mCXdKni62ycN5/f6aDf6X2qjrPl7rLl7Zu6OJbb53nS4PH188bs8sXZzfH18pq9 p0SDWxhnNWbL3NfgOf///wAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACH5BAEAADkALAAAAAAaACgAAAb/wJxw SBQ6WMWkMmm6kZbQ5OvmjFoT1JuBYYWmsrcXqJvEgm8WctFypnI66pyjfXMhCmqGgR4r2S5dIBV0 FjI2h3BRX20VHAUCEjZ4UHNtFo42BA+HCEskbQYOIwU2CjgBNgAZM0kMbSYcIjYCBDg4LTYLf0V6 YCghNBk2DwO2OASZqkS9VBYMCB6pE8bGucidOYJUoaOptdQTFDg2ATgHGkIs2wyyAqbUtgICCwfl uh8ge1sNNhDF8LYiHYKAg4INBJUS8FsAEF6AA6lsHWjg4gYKDDZONGwIAIAtCAX2hPAgYSNHj6ds 3KiA8V3DAQGm2epoS4HKFQ0EmMRhc97Mwge2kN1IoIGgyQECD5wQUO6YygTkdtpCdSgqDl0VoDaV OmDBpm+oTCQoABQgBZfGbIrDAUBDAgcNDnDs98/WA504Buxa0RKgzVkB/h0oi+pDjgQhHtU1RgDi oY6l8gpAJyTBCBsSFtuC6XjWTBuJhIRAgFkmwAmoAkM4mCQCBmEB1sIDIKAFRGytYfDrt4CAuAkn qnrYYCXCBxGkqlYtgbtLhOcbMNSw0SBOEmg2VFj/sGHDhRLCNBC3fqFqARWhowQBADs= --_e82b0936-e17f-47ca-8599-d9d3c8847c05_-- From nobody Fri Oct 23 02:30:59 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EFEBE1B33E1; Fri, 23 Oct 2015 02:30:57 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.33 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.33 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_EQ_IT=0.635, HOST_EQ_IT=1.245, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham 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 gFYd7eGwCc5i; Fri, 23 Oct 2015 02:30:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from teledg002ba020.telecomitalia.it (teledg002ba020.telecomitalia.it [156.54.233.211]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 968461B33DC; Fri, 23 Oct 2015 02:30:54 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="_604b363d-4e0b-47a2-ab62-4fa2d4d03e08_" Received: from TELCAH003BA020.telecomitalia.local (10.188.101.218) by teledg002ba020.telecomitalia.it (10.188.101.211) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.181.6; Fri, 23 Oct 2015 11:30:52 +0200 Received: from TELMBA001BA020.telecomitalia.local ([169.254.1.132]) by telcah003ba020.telecomitalia.local ([10.188.101.218]) with mapi id 14.03.0266.001; Fri, 23 Oct 2015 11:30:52 +0200 From: Fioccola Giuseppe To: Gregory Mirsky , Ross Callon , "mpls@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: working group last call on draft-ietf-mpls-tp-temporal-hitless-psm-07.txt Thread-Index: AdEM3vQ4r5okhukgSou3JT2PtoQN4gAYjHVwAA0JZxA= Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2015 09:30:51 +0000 Message-ID: <23126F6FC5CA3E44916CF99D4E0B878B44E5E00D@TELMBA001BA020.telecomitalia.local> References: <7347100B5761DC41A166AC17F22DF1122190E95C@eusaamb103.ericsson.se> In-Reply-To: <7347100B5761DC41A166AC17F22DF1122190E95C@eusaamb103.ericsson.se> Accept-Language: it-IT, en-US Content-Language: it-IT X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.188.101.188] x-ti-disclaimer: Disclaimer1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: Cc: "satoshi.ueno@ntt.com" , "mpls-chairs@ietf.org" , Loa Andersson , "koike.yoshinori@lab.ntt.co.jp" , "Manuel.Paul@telekom.de" , "arai.kaoru@lab.ntt.co.jp" Subject: [mpls] R: working group last call on draft-ietf-mpls-tp-temporal-hitless-psm-07.txt X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2015 09:30:58 -0000 --_604b363d-4e0b-47a2-ab62-4fa2d4d03e08_ Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_23126F6FC5CA3E44916CF99D4E0B878B44E5E00DTELMBA001BA020t_" --_000_23126F6FC5CA3E44916CF99D4E0B878B44E5E00DTELMBA001BA020t_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I also Support this draft. Regards, Giuseppe Da: mpls [mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org] Per conto di Gregory Mirsky Inviato: venerd=EC 23 ottobre 2015 05:19 A: Ross Callon; mpls@ietf.org Cc: satoshi.ueno@ntt.com; mpls-chairs@ietf.org; Loa Andersson; koike.yoshin= ori@lab.ntt.co.jp; Manuel.Paul@telekom.de; arai.kaoru@lab.ntt.co.jp Oggetto: Re: [mpls] working group last call on draft-ietf-mpls-tp-temporal-= hitless-psm-07.txt Hi Ross, et. al, I support publication of this document. I'd recommend changing from Standar= ds to Informational track. Regards, Greg From: mpls [mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Ross Callon Sent: Thursday, October 22, 2015 8:33 AM To: mpls@ietf.org Cc: mpls-chairs@ietf.org; Loa Andersson; koike= .yoshinori@lab.ntt.co.jp; Manuel.Paul= @telekom.de; satoshi.ueno@ntt.com; arai.kaoru@lab.ntt.co.jp Subject: [mpls] working group last call on draft-ietf-mpls-tp-temporal-hitl= ess-psm-07.txt Working Group, This is to initiate a working group last call on draft-ietf-mpls-tp-tempora= l-hitless-psm-07.txt. Please send your comments to the mpls wg mailing list (mpls@ietf.org). There are no IPR disclosures against this document. All the authors have st= ated that they are not aware of any IPR that relates to this draft. Since the last call will overlap with the IETF meeting, this working group = last call will be extended to three weeks and will end Friday November 13, 2015. This document went through WGLC a couple of years ago, but due to a series = of events (including an illness, and addition of two additional co-authors) was not p= rogressed for publication at the time. As with any WGLC, working group participants are r= equested to read the document and comment, and if you feel that the document is ready f= or publication it is appropriate to respond to any WGLC with a short and simple email indi= cating support. Ross for the MPLS WG chairs Questo messaggio e i suoi allegati sono indirizzati esclusivamente alle per= sone indicate. La diffusione, copia o qualsiasi altra azione derivante dall= a conoscenza di queste informazioni sono rigorosamente vietate. Qualora abb= iate ricevuto questo documento per errore siete cortesemente pregati di dar= ne immediata comunicazione al mittente e di provvedere alla sua distruzione= , Grazie. This e-mail and any attachments is confidential and may contain privileged = information intended for the addressee(s) only. Dissemination, copying, pri= nting or use by anybody else is unauthorised. If you are not the intended r= ecipient, please delete this message and any attachments and advise the sen= der by return e-mail, Thanks. [rispetta l'ambiente]Rispetta l'ambiente. Non stampare questa mail se non = =E8 necessario. --_000_23126F6FC5CA3E44916CF99D4E0B878B44E5E00DTELMBA001BA020t_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I also Sup= port this draft.

 = ;

Regards,

 <= /p>

Giuseppe

 <= /p>

Da: mpls [= mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org] Per conto di Gregory Mirsky
Inviato: venerd=EC 23 ottobre 2015 05:19
A: Ross Callon; mpls@ietf.org
Cc: satoshi.ueno@ntt.com; mpls-chairs@ietf.org; Loa Andersson; koike= .yoshinori@lab.ntt.co.jp; Manuel.Paul@telekom.de; arai.kaoru@lab.ntt.co.jp<= br> Oggetto: Re: [mpls] working group last call on draft-ietf-mpls-tp-te= mporal-hitless-psm-07.txt

 

Hi Ross, e= t. al,

I support = publication of this document. I’d recommend changing from Standards t= o Informational track.

 = ;

 &nbs= p;            &= nbsp; Regards,

 &nbs= p;            &= nbsp;           &nbs= p;     Greg

 = ;

From: mpls [mailto= :mpls-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Ross Callon
Sent: Thursday, October 22, 2015 8:33 AM
To: mpls@ietf.org
Cc: mpls-chairs@ietf.org= ; Loa Andersson; koike.yoshinori@lab.ntt.co= .jp; Manuel.Paul@telekom.de; satoshi.ueno@ntt.com; arai.= kaoru@lab.ntt.co.jp
Subject: [mpls] working group last call on draft-ietf-mpls-tp-tempor= al-hitless-psm-07.txt

 

Working Group,

 =

This is to initiate a wo= rking group last call on draft-ietf-mpls-tp-temporal-hitless-psm-07.txt.

 =

Please send your comment= s to the mpls wg mailing list (mpls@ietf.o= rg).

 =

There are no IPR disclos= ures against this document. All the authors have stated that they

are not aware of any IPR= that relates to this draft.

 =

Since the last call will= overlap with the IETF meeting, this working group last call will be

extended to three weeks = and will end Friday  November 13, 2015. 

 =

This document went throu= gh WGLC a couple of years ago, but due to a series of events

(including an illness, a= nd addition of two additional co-authors) was not progressed for

publication at the time.= As with any WGLC, working group participants are requested to

read the document and co= mment, and if you feel that the document is ready for publication

it is appropriate to res= pond to any WGLC with a short and simple email indicating support.

 =

Ross

for the MPLS WG chairs

 =

 =

= Questo messaggio e i suoi allegati sono indirizzati esclusivamente alle per= sone indicate. La diffusione, copia o qualsiasi altra azione derivante dalla conoscenza di queste informazioni sono rigoro= samente vietate. Qualora abbiate ricevuto questo documento per errore siete= cortesemente pregati di darne immediata comunicazione al mittente e di pro= vvedere alla sua distruzione, Grazie.

This e-mail and any attachments is confidential and may contain privileged information intended for the addressee(s) only.= Dissemination, copying, printing or use by anybody else is unauthorised. I= f you are not the intended recipient, please delete this message and any at= tachments and advise the sender by return e-mail, Thanks.

3D"rispettaRispetta= l'ambiente. Non stampare questa mail se non =E8 necessario.

--_000_23126F6FC5CA3E44916CF99D4E0B878B44E5E00DTELMBA001BA020t_-- --_604b363d-4e0b-47a2-ab62-4fa2d4d03e08_ Content-Description: logo Ambiente_foglia2.jpg Content-Type: image/jpeg; name="logo Ambiente_foglia2.jpg" Content-Disposition: inline; filename="logo Ambiente_foglia2.jpg" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-ID: 00000000000000000000000000000003@TI.Disclaimer R0lGODlhGgAoANU5AEiFNnikNyRvNcvYOafCOEOEW3DO3jB2NqjGs9ny9o+zOIOrN+L1+G+ggbzo 8GCUN1SNNv///zx+NrPJOL/ROYPV44zY5YuzmrfQwCZxQlKNaMXZzOfy8NTi2TV6TuLs5vX8/ez5 +4yzmtTj2cXr8mCXdKni62ycN5/f6aDf6X2qjrPl7rLl7Zu6OJbb53nS4PH188bs8sXZzfH18pq9 p0SDWxhnNWbL3NfgOf///wAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACH5BAEAADkALAAAAAAaACgAAAb/wJxw SBQ6WMWkMmm6kZbQ5OvmjFoT1JuBYYWmsrcXqJvEgm8WctFypnI66pyjfXMhCmqGgR4r2S5dIBV0 FjI2h3BRX20VHAUCEjZ4UHNtFo42BA+HCEskbQYOIwU2CjgBNgAZM0kMbSYcIjYCBDg4LTYLf0V6 YCghNBk2DwO2OASZqkS9VBYMCB6pE8bGucidOYJUoaOptdQTFDg2ATgHGkIs2wyyAqbUtgICCwfl uh8ge1sNNhDF8LYiHYKAg4INBJUS8FsAEF6AA6lsHWjg4gYKDDZONGwIAIAtCAX2hPAgYSNHj6ds 3KiA8V3DAQGm2epoS4HKFQ0EmMRhc97Mwge2kN1IoIGgyQECD5wQUO6YygTkdtpCdSgqDl0VoDaV OmDBpm+oTCQoABQgBZfGbIrDAUBDAgcNDnDs98/WA504Buxa0RKgzVkB/h0oi+pDjgQhHtU1RgDi oY6l8gpAJyTBCBsSFtuC6XjWTBuJhIRAgFkmwAmoAkM4mCQCBmEB1sIDIKAFRGytYfDrt4CAuAkn qnrYYCXCBxGkqlYtgbtLhOcbMNSw0SBOEmg2VFj/sGHDhRLCNBC3fqFqARWhowQBADs= --_604b363d-4e0b-47a2-ab62-4fa2d4d03e08_-- From nobody Fri Oct 23 02:45:22 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3CF1F1B33E5 for ; Fri, 23 Oct 2015 02:45:20 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.73 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.73 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_EQ_IT=0.635, HOST_EQ_IT=1.245, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=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 3oL3asWef1Ku for ; Fri, 23 Oct 2015 02:45:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from teledg001ba020.telecomitalia.it (teledg001ba020.telecomitalia.it [156.54.233.210]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A0CAB1B33D8 for ; Fri, 23 Oct 2015 02:45:13 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="_2ccafa38-e449-4799-bb34-f46f7edb66ac_" Received: from TELCAH003BA020.telecomitalia.local (10.188.101.218) by teledg001ba020.telecomitalia.it (10.188.101.210) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.181.6; Fri, 23 Oct 2015 11:45:10 +0200 Received: from TELMBA004BA020.telecomitalia.local ([169.254.1.160]) by telcah003ba020.telecomitalia.local ([10.188.101.218]) with mapi id 14.03.0266.001; Fri, 23 Oct 2015 11:45:11 +0200 From: Cavazzoni Carlo To: "mpls@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: working group last call on draft-ietf-mpls-tp-temporal-hitless-psm-07.txt Thread-Index: AdEM3vQ4r5okhukgSou3JT2PtoQN4gAmFTwA Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2015 09:45:11 +0000 Message-ID: References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.188.101.189] x-ti-disclaimer: Disclaimer1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [mpls] working group last call on draft-ietf-mpls-tp-temporal-hitless-psm-07.txt X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2015 09:45:20 -0000 --_2ccafa38-e449-4799-bb34-f46f7edb66ac_ Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_DE4D2FD0EB4C4D4CA1DB3F3D0C08885593C81F9Etelmba004ba020t_" --_000_DE4D2FD0EB4C4D4CA1DB3F3D0C08885593C81F9Etelmba004ba020t_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I support the publication of this document. Regards, Carlo ------------------------------------------------------------------ Telecom Italia Carlo Cavazzoni IP & Transport Innovation Via G. Reiss Romoli, 274 10148 Torino +39 011 2285732 +39 335 7854045 Fax: +39 06 91861099 carlo.cavazzoni@telecomitalia.it From: mpls [mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Ross Callon Sent: gioved=EC 22 ottobre 2015 17:33 To: mpls@ietf.org Cc: mpls-chairs@ietf.org; Loa Andersson; koike.yoshinori@lab.ntt.co.jp; Man= uel.Paul@telekom.de; satoshi.ueno@ntt.com; arai.kaoru@lab.ntt.co.jp Subject: [mpls] working group last call on draft-ietf-mpls-tp-temporal-hitl= ess-psm-07.txt Working Group, This is to initiate a working group last call on draft-ietf-mpls-tp-tempora= l-hitless-psm-07.txt. Please send your comments to the mpls wg mailing list (mpls@ietf.org). There are no IPR disclosures against this document. All the authors have st= ated that they are not aware of any IPR that relates to this draft. Since the last call will overlap with the IETF meeting, this working group = last call will be extended to three weeks and will end Friday November 13, 2015. This document went through WGLC a couple of years ago, but due to a series = of events (including an illness, and addition of two additional co-authors) was not p= rogressed for publication at the time. As with any WGLC, working group participants are r= equested to read the document and comment, and if you feel that the document is ready f= or publication it is appropriate to respond to any WGLC with a short and simple email indi= cating support. Ross for the MPLS WG chairs Questo messaggio e i suoi allegati sono indirizzati esclusivamente alle per= sone indicate. La diffusione, copia o qualsiasi altra azione derivante dall= a conoscenza di queste informazioni sono rigorosamente vietate. Qualora abb= iate ricevuto questo documento per errore siete cortesemente pregati di dar= ne immediata comunicazione al mittente e di provvedere alla sua distruzione= , Grazie. This e-mail and any attachments is confidential and may contain privileged = information intended for the addressee(s) only. Dissemination, copying, pri= nting or use by anybody else is unauthorised. If you are not the intended r= ecipient, please delete this message and any attachments and advise the sen= der by return e-mail, Thanks. [rispetta l'ambiente]Rispetta l'ambiente. Non stampare questa mail se non = =E8 necessario. --_000_DE4D2FD0EB4C4D4CA1DB3F3D0C08885593C81F9Etelmba004ba020t_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I support the publication= of this document.

 <= /p>

Regards,

 <= /p>

Carlo

 <= /p>

--= ----------------------------------------------------------------
Telecom Italia
Carl= o Cavazzoni
IP & Transport Innovation
Via G. Reiss Romoli, 274 10148 Torino
+39 011 2285732
+39 335 7854045
Fax: +39 06 91861099
carlo.cavazzoni@telecomitalia.it

 

From: mpls [ma= ilto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Ross Callon
Sent: gioved=EC 22 ottobre 2015 17:33
To: mpls@ietf.org
Cc: mpls-chairs@ietf.org; Loa Andersson; koike.yoshinori@lab.ntt.co.= jp; Manuel.Paul@telekom.de; satoshi.ueno@ntt.com; arai.kaoru@lab.ntt.co.jp<= br> Subject: [mpls] working group last call on draft-ietf-mpls-tp-tempor= al-hitless-psm-07.txt

 

Working Group,

 

This is to initiate a working group las= t call on draft-ietf-mpls-tp-temporal-hitless-psm-07.txt.

 

Please send your comments to the mpls w= g mailing list (mpls@ietf.org).

 

There are no IPR disclosures against th= is document. All the authors have stated that they

are not aware of any IPR that relates t= o this draft.

 

Since the last call will overlap with t= he IETF meeting, this working group last call will be

extended to three weeks and will end Fr= iday  November 13, 2015. 

 

This document went through WGLC a coupl= e of years ago, but due to a series of events

(including an illness, and addition of = two additional co-authors) was not progressed for

publication at the time. As with any WG= LC, working group participants are requested to

read the document and comment, and if y= ou feel that the document is ready for publication

it is appropriate to respond to any WGL= C with a short and simple email indicating support.

 

Ross

for the MPLS WG chairs

 

 

= Questo messaggio e i suoi allegati sono indirizzati esclusivamente alle per= sone indicate. La diffusione, copia o qualsiasi altra azione derivante dalla conoscenza di queste informazioni sono rigoro= samente vietate. Qualora abbiate ricevuto questo documento per errore siete= cortesemente pregati di darne immediata comunicazione al mittente e di pro= vvedere alla sua distruzione, Grazie.

This e-mail and any attachments is confidential and may contain privileged information intended for the addressee(s) only.= Dissemination, copying, printing or use by anybody else is unauthorised. I= f you are not the intended recipient, please delete this message and any at= tachments and advise the sender by return e-mail, Thanks.

3D"rispettaRispetta= l'ambiente. Non stampare questa mail se non =E8 necessario.

--_000_DE4D2FD0EB4C4D4CA1DB3F3D0C08885593C81F9Etelmba004ba020t_-- --_2ccafa38-e449-4799-bb34-f46f7edb66ac_ Content-Description: logo Ambiente_foglia2.jpg Content-Type: image/jpeg; name="logo Ambiente_foglia2.jpg" Content-Disposition: inline; filename="logo Ambiente_foglia2.jpg" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-ID: 00000000000000000000000000000003@TI.Disclaimer R0lGODlhGgAoANU5AEiFNnikNyRvNcvYOafCOEOEW3DO3jB2NqjGs9ny9o+zOIOrN+L1+G+ggbzo 8GCUN1SNNv///zx+NrPJOL/ROYPV44zY5YuzmrfQwCZxQlKNaMXZzOfy8NTi2TV6TuLs5vX8/ez5 +4yzmtTj2cXr8mCXdKni62ycN5/f6aDf6X2qjrPl7rLl7Zu6OJbb53nS4PH188bs8sXZzfH18pq9 p0SDWxhnNWbL3NfgOf///wAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACH5BAEAADkALAAAAAAaACgAAAb/wJxw SBQ6WMWkMmm6kZbQ5OvmjFoT1JuBYYWmsrcXqJvEgm8WctFypnI66pyjfXMhCmqGgR4r2S5dIBV0 FjI2h3BRX20VHAUCEjZ4UHNtFo42BA+HCEskbQYOIwU2CjgBNgAZM0kMbSYcIjYCBDg4LTYLf0V6 YCghNBk2DwO2OASZqkS9VBYMCB6pE8bGucidOYJUoaOptdQTFDg2ATgHGkIs2wyyAqbUtgICCwfl uh8ge1sNNhDF8LYiHYKAg4INBJUS8FsAEF6AA6lsHWjg4gYKDDZONGwIAIAtCAX2hPAgYSNHj6ds 3KiA8V3DAQGm2epoS4HKFQ0EmMRhc97Mwge2kN1IoIGgyQECD5wQUO6YygTkdtpCdSgqDl0VoDaV OmDBpm+oTCQoABQgBZfGbIrDAUBDAgcNDnDs98/WA504Buxa0RKgzVkB/h0oi+pDjgQhHtU1RgDi oY6l8gpAJyTBCBsSFtuC6XjWTBuJhIRAgFkmwAmoAkM4mCQCBmEB1sIDIKAFRGytYfDrt4CAuAkn qnrYYCXCBxGkqlYtgbtLhOcbMNSw0SBOEmg2VFj/sGHDhRLCNBC3fqFqARWhowQBADs= --_2ccafa38-e449-4799-bb34-f46f7edb66ac_-- From nobody Fri Oct 23 03:02:30 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F11071B3442; Fri, 23 Oct 2015 03:02:28 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.33 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.33 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_EQ_IT=0.635, HOST_EQ_IT=1.245, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham 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 jKWOnoloOnLz; Fri, 23 Oct 2015 03:02:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from teledg002ba020.telecomitalia.it (teledg002ba020.telecomitalia.it [156.54.233.211]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8C9971B2EB0; Fri, 23 Oct 2015 03:02:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from TELCAH001BA020.telecomitalia.local (10.188.101.214) by teledg002ba020.telecomitalia.it (10.188.101.211) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.181.6; Fri, 23 Oct 2015 12:02:23 +0200 Received: from TELMBB003BA020.telecomitalia.local ([169.254.1.116]) by TELCAH001BA020.telecomitalia.local ([10.188.101.214]) with mapi id 14.03.0266.001; Fri, 23 Oct 2015 12:02:22 +0200 From: Di Giglio Andrea To: Gregory Mirsky , Ross Callon , "mpls@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: working group last call on draft-ietf-mpls-tp-temporal-hitless-psm-07.txt Thread-Index: AdEM3vQ4r5okhukgSou3JT2PtoQN4gAYjHVwAA0JZxAAASKEYA== Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2015 10:02:22 +0000 Message-ID: <95B44B74B6A9CC41BDF8C16985D4F35448611AF0@telmbb003ba020.telecomitalia.local> References: <7347100B5761DC41A166AC17F22DF1122190E95C@eusaamb103.ericsson.se> <23126F6FC5CA3E44916CF99D4E0B878B44E5E00D@TELMBA001BA020.telecomitalia.local> In-Reply-To: <23126F6FC5CA3E44916CF99D4E0B878B44E5E00D@TELMBA001BA020.telecomitalia.local> Accept-Language: it-IT, en-US Content-Language: it-IT X-MS-Has-Attach: yes X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.188.101.195] x-ti-disclaimer: Disclaimer1 Content-Type: multipart/related; boundary="_004_95B44B74B6A9CC41BDF8C16985D4F35448611AF0telmbb003ba020t_"; type="multipart/alternative" MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: Cc: "satoshi.ueno@ntt.com" , "mpls-chairs@ietf.org" , Loa Andersson , "koike.yoshinori@lab.ntt.co.jp" , "Manuel.Paul@telekom.de" , "arai.kaoru@lab.ntt.co.jp" Subject: [mpls] R: working group last call on draft-ietf-mpls-tp-temporal-hitless-psm-07.txt X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2015 10:02:29 -0000 --_004_95B44B74B6A9CC41BDF8C16985D4F35448611AF0telmbb003ba020t_ Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_95B44B74B6A9CC41BDF8C16985D4F35448611AF0telmbb003ba020t_" --_000_95B44B74B6A9CC41BDF8C16985D4F35448611AF0telmbb003ba020t_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I also Support this draft. Best Regards, Andrea From: mpls [mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Ross Callon Sent: Thursday, October 22, 2015 8:33 AM To: mpls@ietf.org Cc: mpls-chairs@ietf.org; Loa Andersson; koike= .yoshinori@lab.ntt.co.jp; Manuel.Paul= @telekom.de; satoshi.ueno@ntt.com; arai.kaoru@lab.ntt.co.jp Subject: [mpls] working group last call on draft-ietf-mpls-tp-temporal-hitl= ess-psm-07.txt Working Group, This is to initiate a working group last call on draft-ietf-mpls-tp-tempora= l-hitless-psm-07.txt. Please send your comments to the mpls wg mailing list (mpls@ietf.org). There are no IPR disclosures against this document. All the authors have st= ated that they are not aware of any IPR that relates to this draft. Since the last call will overlap with the IETF meeting, this working group = last call will be extended to three weeks and will end Friday November 13, 2015. This document went through WGLC a couple of years ago, but due to a series = of events (including an illness, and addition of two additional co-authors) was not p= rogressed for publication at the time. As with any WGLC, working group participants are r= equested to read the document and comment, and if you feel that the document is ready f= or publication it is appropriate to respond to any WGLC with a short and simple email indi= cating support. Ross for the MPLS WG chairs Questo messaggio e i suoi allegati sono indirizzati esclusivamente alle per= sone indicate. La diffusione, copia o qualsiasi altra azione derivante dall= a conoscenza di queste informazioni sono rigorosamente vietate. Qualora abb= iate ricevuto questo documento per errore siete cortesemente pregati di dar= ne immediata comunicazione al mittente e di provvedere alla sua distruzione= , Grazie. This e-mail and any attachments is confidential and may contain privileged = information intended for the addressee(s) only. Dissemination, copying, pri= nting or use by anybody else is unauthorised. If you are not the intended r= ecipient, please delete this message and any attachments and advise the sen= der by return e-mail, Thanks. [rispetta l'ambiente]Rispetta l'ambiente. Non stampare questa mail se non = =E8 necessario. --_000_95B44B74B6A9CC41BDF8C16985D4F35448611AF0telmbb003ba020t_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I also Sup= port this draft.

 

Best Regards,=

 = ;

Andrea

 

From: mpls [mailto= :mpls-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Ross Callon
Sent: Thursday, October 22, 2015 8:33 AM
To: mpls@ietf.org
Cc: mpls-chairs@ietf.org= ; Loa Andersson; koike.yoshinori@lab.ntt.co= .jp; Manuel.Paul@telekom.de; satoshi.ueno@ntt.com; arai.= kaoru@lab.ntt.co.jp
Subject: [mpls] working group last call on draft-ietf-mpls-tp-tempor= al-hitless-psm-07.txt

 

Working Group,

 =

This is to initiate a wo= rking group last call on draft-ietf-mpls-tp-temporal-hitless-psm-07.txt.

 =

Please send your comment= s to the mpls wg mailing list (mpls@ietf.o= rg).

 =

There are no IPR disclos= ures against this document. All the authors have stated that they

are not aware of any IPR= that relates to this draft.

 =

Since the last call will= overlap with the IETF meeting, this working group last call will be

extended to three weeks = and will end Friday  November 13, 2015. 

 =

This document went throu= gh WGLC a couple of years ago, but due to a series of events

(including an illness, a= nd addition of two additional co-authors) was not progressed for

publication at the time.= As with any WGLC, working group participants are requested to

read the document and co= mment, and if you feel that the document is ready for publication

it is appropriate to res= pond to any WGLC with a short and simple email indicating support.

 =

Ross

for the MPLS WG chairs

 =

 =

Questo messaggio e i suoi allegati sono indiriz= zati esclusivamente alle persone indicate. La diffusione, copia o qualsiasi altra azione derivante dalla conoscenza di queste informazioni= sono rigorosamente vietate. Qualora abbiate ricevuto questo documento per = errore siete cortesemente pregati di darne immediata comunicazione al mitte= nte e di provvedere alla sua distruzione, Grazie.

This e-mail and any attachments=  = is confidential and may contain privileged information intended for the addressee(s) only.= Dissemination, copying, printing or use by anybody else is unauthorised. I= f you are not the intended recipient, please delete this message and any at= tachments and advise the sender by return e-mail, Thanks.

3D"rispettaRispetta l'ambiente. Non stampare questa mail se non =E8 necessario.

 

--_000_95B44B74B6A9CC41BDF8C16985D4F35448611AF0telmbb003ba020t_-- --_004_95B44B74B6A9CC41BDF8C16985D4F35448611AF0telmbb003ba020t_ Content-Type: image/gif; name="image001.gif" Content-Description: image001.gif Content-Disposition: inline; filename="image001.gif"; size=677; creation-date="Fri, 23 Oct 2015 10:02:22 GMT"; modification-date="Fri, 23 Oct 2015 10:02:22 GMT" Content-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 R0lGODlhGgAoANU5AEiFNnikNyRvNcvYOafCOEOEW3DO3jB2NqjGs9ny9o+zOIOrN+L1+G+ggbzo 8GCUN1SNNv///zx+NrPJOL/ROYPV44zY5YuzmrfQwCZxQlKNaMXZzOfy8NTi2TV6TuLs5vX8/ez5 +4yzmtTj2cXr8mCXdKni62ycN5/f6aDf6X2qjrPl7rLl7Zu6OJbb53nS4PH188bs8sXZzfH18pq9 p0SDWxhnNWbL3NfgOf///wAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACH5BAEAADkALAAAAAAaACgAAAb/wJxw SBQ6WMWkMmm6kZbQ5OvmjFoT1JuBYYWmsrcXqJvEgm8WctFypnI66pyjfXMhCmqGgR4r2S5dIBV0 FjI2h3BRX20VHAUCEjZ4UHNtFo42BA+HCEskbQYOIwU2CjgBNgAZM0kMbSYcIjYCBDg4LTYLf0V6 YCghNBk2DwO2OASZqkS9VBYMCB6pE8bGucidOYJUoaOptdQTFDg2ATgHGkIs2wyyAqbUtgICCwfl uh8ge1sNNhDF8LYiHYKAg4INBJUS8FsAEF6AA6lsHWjg4gYKDDZONGwIAIAtCAX2hPAgYSNHj6ds 3KiA8V3DAQGm2epoS4HKFQ0EmMRhc97Mwge2kN1IoIGgyQECD5wQUO6YygTkdtpCdSgqDl0VoDaV OmDBpm+oTCQoABQgBZfGbIrDAUBDAgcNDnDs98/WA504Buxa0RKgzVkB/h0oi+pDjgQhHtU1RgDi oY6l8gpAJyTBCBsSFtuC6XjWTBuJhIRAgFkmwAmoAkM4mCQCBmEB1sIDIKAFRGytYfDrt4CAuAkn qnrYYCXCBxGkqlYtgbtLhOcbMNSw0SBOEmg2VFj/sGHDhRLCNBC3fqFqARWhowQBADs= --_004_95B44B74B6A9CC41BDF8C16985D4F35448611AF0telmbb003ba020t_-- From nobody Fri Oct 23 08:10:21 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7CD351A07BC; Fri, 23 Oct 2015 08:10:20 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.901 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 uuQ3tR_-mrqh; Fri, 23 Oct 2015 08:10:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from na01-bn1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-bn1bon0732.outbound.protection.outlook.com [IPv6:2a01:111:f400:fc10::1:732]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C67B21A036B; Fri, 23 Oct 2015 08:10:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from DM2PR05MB573.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.141.159.16) by DM2PR05MB575.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.141.159.24) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.306.13; Fri, 23 Oct 2015 15:10:11 +0000 Received: from DM2PR05MB573.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([10.141.159.16]) by DM2PR05MB573.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([10.141.159.16]) with mapi id 15.01.0306.003; Fri, 23 Oct 2015 15:10:10 +0000 From: Ross Callon To: "mpls@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: Poll for adoption for draft-vainshtein-mpls-gal-tc-ttl-handling-03 Thread-Index: AQHRAG34vYWZ0jGiBkSo2yhyQIWXI555SAHg Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2015 15:10:10 +0000 Message-ID: References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=rcallon@juniper.net; x-originating-ip: [66.129.241.11] x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; DM2PR05MB575; 5:L1H6RUif9xMYdEWpEZKc+k2pm4TimI07L12hjLOOCpLE5SHzUI8klrMrV/BVUl6lByisvmaSQywJyDqhjH3IWj/1JfTQCtBMzOE3Xw3ZLj2qht1SQEx4FvRqXLXWhYh8pG3iti2xr+xSyxlMIydrJA==; 24:eGWN9yn8+y8DFmnzehas+LoPzZsZuAZmQpovZApjmCvUf0dTulO5CSH8NZ+LLa8HraRsoLsHDUHfkJnCfBMNPVgPOpOn5y7iZiIgDkia5Gs=; 20:qeU7+dMdClBMgfVXw8KNXn82jeIfNtb8ZSTrCAAErbRtldS93kUORewL4tFuMn43SF9sYIWMl0EPvEFlTySszA== x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:DM2PR05MB575; x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:(138986009662008)(108003899814671); x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(601004)(2401047)(8121501046)(5005006)(520078)(3002001)(102215026); SRVR:DM2PR05MB575; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:DM2PR05MB575; x-forefront-prvs: 0738AF4208 x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(377454003)(189002)(199003)(164054003)(105586002)(33656002)(76176999)(15975445007)(99286002)(86362001)(77096005)(40100003)(54356999)(2900100001)(102836002)(92566002)(50986999)(106116001)(18717965001)(10400500002)(5008740100001)(76576001)(106356001)(16236675004)(230783001)(122556002)(2950100001)(19580405001)(101416001)(66066001)(2501003)(19625215002)(450100001)(5004730100002)(87936001)(19580395003)(97736004)(5001960100002)(2351001)(19609705001)(19300405004)(110136002)(81156007)(189998001)(5002640100001)(5003600100002)(74316001)(5007970100001); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:DM2PR05MB575; H:DM2PR05MB573.namprd05.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; MX:1; A:1; LANG:en; received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: juniper.net does not designate permitted sender hosts) spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:23 spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_DM2PR05MB573B005BA69115D04592CF4A5260DM2PR05MB573namprd_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: juniper.net X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 23 Oct 2015 15:10:10.6444 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: bea78b3c-4cdb-4130-854a-1d193232e5f4 X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: DM2PR05MB575 Archived-At: Cc: "mpls-chairs@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [mpls] Poll for adoption for draft-vainshtein-mpls-gal-tc-ttl-handling-03 X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2015 15:10:20 -0000 --_000_DM2PR05MB573B005BA69115D04592CF4A5260DM2PR05MB573namprd_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable This poll has closed, and we do not have consensus at the current time. The authors of draft-vainshtein-mpls-gal-tc-ttl-handling and of RFC 5586 ar= e currently trying to work out a time to meet and resolve their issues. We will make su= re that the MPLS working group is kept up to date on any progress. Thanks, Ross From: Ross Callon [mailto:rcallon@juniper.net] Sent: Tuesday, October 06, 2015 3:34 PM To: mpls@ietf.org Cc: mpls-chairs@ietf.org Subject: Poll for adoption for draft-vainshtein-mpls-gal-tc-ttl-handling-03 This is to start a two week poll on adopting draft-vainshtein-mpls-gal-tc-t= tl-handling-03 as an MPLS working group document. Please send your comments (support/not support) to the mpls working group mailing list (mpls@ietf.org). There are no IPR disclosures pertaining to the draft. The authors have all = indicated that they are not aware of any IPR that applies to this document. This poll for adoption will end Wednesday October 21, 2015. Thanks, Ross --_000_DM2PR05MB573B005BA69115D04592CF4A5260DM2PR05MB573namprd_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

This poll has closed, and= we do not have consensus at the current time.

 <= /p>

The authors of draft-vain= shtein-mpls-gal-tc-ttl-handling and of RFC 5586 are currently

trying to work out a time= to meet and resolve their issues. We will make sure that the

MPLS working group is kep= t up to date on any progress.

 <= /p>

Thanks, Ross

 <= /p>

From: Ross Cal= lon [mailto:rcallon@juniper.net]
Sent: Tuesday, October 06, 2015 3:34 PM
To: mpls@ietf.org
Cc: mpls-chairs@ietf.org
Subject: Poll for adoption for draft-vainshtein-mpls-gal-tc-ttl-hand= ling-03

 

This is to start a two week poll on ado= pting draft-vainshtein-mpls-gal-tc-ttl-handling-03

as an MPLS working group document.=

 

Please send your comments (support/not = support) to the mpls working group

mailing list (mpls@ietf.org).

 

There are no IPR disclosures pertaining= to the draft. The authors have all indicated that

they are not aware of any IPR that appl= ies to this document.

 

This poll for adoption will end Wednesd= ay October 21, 2015.

 

Thanks, Ross

 

--_000_DM2PR05MB573B005BA69115D04592CF4A5260DM2PR05MB573namprd_-- From nobody Sat Oct 24 01:08:35 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A35AA1B2BC7; Sat, 24 Oct 2015 01:08:34 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.276 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.276 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=0.723, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=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 cFQ_8oMLDslh; Sat, 24 Oct 2015 01:08:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-wi0-x236.google.com (mail-wi0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c05::236]) (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 686101B2B26; Sat, 24 Oct 2015 01:08:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: by wicfx6 with SMTP id fx6so56715305wic.1; Sat, 24 Oct 2015 01:08:32 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:disposition-notification-to:date:from:reply-to :user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references:in-reply-to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=spG79y04vh+Zi11JfkHGeuXeR/ByZoWguxLTMvB7D5Q=; b=avtU7ME93VkpmaZy5S4cAiIlnXN5pqdUbfnqWEk9F44PhrN6jCUhXswvvwQHbWWzPP GB0NphLL/WZMOlGzgaSKss6Y7nMRRnYAPNPVztPb9S1wONKwgven/3iYfJofrUnhIfhJ yM8jFgaBn97xVoQGZhK0N7keQc6VO3gfZzhDbw0JTqkRSoJdqYYrgN0a1ehWJSJkDWYL ypY5yl71RzL6t59aatU015PrH3oLqRt29wvGu6XN+Dyumh06/jg+WRzO6wkA7p5ohSb8 2d4DLEXn4oQbDHrdj1MFVK9/5sLKSLMHl9ou1q9uT/3Jp7izjcIw8+p9kMLa8OL9ZJ3D O/6A== X-Received: by 10.180.108.129 with SMTP id hk1mr8743271wib.52.1445674111963; Sat, 24 Oct 2015 01:08:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from McAsterix.local ([92.109.37.136]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id nf15sm5688178wic.22.2015.10.24.01.08.30 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sat, 24 Oct 2015 01:08:30 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <562B3C7D.4070404@gmail.com> Date: Sat, 24 Oct 2015 10:08:29 +0200 From: Huub van Helvoort User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.10; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ross Callon , "mpls@ietf.org" References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Archived-At: Cc: "satoshi.ueno@ntt.com" , "mpls-chairs@ietf.org" , Loa Andersson , "koike.yoshinori@lab.ntt.co.jp" , "Manuel.Paul@telekom.de" , "arai.kaoru@lab.ntt.co.jp" Subject: Re: [mpls] working group last call on draft-ietf-mpls-tp-temporal-hitless-psm-07.txt X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list Reply-To: huubatwork@gmail.com List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 24 Oct 2015 08:08:34 -0000
All,

Yes, I support this document.
It is an important addition to the use of OAM.
It is ready for publication.

Best regards, Huub.


On 22-10-15 17:33, Ross Callon wrote:
Working Group,
 
This is to initiate a working group last call on draft-ietf-mpls-tp-temporal-hitless-psm-07.txt.
 
Please send your comments to the mpls wg mailing list (mpls@ietf.org).
 
There are no IPR disclosures against this document. All the authors have stated that they
are not aware of any IPR that relates to this draft.
 
Since the last call will overlap with the IETF meeting, this working group last call will be
extended to three weeks and will end Friday  November 13, 2015. 
 
This document went through WGLC a couple of years ago, but due to a series of events
(including an illness, and addition of two additional co-authors) was not progressed for
publication at the time. As with any WGLC, working group participants are requested to
read the document and comment, and if you feel that the document is ready for publication
it is appropriate to respond to any WGLC with a short and simple email indicating support.
 
Ross
for the MPLS WG chairs  

-- 
*****************************************************************
              请记住，你是独一无二的，就像其他每一个人一样
From nobody Sat Oct 24 22:38:37 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B7DBD1ACD30; Sat, 24 Oct 2015 22:38:35 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.901 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 EtD96xoJxGSA; Sat, 24 Oct 2015 22:38:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from emea01-db3-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-db3on0715.outbound.protection.outlook.com [IPv6:2a01:111:f400:fe04::715]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D24CB1ACD2E; Sat, 24 Oct 2015 22:38:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from DB3PR03MB0780.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com (10.161.55.12) by DB3PR03MB0777.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com (10.161.54.27) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.300.14; Sun, 25 Oct 2015 05:38:10 +0000 Received: from DB3PR03MB0780.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com ([10.161.55.12]) by DB3PR03MB0780.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com ([10.161.55.12]) with mapi id 15.01.0306.003; Sun, 25 Oct 2015 05:38:10 +0000 From: Alexander Vainshtein To: "mpls@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: working group last call on draft-ietf-mpls-tp-temporal-hitless-psm-07.txt Thread-Index: AdEM3vQ4r5okhukgSou3JT2PtoQN4gAYjHVwAA0JZxAAASKEYABbWyV/ Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2015 05:38:09 +0000 Message-ID: References: <7347100B5761DC41A166AC17F22DF1122190E95C@eusaamb103.ericsson.se> <23126F6FC5CA3E44916CF99D4E0B878B44E5E00D@TELMBA001BA020.telecomitalia.local>, <95B44B74B6A9CC41BDF8C16985D4F35448611AF0@telmbb003ba020.telecomitalia.local> In-Reply-To: <95B44B74B6A9CC41BDF8C16985D4F35448611AF0@telmbb003ba020.telecomitalia.local> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: yes X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=Alexander.Vainshtein@ecitele.com; x-originating-ip: [5.153.9.206] x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; DB3PR03MB0777; 5:vdc/tqnbNI1i+//NOXfS97/kEkNPl6ol3+To/tpcDiHLYL4NSJbOaNysMvX35CYzbtUNdfaW4HiyLL6PrxUbZmYm3dbO21pQJg66q77WdagUeS3qGtvCVdcWpCnVD7AQJ3CF3/bW3BBEqPKd1Q3C7Q==; 24:cuGySRHaKxhc4ExytwlidmuLzb/Ostw8rBFdqDsmGLY0MIWKiNaCP0DwOxJV9lYzbOOYdVHcoZqlAy8ZanX2kE6RihPYEbf3rywYcjfyEH8=; 20:wgKQ/nqcnX2+yDK4Cp++PNakekvhmus0dFuYQknpEtmMf/FcVRUkXaqhCFQSs2K2OQ9Yat3UUr509mxTu5q+9A== x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:DB3PR03MB0777; x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:(260130700054247); x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(601004)(2401047)(520078)(5005006)(8121501046)(3002001)(102215026); SRVR:DB3PR03MB0777; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:DB3PR03MB0777; x-forefront-prvs: 074040B844 x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(377454003)(189002)(199003)(5001920100001)(5890100001)(97736004)(2501003)(5008740100001)(76576001)(92566002)(93886004)(5004730100002)(5007970100001)(19627595001)(19627405001)(2351001)(105586002)(230783001)(106356001)(102836002)(81156007)(2900100001)(2950100001)(11100500001)(54356999)(87936001)(76176999)(50986999)(99936001)(77096005)(71446004)(74316001)(19613025002)(86362001)(19580405001)(19580395003)(19625215002)(101416001)(66066001)(33656002)(17760045003)(189998001)(18206015028)(40100003)(122556002)(5002640100001)(110136002)(5001960100002)(16236675004)(5003600100002)(10400500002)(7059030); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:DB3PR03MB0777; H:DB3PR03MB0780.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; MX:1; A:1; LANG:en; received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: ecitele.com does not designate permitted sender hosts) spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:23 spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM Content-Type: multipart/related; boundary="_004_DB3PR03MB07808C46FFB3A77E440A77569D240DB3PR03MB0780eurp_"; type="multipart/alternative" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: ecitele.com X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 25 Oct 2015 05:38:09.4628 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 2c514a61-08de-4519-b4c0-921fef62c42a X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: DB3PR03MB0777 Archived-At: Cc: "satoshi.ueno@ntt.com" , "mpls-chairs@ietf.org" , Loa Andersson , "koike.yoshinori@lab.ntt.co.jp" , "Manuel.Paul@telekom.de" , "arai.kaoru@lab.ntt.co.jp" , Ross Callon Subject: Re: [mpls] working group last call on draft-ietf-mpls-tp-temporal-hitless-psm-07.txt X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2015 05:38:35 -0000 --_004_DB3PR03MB07808C46FFB3A77E440A77569D240DB3PR03MB0780eurp_ Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_DB3PR03MB07808C46FFB3A77E440A77569D240DB3PR03MB0780eurp_" --_000_DB3PR03MB07808C46FFB3A77E440A77569D240DB3PR03MB0780eurp_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Support. Regards, Sasha ________________________________ From: mpls on behalf of Di Giglio Andrea Sent: Friday, October 23, 2015 1:02 PM To: Gregory Mirsky; Ross Callon; mpls@ietf.org Cc: satoshi.ueno@ntt.com; mpls-chairs@ietf.org; Loa Andersson; koike.yoshin= ori@lab.ntt.co.jp; Manuel.Paul@telekom.de; arai.kaoru@lab.ntt.co.jp Subject: [mpls] R: working group last call on draft-ietf-mpls-tp-temporal-h= itless-psm-07.txt I also Support this draft. Best Regards, Andrea From: mpls [mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Ross Callon Sent: Thursday, October 22, 2015 8:33 AM To: mpls@ietf.org Cc: mpls-chairs@ietf.org; Loa Andersson; koike= .yoshinori@lab.ntt.co.jp; Manuel.Paul= @telekom.de; satoshi.ueno@ntt.com; arai.kaoru@lab.ntt.co.jp Subject: [mpls] working group last call on draft-ietf-mpls-tp-temporal-hitl= ess-psm-07.txt Working Group, This is to initiate a working group last call on draft-ietf-mpls-tp-tempora= l-hitless-psm-07.txt. Please send your comments to the mpls wg mailing list (mpls@ietf.org). There are no IPR disclosures against this document. All the authors have st= ated that they are not aware of any IPR that relates to this draft. Since the last call will overlap with the IETF meeting, this working group = last call will be extended to three weeks and will end Friday November 13, 2015. This document went through WGLC a couple of years ago, but due to a series = of events (including an illness, and addition of two additional co-authors) was not p= rogressed for publication at the time. As with any WGLC, working group participants are r= equested to read the document and comment, and if you feel that the document is ready f= or publication it is appropriate to respond to any WGLC with a short and simple email indi= cating support. Ross for the MPLS WG chairs Questo messaggio e i suoi allegati sono indirizzati esclusivamente alle per= sone indicate. La diffusione, copia o qualsiasi altra azione derivante dall= a conoscenza di queste informazioni sono rigorosamente vietate. Qualora abb= iate ricevuto questo documento per errore siete cortesemente pregati di dar= ne immediata comunicazione al mittente e di provvedere alla sua distruzione= , Grazie. This e-mail and any attachments is confidential and may contain privileged = information intended for the addressee(s) only. Dissemination, copying, pri= nting or use by anybody else is unauthorised. If you are not the intended r= ecipient, please delete this message and any attachments and advise the sen= der by return e-mail, Thanks. [rispetta l'ambiente]Rispetta l'ambiente. Non stampare questa mail se non = =E8 necessario. --_000_DB3PR03MB07808C46FFB3A77E440A77569D240DB3PR03MB0780eurp_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


Support.

Regards,
Sasha

From: mpls <mpls-bounces= @ietf.org> on behalf of Di Giglio Andrea <andrea.digiglio@telecomital= ia.it>
Sent: Friday, October 23, 2015 1:02 PM
To: Gregory Mirsky; Ross Callon; mpls@ietf.org
Cc: satoshi.ueno@ntt.com; mpls-chairs@ietf.org; Loa Andersson; koike= .yoshinori@lab.ntt.co.jp; Manuel.Paul@telekom.de; arai.kaoru@lab.ntt.co.jp<= br> Subject: [mpls] R: working group last call on draft-ietf-mpls-tp-tem= poral-hitless-psm-07.txt
 

I also Support this draft.

 

Best Regards,

 

Andrea

 

From:mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Ross Callon
Sent: Thursday, October 22, 2015 8:33 AM
To: mpls@ietf.org
Cc: mpls-chairs@ietf.org; Loa Andersson; koike.yoshinori@lab.ntt.co.jp; Manuel.Paul@telekom.de; satoshi.ueno@ntt.com; arai.kaoru@lab.ntt.co.jp
Subject: [mpls] working group last call on draft-ietf-mpls-tp-tempor= al-hitless-psm-07.txt

 

Working Group,

 

This is to initiate a working group last call = on draft-ietf-mpls-tp-temporal-hitless-psm-07.txt.

 

Please send your comments to the mpls wg maili= ng list (mpls@ietf.org).

 

There are no IPR disclosures against this docu= ment. All the authors have stated that they

are not aware of any IPR that relates to this = draft.

 

Since the last call will overlap with the IETF= meeting, this working group last call will be

extended to three weeks and will end Friday&nb= sp; November 13, 2015. 

 

This document went through WGLC a couple of ye= ars ago, but due to a series of events

(including an illness, and addition of two add= itional co-authors) was not progressed for

publication at the time. As with any WGLC, wor= king group participants are requested to

read the document and comment, and if you feel= that the document is ready for publication

it is appropriate to respond to any WGLC with = a short and simple email indicating support.

 

Ross

for the MPLS WG chairs

 

 

Questo messaggio e i suoi allegati sono ind= irizzati esclusivamente alle persone indicate. La diffusione, copia o quals= iasi altra azione derivante dalla conoscenza di queste informazioni sono rigorosamente vietate. Qualora abbiate ricevuto questo d= ocumento per errore siete cortesemente pregati di darne immediata comunicaz= ione al mittente e di provvedere alla sua distruzione, Grazie.

This e-mail and any attachments is confidential and may contain privileged information intended for the addressee(s) only.= Dissemination, copying, printing or use by anybody else is unauthorised. I= f you are not the intended recipient, please delete this message and any at= tachments and advise the sender by return e-mail, Thanks.

3D"rispettaRispetta l'ambiente. Non stampare questa mail se non =E8 necessario.

 

--_000_DB3PR03MB07808C46FFB3A77E440A77569D240DB3PR03MB0780eurp_-- --_004_DB3PR03MB07808C46FFB3A77E440A77569D240DB3PR03MB0780eurp_ Content-Type: image/gif; name="image001.gif" Content-Description: image001.gif Content-Disposition: inline; filename="image001.gif"; size=677; creation-date="Fri, 23 Oct 2015 10:02:22 GMT"; modification-date="Fri, 23 Oct 2015 10:02:22 GMT" Content-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 R0lGODlhGgAoANU5AEiFNnikNyRvNcvYOafCOEOEW3DO3jB2NqjGs9ny9o+zOIOrN+L1+G+ggbzo 8GCUN1SNNv///zx+NrPJOL/ROYPV44zY5YuzmrfQwCZxQlKNaMXZzOfy8NTi2TV6TuLs5vX8/ez5 +4yzmtTj2cXr8mCXdKni62ycN5/f6aDf6X2qjrPl7rLl7Zu6OJbb53nS4PH188bs8sXZzfH18pq9 p0SDWxhnNWbL3NfgOf///wAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACH5BAEAADkALAAAAAAaACgAAAb/wJxw SBQ6WMWkMmm6kZbQ5OvmjFoT1JuBYYWmsrcXqJvEgm8WctFypnI66pyjfXMhCmqGgR4r2S5dIBV0 FjI2h3BRX20VHAUCEjZ4UHNtFo42BA+HCEskbQYOIwU2CjgBNgAZM0kMbSYcIjYCBDg4LTYLf0V6 YCghNBk2DwO2OASZqkS9VBYMCB6pE8bGucidOYJUoaOptdQTFDg2ATgHGkIs2wyyAqbUtgICCwfl uh8ge1sNNhDF8LYiHYKAg4INBJUS8FsAEF6AA6lsHWjg4gYKDDZONGwIAIAtCAX2hPAgYSNHj6ds 3KiA8V3DAQGm2epoS4HKFQ0EmMRhc97Mwge2kN1IoIGgyQECD5wQUO6YygTkdtpCdSgqDl0VoDaV OmDBpm+oTCQoABQgBZfGbIrDAUBDAgcNDnDs98/WA504Buxa0RKgzVkB/h0oi+pDjgQhHtU1RgDi oY6l8gpAJyTBCBsSFtuC6XjWTBuJhIRAgFkmwAmoAkM4mCQCBmEB1sIDIKAFRGytYfDrt4CAuAkn qnrYYCXCBxGkqlYtgbtLhOcbMNSw0SBOEmg2VFj/sGHDhRLCNBC3fqFqARWhowQBADs= --_004_DB3PR03MB07808C46FFB3A77E440A77569D240DB3PR03MB0780eurp_-- From nobody Sun Oct 25 18:34:50 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C89551B34A3; Sun, 25 Oct 2015 18:34:48 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.21 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.21 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham 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 mpRjmWSd3q1j; Sun, 25 Oct 2015 18:34:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [194.213.3.17]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BA6B11B34A2; Sun, 25 Oct 2015 18:34:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 172.18.7.190 (EHLO lhreml405-hub.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.7.190]) by lhrrg01-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.3.7-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id CDA00739; Mon, 26 Oct 2015 01:34:40 +0000 (GMT) Received: from SZXEMA411-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.82.72.70) by lhreml405-hub.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.242) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.235.1; Mon, 26 Oct 2015 01:34:39 +0000 Received: from SZXEMA510-MBX.china.huawei.com ([169.254.3.229]) by szxema411-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.82.72.70]) with mapi id 14.03.0235.001; Mon, 26 Oct 2015 09:34:34 +0800 From: Mach Chen To: Ross Callon , "mpls@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: working group last call on draft-ietf-mpls-tp-temporal-hitless-psm-07.txt Thread-Index: AdEM3vQ4r5okhukgSou3JT2PtoQN4gCrzBIw Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2015 01:34:34 +0000 Message-ID: References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US, zh-CN Content-Language: zh-CN X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.111.102.135] Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_F73A3CB31E8BE34FA1BBE3C8F0CB2AE28B6175DFSZXEMA510MBXchi_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Archived-At: Cc: "satoshi.ueno@ntt.com" , "mpls-chairs@ietf.org" , Loa Andersson , "koike.yoshinori@lab.ntt.co.jp" , "Manuel.Paul@telekom.de" , "arai.kaoru@lab.ntt.co.jp" Subject: Re: [mpls] working group last call on draft-ietf-mpls-tp-temporal-hitless-psm-07.txt X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2015 01:34:48 -0000 --_000_F73A3CB31E8BE34FA1BBE3C8F0CB2AE28B6175DFSZXEMA510MBXchi_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I have read the document and support the publication! Best regards, Mach From: mpls [mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Ross Callon Sent: Thursday, October 22, 2015 11:33 PM To: mpls@ietf.org Cc: mpls-chairs@ietf.org; Loa Andersson; koike.yoshinori@lab.ntt.co.jp; Man= uel.Paul@telekom.de; satoshi.ueno@ntt.com; arai.kaoru@lab.ntt.co.jp Subject: [mpls] working group last call on draft-ietf-mpls-tp-temporal-hitl= ess-psm-07.txt Working Group, This is to initiate a working group last call on draft-ietf-mpls-tp-tempora= l-hitless-psm-07.txt. Please send your comments to the mpls wg mailing list (mpls@ietf.org). There are no IPR disclosures against this document. All the authors have st= ated that they are not aware of any IPR that relates to this draft. Since the last call will overlap with the IETF meeting, this working group = last call will be extended to three weeks and will end Friday November 13, 2015. This document went through WGLC a couple of years ago, but due to a series = of events (including an illness, and addition of two additional co-authors) was not p= rogressed for publication at the time. As with any WGLC, working group participants are r= equested to read the document and comment, and if you feel that the document is ready f= or publication it is appropriate to respond to any WGLC with a short and simple email indi= cating support. Ross for the MPLS WG chairs --_000_F73A3CB31E8BE34FA1BBE3C8F0CB2AE28B6175DFSZXEMA510MBXchi_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I have rea= d the document and support the publication!

 = ;

Best regar= ds,

Mach<= /o:p>

 = ;

From: mpls [mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Ross Callon
Sent: Thursday, October 22, 2015 11:33 PM
To: mpls@ietf.org
Cc: mpls-chairs@ietf.org; Loa Andersson; koike.yoshinori@lab.ntt.co.= jp; Manuel.Paul@telekom.de; satoshi.ueno@ntt.com; arai.kaoru@lab.ntt.co.jp<= br> Subject: [mpls] working group last call on draft-ietf-mpls-tp-tempor= al-hitless-psm-07.txt

 

Working Group,

 =

This is to initiate a wo= rking group last call on draft-ietf-mpls-tp-temporal-hitless-psm-07.txt.

 =

Please send your comment= s to the mpls wg mailing list (mpls@ietf.o= rg).

 =

There are no IPR disclos= ures against this document. All the authors have stated that they

are not aware of any IPR= that relates to this draft.

 =

Since the last call will= overlap with the IETF meeting, this working group last call will be

extended to three weeks = and will end Friday  November 13, 2015. 

 =

This document went throu= gh WGLC a couple of years ago, but due to a series of events

(including an illness, a= nd addition of two additional co-authors) was not progressed for

publication at the time.= As with any WGLC, working group participants are requested to

read the document and co= mment, and if you feel that the document is ready for publication

it is appropriate to res= pond to any WGLC with a short and simple email indicating support.

 =

Ross

for the MPLS WG chairs

 =

 =

--_000_F73A3CB31E8BE34FA1BBE3C8F0CB2AE28B6175DFSZXEMA510MBXchi_-- From nobody Sun Oct 25 20:49:42 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 090E31A9103; Sun, 25 Oct 2015 20:49:41 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.21 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.21 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham 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 S7yeFEEVOfbB; Sun, 25 Oct 2015 20:49:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [194.213.3.17]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9621B1A9101; Sun, 25 Oct 2015 20:49:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 172.18.7.190 (EHLO lhreml402-hub.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.7.190]) by lhrrg01-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.3.7-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id CDA09646; Mon, 26 Oct 2015 03:49:34 +0000 (GMT) Received: from NKGEML402-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.98.56.33) by lhreml402-hub.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.241) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.235.1; Mon, 26 Oct 2015 03:49:33 +0000 Received: from NKGEML512-MBX.china.huawei.com ([169.254.7.203]) by nkgeml402-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.98.56.33]) with mapi id 14.03.0235.001; Mon, 26 Oct 2015 11:49:27 +0800 From: "Dongjie (Jimmy)" To: Ross Callon , "mpls@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: working group last call on draft-ietf-mpls-tp-temporal-hitless-psm-07.txt Thread-Index: AdEM3vQ4r5okhukgSou3JT2PtoQN4gCwjvxw Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2015 03:49:27 +0000 Message-ID: <76CD132C3ADEF848BD84D028D243C927743C21E7@nkgeml512-mbx.china.huawei.com> References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US, zh-CN Content-Language: zh-CN X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.111.97.131] Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_76CD132C3ADEF848BD84D028D243C927743C21E7nkgeml512mbxchi_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Archived-At: Cc: "satoshi.ueno@ntt.com" , "mpls-chairs@ietf.org" , Loa Andersson , "koike.yoshinori@lab.ntt.co.jp" , "Manuel.Paul@telekom.de" , "arai.kaoru@lab.ntt.co.jp" Subject: Re: [mpls] working group last call on draft-ietf-mpls-tp-temporal-hitless-psm-07.txt X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2015 03:49:41 -0000 --_000_76CD132C3ADEF848BD84D028D243C927743C21E7nkgeml512mbxchi_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Yes, I support the publication of this document. Best regards, Jie From: mpls [mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Ross Callon Sent: Thursday, October 22, 2015 11:33 PM To: mpls@ietf.org Cc: mpls-chairs@ietf.org; Loa Andersson; koike.yoshinori@lab.ntt.co.jp; Man= uel.Paul@telekom.de; satoshi.ueno@ntt.com; arai.kaoru@lab.ntt.co.jp Subject: [mpls] working group last call on draft-ietf-mpls-tp-temporal-hitl= ess-psm-07.txt Working Group, This is to initiate a working group last call on draft-ietf-mpls-tp-tempora= l-hitless-psm-07.txt. Please send your comments to the mpls wg mailing list (mpls@ietf.org). There are no IPR disclosures against this document. All the authors have st= ated that they are not aware of any IPR that relates to this draft. Since the last call will overlap with the IETF meeting, this working group = last call will be extended to three weeks and will end Friday November 13, 2015. This document went through WGLC a couple of years ago, but due to a series = of events (including an illness, and addition of two additional co-authors) was not p= rogressed for publication at the time. As with any WGLC, working group participants are r= equested to read the document and comment, and if you feel that the document is ready f= or publication it is appropriate to respond to any WGLC with a short and simple email indi= cating support. Ross for the MPLS WG chairs --_000_76CD132C3ADEF848BD84D028D243C927743C21E7nkgeml512mbxchi_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Yes, I sup= port the publication of this document.

 = ;

Best regar= ds,

Jie=

 = ;

From: mpls [mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Ross Callon
Sent: Thursday, October 22, 2015 11:33 PM
To: mpls@ietf.org
Cc: mpls-chairs@ietf.org; Loa Andersson; koike.yoshinori@lab.ntt.co.= jp; Manuel.Paul@telekom.de; satoshi.ueno@ntt.com; arai.kaoru@lab.ntt.co.jp<= br> Subject: [mpls] working group last call on draft-ietf-mpls-tp-tempor= al-hitless-psm-07.txt

 

Working Group,

 =

This is to initiate a wo= rking group last call on draft-ietf-mpls-tp-temporal-hitless-psm-07.txt.

 =

Please send your comment= s to the mpls wg mailing list (mpls@ietf.o= rg).

 =

There are no IPR disclos= ures against this document. All the authors have stated that they

are not aware of any IPR= that relates to this draft.

 =

Since the last call will= overlap with the IETF meeting, this working group last call will be

extended to three weeks = and will end Friday  November 13, 2015. 

 =

This document went throu= gh WGLC a couple of years ago, but due to a series of events

(including an illness, a= nd addition of two additional co-authors) was not progressed for

publication at the time.= As with any WGLC, working group participants are requested to

read the document and co= mment, and if you feel that the document is ready for publication

it is appropriate to res= pond to any WGLC with a short and simple email indicating support.

 =

Ross

for the MPLS WG chairs

 =

 =

--_000_76CD132C3ADEF848BD84D028D243C927743C21E7nkgeml512mbxchi_-- From nobody Mon Oct 26 01:39:11 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 419141B38EC for ; Mon, 26 Oct 2015 01:39:10 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.93 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.93 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_05=-0.5, HELO_EQ_IT=0.635, HOST_EQ_IT=1.245, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham 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 UwXx-ovwHF66 for ; Mon, 26 Oct 2015 01:39:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from TELEDG002RM001.telecomitalia.it (teledg002rm001.telecomitalia.it [217.169.121.30]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9D0D81B38EB for ; Mon, 26 Oct 2015 01:39:05 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="_0f0e4b37-4bac-45fb-b956-3920eeaf24dc_" Received: from TELCAH008RM001.telecomitalia.local (10.19.10.119) by TELEDG002RM001.telecomitalia.it (10.19.3.112) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.181.6; Mon, 26 Oct 2015 09:39:03 +0100 Received: from TELMBA006RM001.telecomitalia.local ([169.254.1.89]) by TELCAH008RM001.telecomitalia.local ([10.19.10.119]) with mapi id 14.03.0266.001; Mon, 26 Oct 2015 09:39:02 +0100 From: Cociglio Mauro To: "mpls@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: I: working group last call on draft-ietf-mpls-tp-temporal-hitless-psm-07.txt Thread-Index: AdEPybrBuUDOqdlfSyq8YXge6xkEtA== Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2015 08:39:02 +0000 Message-ID: <9E21D288798F2844A29EC447ECC67C40321502D0@TELMBA006RM001.telecomitalia.local> Accept-Language: it-IT, en-US Content-Language: it-IT X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.19.10.84] x-ti-disclaimer: Disclaimer1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: Subject: [mpls] I: working group last call on draft-ietf-mpls-tp-temporal-hitless-psm-07.txt X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2015 08:39:10 -0000 --_0f0e4b37-4bac-45fb-b956-3920eeaf24dc_ Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_9E21D288798F2844A29EC447ECC67C40321502D0TELMBA006RM001t_" --_000_9E21D288798F2844A29EC447ECC67C40321502D0TELMBA006RM001t_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I support. ___________________ Mauro Cociglio Telecom Italia Via G. Reiss Romoli, 274 10148 - Torino (Italy) Tel.: +390112285028 Mobile: +393357669751 ___________________ Questo messaggio e i suoi allegati sono indirizzati esclusivamente alle per= sone indicate. La diffusione, copia o qualsiasi altra azione derivante dall= a conoscenza di queste informazioni sono rigorosamente vietate. Qualora abb= iate ricevuto questo documento per errore siete cortesemente pregati di dar= ne immediata comunicazione al mittente e di provvedere alla sua distruzione= , Grazie. This e-mail and any attachments is confidential and may contain privileged = information intended for the addressee(s) only. Dissemination, copying, pri= nting or use by anybody else is unauthorised. If you are not the intended r= ecipient, please delete this message and any attachments and advise the sen= der by return e-mail, Thanks. [rispetta l'ambiente]Rispetta l'ambiente. Non stampare questa mail se non ?= necessario. --_000_9E21D288798F2844A29EC447ECC67C40321502D0TELMBA006RM001t_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I support.

 

___________________

Mauro Cociglio

Telecom Italia

Via G. Reiss Romoli, 274

10148 - Torino (Italy)

Tel.: +390112285028

Mobile: +393357669751

___________________

 

= Questo messaggio e i suoi allegati sono indirizzati esclusivamente alle per= sone indicate. La diffusione, copia o qualsiasi altra azione derivante dalla conoscenza di queste informazioni sono rigoro= samente vietate. Qualora abbiate ricevuto questo documento per errore siete= cortesemente pregati di darne immediata comunicazione al mittente e di pro= vvedere alla sua distruzione, Grazie.

This e-mail and any attachments is confidential and may contain privileged information intended for the addressee(s) only.= Dissemination, copying, printing or use by anybody else is unauthorised. I= f you are not the intended recipient, please delete this message and any at= tachments and advise the sender by return e-mail, Thanks.

3D"rispettaRispetta= l'ambiente. Non stampare questa mail se non è necessario.

--_000_9E21D288798F2844A29EC447ECC67C40321502D0TELMBA006RM001t_-- --_0f0e4b37-4bac-45fb-b956-3920eeaf24dc_ Content-Description: logo Ambiente_foglia2.jpg Content-Type: image/jpeg; name="logo Ambiente_foglia2.jpg" Content-Disposition: inline; filename="logo Ambiente_foglia2.jpg" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-ID: 00000000000000000000000000000003@TI.Disclaimer R0lGODlhGgAoANU5AEiFNnikNyRvNcvYOafCOEOEW3DO3jB2NqjGs9ny9o+zOIOrN+L1+G+ggbzo 8GCUN1SNNv///zx+NrPJOL/ROYPV44zY5YuzmrfQwCZxQlKNaMXZzOfy8NTi2TV6TuLs5vX8/ez5 +4yzmtTj2cXr8mCXdKni62ycN5/f6aDf6X2qjrPl7rLl7Zu6OJbb53nS4PH188bs8sXZzfH18pq9 p0SDWxhnNWbL3NfgOf///wAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACH5BAEAADkALAAAAAAaACgAAAb/wJxw SBQ6WMWkMmm6kZbQ5OvmjFoT1JuBYYWmsrcXqJvEgm8WctFypnI66pyjfXMhCmqGgR4r2S5dIBV0 FjI2h3BRX20VHAUCEjZ4UHNtFo42BA+HCEskbQYOIwU2CjgBNgAZM0kMbSYcIjYCBDg4LTYLf0V6 YCghNBk2DwO2OASZqkS9VBYMCB6pE8bGucidOYJUoaOptdQTFDg2ATgHGkIs2wyyAqbUtgICCwfl uh8ge1sNNhDF8LYiHYKAg4INBJUS8FsAEF6AA6lsHWjg4gYKDDZONGwIAIAtCAX2hPAgYSNHj6ds 3KiA8V3DAQGm2epoS4HKFQ0EmMRhc97Mwge2kN1IoIGgyQECD5wQUO6YygTkdtpCdSgqDl0VoDaV OmDBpm+oTCQoABQgBZfGbIrDAUBDAgcNDnDs98/WA504Buxa0RKgzVkB/h0oi+pDjgQhHtU1RgDi oY6l8gpAJyTBCBsSFtuC6XjWTBuJhIRAgFkmwAmoAkM4mCQCBmEB1sIDIKAFRGytYfDrt4CAuAkn qnrYYCXCBxGkqlYtgbtLhOcbMNSw0SBOEmg2VFj/sGHDhRLCNBC3fqFqARWhowQBADs= --_0f0e4b37-4bac-45fb-b956-3920eeaf24dc_-- From nobody Mon Oct 26 03:11:49 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD2F61B3AA5 for ; Mon, 26 Oct 2015 03:11:47 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -105.512 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-105.512 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_05=-0.5, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=ham 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 VGH5p8pdKKx1 for ; Mon, 26 Oct 2015 03:11:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D862D1B3AA1 for ; Mon, 26 Oct 2015 03:11:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: by rfc-editor.org (Postfix, from userid 30) id 1E98A18046B; Mon, 26 Oct 2015 03:11:14 -0700 (PDT) To: loa@pi.se, ina@juniper.net, rhthomas@cisco.com, akatlas@gmail.com, db3546@att.com, aretana@cisco.com, loa@pi.nu, swallow@cisco.com, rcallon@juniper.net X-PHP-Originating-Script: 30:errata_mail_lib.php From: RFC Errata System Message-Id: <20151026101114.1E98A18046B@rfc-editor.org> Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2015 03:11:14 -0700 (PDT) Archived-At: Cc: mpls@ietf.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org, jiessie.xu@ericsson.com Subject: [mpls] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC5036 (4512) X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2015 10:11:47 -0000 The following errata report has been submitted for RFC5036, "LDP Specification". -------------------------------------- You may review the report below and at: http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=5036&eid=4512 -------------------------------------- Type: Technical Reported by: Jiessie Section: 2.5.2 Original Text ------------- 2.4.1. Basic Discovery Mechanism To engage in LDP Basic Discovery on an interface, an LSR periodically sends LDP Link Hellos out the interface. LDP Link Hellos are sent as UDP packets addressed to the well-known LDP discovery port for the \\"all routers on this subnet\\" group multicast address. 2.5.2. Transport Connection Establishment Note that when an LSR sends a Hello, it selects the transport address for its end of the session connection and uses the Hello to advertise the address, either explicitly by including it in an optional Transport Address TLV or implicitly by omitting the TLV and using it as the Hello source address. Corrected Text -------------- Notes ----- According to 2.4.1, an LSR send Hellos to \\"all routers on this subnet\\", the eligible reception LSR should be on this subnet. 2.5.2 states that one way for an LSR to advertise Transport Address is to uses it as Hello source address. On the topology below, LSRa uses 1.1.1.1 as Transport Address and sends Hello(source:1.1.1.1 destination:224.0.0.2) to LSRb. LSRb will ignore this packet which is not on its interface subnet. 1.1.1.1 |LSRa|--------------|LSRb| 10.1.1.1 10.1.1.2 My question is: What\\'s the scenario to use \\"implicitly\\" way to send Hello? Instructions: ------------- This erratum is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, please use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party (IESG) can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary. -------------------------------------- RFC5036 (draft-ietf-mpls-rfc3036bis-04) -------------------------------------- Title : LDP Specification Publication Date : October 2007 Author(s) : L. Andersson, Ed., I. Minei, Ed., B. Thomas, Ed. Category : DRAFT STANDARD Source : Multiprotocol Label Switching Area : Routing Stream : IETF Verifying Party : IESG From nobody Tue Oct 27 21:07:48 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E4C0C1B45D0; Tue, 27 Oct 2015 21:07:45 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.211 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.211 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham 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 dopqt-aZH9P5; Tue, 27 Oct 2015 21:07:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [194.213.3.17]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B369D1B45CC; Tue, 27 Oct 2015 21:07:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 172.18.7.190 (EHLO lhreml405-hub.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.7.190]) by lhrrg01-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.3.7-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id CDE15256; Wed, 28 Oct 2015 04:07:40 +0000 (GMT) Received: from NKGEML404-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.98.56.35) by lhreml405-hub.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.242) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.235.1; Wed, 28 Oct 2015 04:07:39 +0000 Received: from NKGEML512-MBS.china.huawei.com ([169.254.8.187]) by nkgeml404-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.98.56.35]) with mapi id 14.03.0235.001; Wed, 28 Oct 2015 12:07:30 +0800 From: Xuxiaohu To: Xuxiaohu , "'sfc@ietf.org'" , "sfc-chairs@tools.ietf.org" Thread-Topic: New Version Notification for draft-xu-sfc-using-mpls-spring-04.txt Thread-Index: AQHQ6uEhwUT+nrZsQk6IpAAbYfyXTp4z7JRggEylwuA= Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2015 04:07:30 +0000 Message-ID: <1FEE3F8F5CCDE64C9A8E8F4AD27C19EE0CB3DFAF@NKGEML512-MBS.china.huawei.com> Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US Content-Language: zh-CN X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.111.99.55] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Archived-At: Cc: "'mpls@ietf.org'" , "mpls-chairs@tools.ietf.org" Subject: Re: [mpls] New Version Notification for draft-xu-sfc-using-mpls-spring-04.txt X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2015 04:07:46 -0000 SGkgU0ZDIGNvLWNoYWlycywNCg0KSSBoYXZlbid0IHJlY2VpdmVkIGFueSByZXNwb25zZSBmcm9t IHlvdSB5ZXQuIFdvdWxkIHlvdSBwbGVhc2UgdGVsbCB1cyB5b3VyIHRob3VnaHRzIG9uIHRoZSBu ZXcgdmVyc2lvbiBvZiB0aGlzIGRyYWZ0LiBUaGFua3MgYSBsb3QuDQoNCkJlc3QgcmVnYXJkcywN ClhpYW9odSAob24gYmVoYWxmIG9mIGFsbCBjby1hdXRob3JzKQ0KDQo+IC0tLS0tT3JpZ2luYWwg TWVzc2FnZS0tLS0tDQo+IEZyb206IFh1eGlhb2h1DQo+IFNlbnQ6IFdlZG5lc2RheSwgU2VwdGVt YmVyIDA5LCAyMDE1IDU6NDUgUE0NCj4gVG86ICdzZmNAaWV0Zi5vcmcnOyBzZmMtY2hhaXJzQHRv b2xzLmlldGYub3JnDQo+IENjOiAnbXBsc0BpZXRmLm9yZyc7IG1wbHMtY2hhaXJzQHRvb2xzLmll dGYub3JnDQo+IFN1YmplY3Q6IEZXOiBOZXcgVmVyc2lvbiBOb3RpZmljYXRpb24gZm9yIGRyYWZ0 LXh1LXNmYy11c2luZy1tcGxzLXNwcmluZy0wNC50eHQNCj4gDQo+IEhpIGFsbCwNCj4gDQo+IFNl cnZpY2UgY2hhaW5pbmcgaXMgYW4gaW1wb3J0YW50IGZ1bmN0aW9uIGZvciBhbGwgdHlwZSBvZiBu ZXR3b3JrcyBpbmNsdWRpbmcgdGhvc2UNCj4gdXNpbmcgdGhlIHNvdXJjZSByb3V0aW5nIHBhcmFk aWdtIGFzIHNwZWNpZmllZCBieSB0aGUgU1BSSU5HIHdvcmtpbmcgZ3JvdXAuDQo+IFRoaXMgZHJh ZnQgaXMgZXNwZWNpYWxseSBmb2N1c2VkIG9uIHRoZSBTUFJJTkcvTVBMUyBuZXR3b3JrIHNjZW5h cmlvLg0KPiANCj4gV2hlbiB3ZSBwb3N0ZWQgdGhlIGVhcmx5IHZlcnNpb25zICgtMDAgdG8gLTAy KSwgdGhlIGZlZWRiYWNrIGZyb20gdGhlIFNGQw0KPiB3b3JraW5nIGdyb3VwIGNoYWlycyB3YXMg dGhhdCB0aGUgc29sdXRpb24gcmVxdWlyZWQgY2hhbmdlcyB0byB0aGUgTVBMUw0KPiBhcmNoaXRl Y3R1cmUuIFdlIGRpc2N1c3NlZCB0aGlzIGFtb25nIHRoZSBhdXRob3JzIGFuZCBwb3N0ZWQgYSBu ZXcgdmVyc2lvbg0KPiAoLTAzKSB0aGF0IGRvZXMgbm90IHJlcXVpcmUgYW55IGNoYW5nZSB0byB0 aGUgTVBMUyBBcmNoaXRlY3R1cmUgYW55bW9yZS4NCj4gVmVyc2lvbiAtMDQgbWVyZWx5IGNvcnJl Y3RzIHNvbWUgdHlwb3MuDQo+IA0KPiBOb3cgd2Ugd291bGQgbGlrZSB0byBhc2sgdGhlIFNGQyBj aGFpcnMgYW5kIFdHcyBpZiB0aGUgZHJhZnQgY2FuIG5vdyBiZQ0KPiBjb25zaWRlcmVkIGZvciBh ZG9wdGlvbiBieSB0aGUgU0ZDIHdvcmtpbmcgZ3JvdXAuDQo+IA0KPiBCZXN0IHJlZ2FyZHMsDQo+ IFhpYW9odQ0KPiANCj4gPiAtLS0tLU9yaWdpbmFsIE1lc3NhZ2UtLS0tLQ0KPiA+IEZyb206IGlu dGVybmV0LWRyYWZ0c0BpZXRmLm9yZyBbbWFpbHRvOmludGVybmV0LWRyYWZ0c0BpZXRmLm9yZ10N Cj4gPiBTZW50OiBXZWRuZXNkYXksIFNlcHRlbWJlciAwOSwgMjAxNSA1OjIzIFBNDQo+ID4gVG86 IExpemhlbmJpbjsgTHVpcyBNLiBDb250cmVyYXM7IFh1eGlhb2h1OyBIaW1hbnNodSBDLiBTaGFo Ow0KPiA+IFh1eGlhb2h1OyBIaW1hbnNodSBTaGFoOyBMdWlzIE0uIENvbnRyZXJhczsgTGl6aGVu YmluDQo+ID4gU3ViamVjdDogTmV3IFZlcnNpb24gTm90aWZpY2F0aW9uIGZvcg0KPiA+IGRyYWZ0 LXh1LXNmYy11c2luZy1tcGxzLXNwcmluZy0wNC50eHQNCj4gPg0KPiA+DQo+ID4gQSBuZXcgdmVy c2lvbiBvZiBJLUQsIGRyYWZ0LXh1LXNmYy11c2luZy1tcGxzLXNwcmluZy0wNC50eHQNCj4gPiBo YXMgYmVlbiBzdWNjZXNzZnVsbHkgc3VibWl0dGVkIGJ5IFhpYW9odSBYdSBhbmQgcG9zdGVkIHRv IHRoZSBJRVRGDQo+IHJlcG9zaXRvcnkuDQo+ID4NCj4gPiBOYW1lOgkJZHJhZnQteHUtc2ZjLXVz aW5nLW1wbHMtc3ByaW5nDQo+ID4gUmV2aXNpb246CTA0DQo+ID4gVGl0bGU6CQlTZXJ2aWNlIEZ1 bmN0aW9uIENoYWluaW5nIFVzaW5nIE1QTFMtU1BSSU5HDQo+ID4gRG9jdW1lbnQgZGF0ZToJMjAx NS0wOS0wOQ0KPiA+IEdyb3VwOgkJSW5kaXZpZHVhbCBTdWJtaXNzaW9uDQo+ID4gUGFnZXM6CQk3 DQo+ID4gVVJMOg0KPiA+IGh0dHBzOi8vd3d3LmlldGYub3JnL2ludGVybmV0LWRyYWZ0cy9kcmFm dC14dS1zZmMtdXNpbmctbXBscy1zcHJpbmctMDQNCj4gPiAudHh0DQo+ID4gU3RhdHVzOg0KPiA+ IGh0dHBzOi8vZGF0YXRyYWNrZXIuaWV0Zi5vcmcvZG9jL2RyYWZ0LXh1LXNmYy11c2luZy1tcGxz LXNwcmluZy8NCj4gPiBIdG1saXplZDogICAgICAgaHR0cHM6Ly90b29scy5pZXRmLm9yZy9odG1s L2RyYWZ0LXh1LXNmYy11c2luZy1tcGxzLXNwcmluZy0wNA0KPiA+IERpZmY6DQo+ID4gaHR0cHM6 Ly93d3cuaWV0Zi5vcmcvcmZjZGlmZj91cmwyPWRyYWZ0LXh1LXNmYy11c2luZy1tcGxzLXNwcmlu Zy0wNA0KPiA+DQo+ID4gQWJzdHJhY3Q6DQo+ID4gICAgU291cmNlIFBhY2tldCBSb3V0aW5nIGlu IE5ldHdvcmtpbmcgKFNQUklORykgV0cgc3BlY2lmaWVzIGEgc3BlY2lhbA0KPiA+ICAgIHNvdXJj ZSByb3V0aW5nIG1lY2hhbmlzbS4gIFN1Y2ggc291cmNlIHJvdXRpbmcgbWVjaGFuaXNtIGNhbiBi ZQ0KPiA+ICAgIGxldmVyYWdlZCB0byByZWFsaXplIHRoZSBzZXJ2aWNlIHBhdGggbGF5ZXIgZnVu Y3Rpb25hbGl0eSBvZiB0aGUNCj4gPiAgICBzZXJ2aWNlIGZ1bmN0aW9uIGNoYWluaW5nIChpLmUs IHN0ZWVyaW5nIHRyYWZmaWMgdGhyb3VnaCBhIHBhcnRpY3VsYXINCj4gPiAgICBzZXJ2aWNlIGZ1 bmN0aW9uIHBhdGgpIGJ5IGVuY29kaW5nIHRoZSBzZXJ2aWNlIGZ1bmN0aW9uIHBhdGggb3IgdGhl DQo+ID4gICAgc2VydmljZSBmdW5jdGlvbiBjaGFpbiBpbmZvcm1hdGlvbiBhcyB0aGUgZXhwbGlj aXQgcGF0aCBpbmZvcm1hdGlvbi4NCj4gPiAgICBUaGlzIGRvY3VtZW50IGRlc2NyaWJlcyBob3cg dG8gbGV2ZXJhZ2UgdGhlIE1QTFMtYmFzZWQgc291cmNlIHJvdXRpbmcNCj4gPiAgICBtZWNoYW5p c20gYXMgZGV2ZWxvcGVkIGJ5IHRoZSBTUFJJTkcgV0cgdG8gcmVhbGl6ZSB0aGUgc2VydmljZSBw YXRoDQo+ID4gICAgbGF5ZXIgZnVuY3Rpb25hbGl0eSBvZiB0aGUgc2VydmljZSBmdW5jdGlvbiBj aGFpbmluZy4NCj4gPg0KPiA+DQo+ID4NCj4gPg0KPiA+IFBsZWFzZSBub3RlIHRoYXQgaXQgbWF5 IHRha2UgYSBjb3VwbGUgb2YgbWludXRlcyBmcm9tIHRoZSB0aW1lIG9mDQo+ID4gc3VibWlzc2lv biB1bnRpbCB0aGUgaHRtbGl6ZWQgdmVyc2lvbiBhbmQgZGlmZiBhcmUgYXZhaWxhYmxlIGF0IHRv b2xzLmlldGYub3JnLg0KPiA+DQo+ID4gVGhlIElFVEYgU2VjcmV0YXJpYXQNCg0K From nobody Wed Oct 28 09:45:12 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5CC0D1B5B2E for ; Wed, 28 Oct 2015 09:45:11 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.911 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.911 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham 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 N-r-SymWvSRO for ; Wed, 28 Oct 2015 09:45:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from e37.co.us.ibm.com (e37.co.us.ibm.com [32.97.110.158]) (using TLSv1 with cipher CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5BE841B5D12 for ; Wed, 28 Oct 2015 09:29:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost by e37.co.us.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Wed, 28 Oct 2015 10:29:30 -0600 Received: from d03dlp01.boulder.ibm.com (9.17.202.177) by e37.co.us.ibm.com (192.168.1.137) with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted; Wed, 28 Oct 2015 10:29:28 -0600 X-IBM-Helo: d03dlp01.boulder.ibm.com X-IBM-MailFrom: narten@us.ibm.com X-IBM-RcptTo: mpls@ietf.org;sfc@ietf.org Received: from b03cxnp08025.gho.boulder.ibm.com (b03cxnp08025.gho.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.130.17]) by d03dlp01.boulder.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6758B1FF004C; Wed, 28 Oct 2015 10:17:39 -0600 (MDT) Received: from d03av05.boulder.ibm.com (d03av05.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.85]) by b03cxnp08025.gho.boulder.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id t9SGS32654001862; Wed, 28 Oct 2015 09:28:03 -0700 Received: from d03av05.boulder.ibm.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by d03av05.boulder.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/NCO v10.0 AVout) with ESMTP id t9SGTRA8014828; Wed, 28 Oct 2015 10:29:27 -0600 Received: from cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com ([9.80.99.144]) by d03av05.boulder.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/NCO v10.0 AVin) with ESMTP id t9SGTPMj014677 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 28 Oct 2015 10:29:26 -0600 Received: from cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com.us.ibm.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.12.5) with ESMTP id t9SGTMEA022375; Wed, 28 Oct 2015 12:29:23 -0400 Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2015 12:21:35 -0400 Message-ID: From: Thomas Narten To: Xuxiaohu In-Reply-To: <1FEE3F8F5CCDE64C9A8E8F4AD27C19EE0CB3DFAF@NKGEML512-MBS.china.huawei.com> References: <1FEE3F8F5CCDE64C9A8E8F4AD27C19EE0CB3DFAF@NKGEML512-MBS.china.huawei.com> User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) SEMI-EPG/1.14.7 (Harue) FLIM/1.14.9 (=?ISO-8859-4?Q?Goj=F2?=) APEL/10.8 EasyPG/1.0.0 Emacs/23.1 (x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu) MULE/6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO) MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-TM-AS-MML: disable X-Content-Scanned: Fidelis XPS MAILER x-cbid: 15102816-0025-0000-0000-00001E52CDB0 Archived-At: Cc: "'mpls@ietf.org'" , "mpls-chairs@tools.ietf.org" , "'sfc@ietf.org'" , "sfc-chairs@tools.ietf.org" Subject: Re: [mpls] New Version Notification for draft-xu-sfc-using-mpls-spring-04.txt X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2015 16:45:11 -0000 Hi Xiaohu. See below. > I haven't received any response from you yet. Would you please tell us your > thoughts on the new version of this draft. Thanks a lot. > Best regards, Xiaohu (on behalf of all co-authors) > > > -----Original Message----- From: Xuxiaohu Sent: Wednesday, September 09, > > 2015 5:45 PM To: 'sfc@ietf.org'; sfc-chairs@tools.ietf.org Cc: > > 'mpls@ietf.org'; mpls-chairs@tools.ietf.org Subject: FW: New Version > > Notification for draft-xu-sfc-using-mpls-spring-04.txt > > > > Hi all, > > > > Service chaining is an important function for all type of networks including > > those using the source routing paradigm as specified by the SPRING working > > group. This draft is especially focused on the SPRING/MPLS network > > scenario. > > When we posted the early versions (-00 to -02), the feedback from the SFC > > working group chairs was that the solution required changes to the MPLS > > architecture. We discussed this among the authors and posted a new version > > (-03) that does not require any change to the MPLS Architecture anymore. > > Version -04 merely corrects some typos. Good that the document is now consistent with the MPLS architecture. That said, this document is not really core to SFC. E.g., we are focused on being transport independent. This document is MPLS-specific. The key question is how relevant and important it is to the work of this WG. Our read of the mailing list discussions over recent months is that there isn't strong interest in this work. Given the weak interest and lack of clear importance to the WG core deliverables, we do not see justification for taking this on as a WG document. Thomas & Jim > > Now we would like to ask the SFC chairs and WGs if the draft can now be > > considered for adoption by the SFC working group. > > > > Best regards, Xiaohu > > > > > -----Original Message----- From: internet-drafts@ietf.org > > > [mailto:internet-drafts@ietf.org] Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2015 5:23 > > > PM To: Lizhenbin; Luis M. Contreras; Xuxiaohu; Himanshu C. Shah; Xuxiaohu; > > > Himanshu Shah; Luis M. Contreras; Lizhenbin Subject: New Version > > > Notification for draft-xu-sfc-using-mpls-spring-04.txt > > > > > > > > > A new version of I-D, draft-xu-sfc-using-mpls-spring-04.txt has been > > > successfully submitted by Xiaohu Xu and posted to the IETF > > repository. > > > > > > Name: draft-xu-sfc-using-mpls-spring Revision: 04 Title: Service Function > > > Chaining Using MPLS-SPRING Document date: 2015-09-09 Group: Individual > > > Submission Pages: 7 URL: > > > https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-xu-sfc-using-mpls-spring-04 > > > .txt Status: > > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-xu-sfc-using-mpls-spring/ Htmlized: > > > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-xu-sfc-using-mpls-spring-04 Diff: > > > https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-xu-sfc-using-mpls-spring-04 > > > > > > Abstract: > > > Source Packet Routing in Networking (SPRING) WG specifies a special > > > source routing mechanism. Such source routing mechanism can be > > > leveraged to realize the service path layer functionality of the > > > service function chaining (i.e, steering traffic through a particular > > > service function path) by encoding the service function path or the > > > service function chain information as the explicit path information. > > > This document describes how to leverage the MPLS-based source routing > > > mechanism as developed by the SPRING WG to realize the service path > > > layer functionality of the service function chaining. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 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. > > > > > > The IETF Secretariat > From nobody Wed Oct 28 18:40:57 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 03D271B6156; Wed, 28 Oct 2015 18:40:55 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.211 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.211 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham 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 ALoA3B3MLIz9; Wed, 28 Oct 2015 18:40:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [194.213.3.17]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7C2991B6154; Wed, 28 Oct 2015 18:40:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 172.18.7.190 (EHLO lhreml401-hub.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.7.190]) by lhrrg01-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.3.7-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id CDF34758; Thu, 29 Oct 2015 01:40:47 +0000 (GMT) Received: from nkgeml407-hub.china.huawei.com (10.98.56.38) by lhreml401-hub.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.240) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.235.1; Thu, 29 Oct 2015 01:40:46 +0000 Received: from NKGEML512-MBS.china.huawei.com ([169.254.8.187]) by nkgeml407-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.98.56.38]) with mapi id 14.03.0235.001; Thu, 29 Oct 2015 09:40:39 +0800 From: Xuxiaohu To: Thomas Narten Thread-Topic: New Version Notification for draft-xu-sfc-using-mpls-spring-04.txt Thread-Index: AQHQ6uEhwUT+nrZsQk6IpAAbYfyXTp4z7JRggEylwuCAAEs5gIABG47w Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2015 01:40:38 +0000 Message-ID: <1FEE3F8F5CCDE64C9A8E8F4AD27C19EE0CB3E2EE@NKGEML512-MBS.china.huawei.com> References: <1FEE3F8F5CCDE64C9A8E8F4AD27C19EE0CB3DFAF@NKGEML512-MBS.china.huawei.com> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US Content-Language: zh-CN X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.111.99.55] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Archived-At: Cc: "'mpls@ietf.org'" , "mpls-chairs@tools.ietf.org" , "'sfc@ietf.org'" , "sfc-chairs@tools.ietf.org" Subject: Re: [mpls] New Version Notification for draft-xu-sfc-using-mpls-spring-04.txt X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2015 01:40:55 -0000 Hi Thomas, > -----Original Message----- > From: Thomas Narten [mailto:narten@us.ibm.com] > Sent: Thursday, October 29, 2015 12:22 AM > To: Xuxiaohu > Cc: 'sfc@ietf.org'; sfc-chairs@tools.ietf.org; 'mpls@ietf.org'; > mpls-chairs@tools.ietf.org > Subject: Re: New Version Notification for draft-xu-sfc-using-mpls-spring-= 04.txt >=20 > Hi Xiaohu. >=20 > See below. >=20 > > I haven't received any response from you yet. Would you please tell us > > your thoughts on the new version of this draft. Thanks a lot. >=20 > > Best regards, Xiaohu (on behalf of all co-authors) > > > > > -----Original Message----- From: Xuxiaohu Sent: Wednesday, September > > > 09, > > > 2015 5:45 PM To: 'sfc@ietf.org'; sfc-chairs@tools.ietf.org Cc: > > > 'mpls@ietf.org'; mpls-chairs@tools.ietf.org Subject: FW: New Version > > > Notification for draft-xu-sfc-using-mpls-spring-04.txt > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > Service chaining is an important function for all type of networks > > > including those using the source routing paradigm as specified by > > > the SPRING working group. This draft is especially focused on the > > > SPRING/MPLS network scenario. >=20 > > > When we posted the early versions (-00 to -02), the feedback from > > > the SFC working group chairs was that the solution required changes > > > to the MPLS architecture. We discussed this among the authors and > > > posted a new version > > > (-03) that does not require any change to the MPLS Architecture anymo= re. > > > Version -04 merely corrects some typos. >=20 > Good that the document is now consistent with the MPLS architecture. >=20 > That said, this document is not really core to SFC. E.g., we are focused = on being > transport independent. This document is MPLS-specific. In this draft, the SFC encapsulation is implemented in the form of an MPLS = label stack (equivalent to NSH). Such SFC encapsulation could be transporte= d over any transport networks such as IPv4, IPv6, MPLS networks. In a words= , the SFC-encapsulation approach described in this draft is fully transport= -independent indeed. > The key question is how relevant and important it is to the work of this = WG. Our > read of the mailing list discussions over recent months is that there isn= 't strong > interest in this work. By encoding the SFP info by an MPLS label stack (i.e., implementing the SFC= encapsulation in the form of an MPLS label stack), SFF devices could be ea= sily implemented on existing MPLS devices without any change to their data = planes. As a result, there is no need to introduce a totally new SFC encaps= ulation scheme and accordingly there is no need to introduce a totally new = forwarding paradigm (e.g., NSH-based forwarding paradigm) especially when c= onsidering implementing SFFs on hardware platforms due to performance deman= ds. =20 According to the following statement quoted from the current SFC charter: "... The WG will examine existing identifier schemes, if there is a need for such identifiers in the context of the Generic SFC encapsulation, before defining any new identifier scheme. ..." It seems that this MPLS-SPRING-based SFC encapsulation scheme should be rel= evant to the SFC WG. At least, it could be investigated as a light-weight S= FC encapsulation approach (from the aspect of reducing and even avoiding an= y impact on the data plane). Best regards, Xiaohu > Given the weak interest and lack of clear importance to the WG core > deliverables, we do not see justification for taking this on as a WG docu= ment. >=20 > Thomas & Jim >=20 >=20 > > > Now we would like to ask the SFC chairs and WGs if the draft can now > > > be considered for adoption by the SFC working group. >=20 >=20 >=20 > > > > > > Best regards, Xiaohu > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- From: internet-drafts@ietf.org > > > > [mailto:internet-drafts@ietf.org] Sent: Wednesday, September 09, > > > > 2015 5:23 PM To: Lizhenbin; Luis M. Contreras; Xuxiaohu; Himanshu > > > > C. Shah; Xuxiaohu; Himanshu Shah; Luis M. Contreras; Lizhenbin > > > > Subject: New Version Notification for > > > > draft-xu-sfc-using-mpls-spring-04.txt > > > > > > > > > > > > A new version of I-D, draft-xu-sfc-using-mpls-spring-04.txt has > > > > been successfully submitted by Xiaohu Xu and posted to the IETF > > > repository. > > > > > > > > Name: draft-xu-sfc-using-mpls-spring Revision: 04 Title: Service > > > > Function Chaining Using MPLS-SPRING Document date: 2015-09-09 > > > > Group: Individual Submission Pages: 7 URL: > > > > https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-xu-sfc-using-mpls-sprin > > > > g-04 > > > > .txt Status: > > > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-xu-sfc-using-mpls-spring/ Ht= mlized: > > > > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-xu-sfc-using-mpls-spring-04 Diff: > > > > https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=3Ddraft-xu-sfc-using-mpls-spring-= 0 > > > > 4 > > > > > > > > Abstract: > > > > Source Packet Routing in Networking (SPRING) WG specifies a spec= ial > > > > source routing mechanism. Such source routing mechanism can be > > > > leveraged to realize the service path layer functionality of the > > > > service function chaining (i.e, steering traffic through a parti= cular > > > > service function path) by encoding the service function path or = the > > > > service function chain information as the explicit path informat= ion. > > > > This document describes how to leverage the MPLS-based source > routing > > > > mechanism as developed by the SPRING WG to realize the service p= ath > > > > layer functionality of the service function chaining. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 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. > > > > > > > > The IETF Secretariat > > From nobody Thu Oct 29 22:59:18 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0A2941A044D; Thu, 29 Oct 2015 22:59:17 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.211 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.211 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham 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 S7PAbpJGw4iS; Thu, 29 Oct 2015 22:59:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [194.213.3.17]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ED17D1A0439; Thu, 29 Oct 2015 22:59:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 172.18.7.190 (EHLO lhreml404-hub.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.7.190]) by lhrrg01-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.3.7-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id CDH21163; Fri, 30 Oct 2015 05:59:12 +0000 (GMT) Received: from SZXEMA413-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.82.72.72) by lhreml404-hub.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.218) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.235.1; Fri, 30 Oct 2015 05:59:09 +0000 Received: from SZXEMA510-MBX.china.huawei.com ([169.254.3.229]) by SZXEMA413-HUB.china.huawei.com ([10.82.72.72]) with mapi id 14.03.0235.001; Fri, 30 Oct 2015 13:59:04 +0800 From: Mach Chen To: "mpls@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: Poll adoption for draft-tiruveedhula-mpls-mldp-mib-04 Thread-Index: AdES2BLGzHwHB7aCQ4mFxx2gfK1EZA== Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2015 05:59:03 +0000 Message-ID: Accept-Language: en-US, zh-CN Content-Language: zh-CN X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.111.102.135] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Archived-At: Cc: "mpls-chairs@ietf.org" Subject: [mpls] Poll adoption for draft-tiruveedhula-mpls-mldp-mib-04 X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2015 05:59:17 -0000 This is to start a three week poll on adopting draft-tiruveedhula-mpls-mldp= -mib-04 as an MPLS working group document. =20 Please send your comments (support/not support) to the mpls working group m= ailing list (mpls@ietf.org). =20 There are no IPR disclosures pertaining to the draft. The authors have all = indicated that they are not aware of any IPR that applies to this document. =20 This poll for adoption will end Friday November 20, 2015.=20 =20 Thanks,=20 Mach (Document shepherd) From kapilaro@juniper.net Fri Oct 30 03:09:52 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A62A1B2AAE for ; Fri, 30 Oct 2015 03:09:52 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.902 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.902 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 Diqa-tpVUOn1 for ; Fri, 30 Oct 2015 03:09:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from na01-by2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-by2on0136.outbound.protection.outlook.com [207.46.100.136]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B141E1B2AAB for ; Fri, 30 Oct 2015 03:09:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from BLUPR0501MB1777.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.163.121.12) by BLUPR0501MB1795.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.163.121.142) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.312.18; Fri, 30 Oct 2015 10:09:48 +0000 Received: from BLUPR0501MB1777.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([10.163.121.12]) by BLUPR0501MB1777.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([10.163.121.12]) with mapi id 15.01.0312.014; Fri, 30 Oct 2015 10:09:48 +0000 From: Kapil Arora To: "mpls@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: input on draft-smack-mpls-rfc4379bis-07.txt Thread-Index: AdES7nHxxdTCtpEOTJKRIV7a8xfFVA== Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2015 10:09:47 +0000 Message-ID: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=kapilaro@juniper.net; x-originating-ip: [116.197.184.12] x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; BLUPR0501MB1795; 5:nwPRrgHdYIEUhoItrEu8IbQIl+9SjVs+0mHwqQy+vG3CY7XjVbyNxtiI75yRZDp+t7LSgk15RK3T8lfRZ+G5iNyY0ID7gbMzaCAUVfS92AF5+3NssZNhmtxoVerfwkrTpbKzSY/BXfi0wKWfEceuXQ==; 24:cnfod0HsXVqzH5a8xiC/GBLAKf3K1PTfHwOg8OdnzQMTxmZ3pqb8doYY7ksB7MGuxIzUYJSHLY6k6HgNfdNMDTxuP/QQiVnGYTFHyaA0Sk8=; 20:D3ni3230+tPTbYbtfn00eIrMu/6sIED3MzeChfxeDaYr9olZuSEeCw4xpo1YhggpPVrjjYebD6wnUhjB4UszZw== x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:BLUPR0501MB1795; x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:; x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(601004)(2401047)(520078)(5005006)(8121501046)(10201501046)(3002001)(102215026); SRVR:BLUPR0501MB1795; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:BLUPR0501MB1795; x-forefront-prvs: 07459438AA x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(6009001)(189002)(199003)(37854004)(76576001)(105586002)(50986999)(450100001)(122556002)(5001920100001)(54356999)(92566002)(107886002)(101416001)(5004730100002)(5003600100002)(5007970100001)(229853001)(110136002)(5008740100001)(4001430100002)(2351001)(5002640100001)(2501003)(99286002)(87936001)(230783001)(40100003)(86362001)(189998001)(19580395003)(97736004)(106356001)(66066001)(74316001)(5001960100002)(77096005)(81156007)(33656002)(102836002)(10400500002)(2900100001)(11100500001); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:BLUPR0501MB1795; H:BLUPR0501MB1777.namprd05.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; MX:1; A:1; LANG:en; received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: juniper.net does not designate permitted sender hosts) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: juniper.net X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 30 Oct 2015 10:09:47.7299 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: bea78b3c-4cdb-4130-854a-1d193232e5f4 X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BLUPR0501MB1795 Archived-At: Cc: Ramesh Kandula Subject: [mpls] input on draft-smack-mpls-rfc4379bis-07.txt X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2015 10:21:37 -0000 Hi Authors, I have some input on draft-smack-mpls-rfc4379bis-07.txt regrading RSVP p2mp= lsp ping and mpls traceroute in pipe mode.=20 1. Correlation of mpls echo responses for RSVP p2mp lsps:=20 For P2mp Lsps when mpls ping is initiated from the ingress router it reache= s all the egress routers. Each egress responds with mpls echo response .=20 For RSVP p2mp lsps ingress router has the knowledge of all the egress route= rs because of the configuration, so it makes sense to correlate the echo re= sponse from each egress with configured egress at the rsvp p2mp ingress so that in= gress router knows if it hasn't got response from one or more egress router= s or if=20 there is a forwarding issue on one or more egress. As per rfc 4379 source a= ddress of the echo response packet can be any routable address so it become= s difficult=20 for the ingress router to correlate from the source address of the echo res= ponse packet with one of the configured egress address. If the egress can r= espond with destination address of the sub lsp as the source address of the echo respon= se packet, ingress router can correlate all the echo responses and would be= able to isolate the failure if exists for one or more branch. 2. Mpls traceroute Pipe mode: Consider the topology below for the reference R1---------R2------R3-----P-------R4---------R5----R6--------R7 <----BGP AS 100----><-----BGP AS 200---------><--BGP AS 100--> Mpls traceroute expects echo reply via IP. So say we want to run BGP tracer= oute in the topology mentioned above. In the above topology if we want to run BGP traceroute from R1 to BGP FEC R= 7 then as per rfc 4379 all the nodes=20 should have IP connectivity to R1 which may not be true practically, All th= e routers in other AS may not have IP connectivity to BGP Ingress (R1) but it is fair to assume that all BGP spea= king nodes (R1, R3, R4, R7) will have IP connectivity to BGP ingress so for these kind of scenarios we can introduce= s the traceroute in pipe mode. If R1 initiates=20 a BGP traceroute in pipe mode towards FEC R7 then R1 should set the outer T= TL =3D255 (Transport header TTL) and should=20 set the inner TTL to TTL=3D1 (BGP label TTL value) and add the BGP FEC in t= he mpls echo request. So TTL will expire=20 only at BGP speaking node i.e. R3 and R3 should validate the BGP FEC and R3= should set the Downstream interface address in=20 DDMT to the address of R4's address (BGP next hop address) and not the P ro= uters address. R3 can make the decision=20 to working in pipe mode only if no-propogate-ttl is configured. If no-propo= gate-ttl is not configured then R3 can work as per rfc=20 6424 and send FEC stack change depending on if its entering to a new transp= ort tunnel or not. Thanks Kapil Arora From nobody Fri Oct 30 07:32:34 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D5631A1B71 for ; Fri, 30 Oct 2015 07:32:32 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.79 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.79 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham 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 ZqeLznoEihhJ for ; Fri, 30 Oct 2015 07:32:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from server.isocore.com (server.isocore.com [192.163.204.174]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A1F871A1B6F for ; Fri, 30 Oct 2015 07:32:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from static-100-36-238-26.washdc.fios.verizon.net ([100.36.238.26]:50356 helo=adminPCR) by server.isocore.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.86) (envelope-from ) id 1ZsAj6-0006pQ-B8 for mpls@ietf.org; Fri, 30 Oct 2015 14:32:20 +0000 From: "Shamjhana" To: Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2015 10:32:32 -0400 Message-ID: <070e01d1131f$d0371600$70a54200$@isocore.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_070F_01D112FE.4927E700" X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0 Thread-Index: AdETH5zlm6kpM5efQ6im5pbHv1vS5g== Content-Language: en-us X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - server.isocore.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - isocore.com X-Get-Message-Sender-Via: server.isocore.com: authenticated_id: spokharel@isocore.com X-Authenticated-Sender: server.isocore.com: spokharel@isocore.com X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: Archived-At: Subject: [mpls] Only 2 Weeks Left till SDN/MPLS 2015! X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2015 14:32:32 -0000 This is a multipart message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_070F_01D112FE.4927E700 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Only 2 weeks are left till SDN/MPLS 2015! Please book your reservations now, as the hotel cutoff date for reduced prices is today at 5 PM! https://aws.passkey.com/event/13907017/owner/1786/home Key topics include Virtualization, SDN, Cloud and Data Centers, Orchestration, NFV, Cloud Security, Mobility, PCE, Traffic Engineering, Transport SDN, Web Services, multi-play applications across common infrastructure and other emerging technologies. You can find the program information at http://www.isocore.com/2015/program.htm. Register now at: http://www.isocore.com/2015/attendees.php Tutorials (Sunday): http://www.isocore.com/2015/tutorials.htm Technical sessions (Mon- Wed): http://www.isocore.com/2015/technical_sessions.htm ------=_NextPart_000_070F_01D112FE.4927E700 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Only 2 = weeks are left till SDN/MPLS 2015!

Please book = your reservations now, as the hotel cutoff date for reduced prices is = today at 5 PM!
https://a= ws.passkey.com/event/13907017/owner/1786/home

Key topics = include Virtualization, SDN, Cloud and Data Centers, Orchestration, = NFV, Cloud Security, Mobility, PCE, Traffic Engineering, Transport SDN, = Web Services, multi-play applications across common infrastructure = and other emerging technologies. You can find the program = information at http://www.isocore.com/2= 015/program.htm.

Register = now at:

http://www.isocore.com= /2015/attendees.php

Tutorials = (Sunday):

http://www.isocore.com= /2015/tutorials.htm

Technical = sessions (Mon- Wed):

http://www.is= ocore.com/2015/technical_sessions.htm

 

------=_NextPart_000_070F_01D112FE.4927E700-- From nobody Fri Oct 30 13:33:46 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D636E1A9100 for ; Fri, 30 Oct 2015 13:33:13 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.911 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.911 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=unavailable 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 dxTdEJL3Y283 for ; Fri, 30 Oct 2015 13:33:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from e33.co.us.ibm.com (e33.co.us.ibm.com [32.97.110.151]) (using TLSv1 with cipher CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2EA181A90F9 for ; Fri, 30 Oct 2015 13:33:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost by e33.co.us.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Fri, 30 Oct 2015 14:33:11 -0600 Received: from d03dlp03.boulder.ibm.com (9.17.202.179) by e33.co.us.ibm.com (192.168.1.133) with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted; Fri, 30 Oct 2015 14:33:10 -0600 X-IBM-Helo: d03dlp03.boulder.ibm.com X-IBM-MailFrom: narten@us.ibm.com X-IBM-RcptTo: mpls@ietf.org;sfc@ietf.org Received: from b03cxnp07029.gho.boulder.ibm.com (b03cxnp07029.gho.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.130.16]) by d03dlp03.boulder.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C292C19D8042; Fri, 30 Oct 2015 14:21:18 -0600 (MDT) Received: from d03av04.boulder.ibm.com (d03av04.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.170]) by b03cxnp07029.gho.boulder.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id t9UKX9nA11665848; Fri, 30 Oct 2015 13:33:09 -0700 Received: from d03av04.boulder.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d03av04.boulder.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/NCO v10.0 AVout) with ESMTP id t9UKX9Jc025176; Fri, 30 Oct 2015 14:33:09 -0600 Received: from cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com ([9.80.96.118]) by d03av04.boulder.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/NCO v10.0 AVin) with ESMTP id t9UKX7nb025081 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Fri, 30 Oct 2015 14:33:09 -0600 Received: from cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com.us.ibm.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.12.5) with ESMTP id t9UKX6h8015866; Fri, 30 Oct 2015 16:33:07 -0400 Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2015 16:33:06 -0400 Message-ID: From: Thomas Narten To: Xuxiaohu In-Reply-To: <1FEE3F8F5CCDE64C9A8E8F4AD27C19EE0CB3E2EE@NKGEML512-MBS.china.huawei.com> References: <1FEE3F8F5CCDE64C9A8E8F4AD27C19EE0CB3DFAF@NKGEML512-MBS.china.huawei.com> <1FEE3F8F5CCDE64C9A8E8F4AD27C19EE0CB3E2EE@NKGEML512-MBS.china.huawei.com> User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) SEMI-EPG/1.14.7 (Harue) FLIM/1.14.9 (=?ISO-8859-4?Q?Goj=F2?=) APEL/10.8 EasyPG/1.0.0 Emacs/23.1 (x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu) MULE/6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO) MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-TM-AS-MML: disable X-Content-Scanned: Fidelis XPS MAILER x-cbid: 15103020-0009-0000-0000-00000F5D4DA4 Archived-At: Cc: "'mpls@ietf.org'" , "mpls-chairs@tools.ietf.org" , "'sfc@ietf.org'" , "sfc-chairs@tools.ietf.org" Subject: Re: [mpls] New Version Notification for draft-xu-sfc-using-mpls-spring-04.txt X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2015 20:33:14 -0000 > According to the following statement quoted from the current SFC charter: > > "... The WG will examine existing identifier schemes, > if there is a need for such identifiers in the context of the Generic SFC > encapsulation, before defining any new identifier scheme. > ..." > > It seems that this MPLS-SPRING-based SFC encapsulation scheme should be > relevant to the SFC WG. At least, it could be investigated as a light-weight > SFC encapsulation approach (from the aspect of reducing and even avoiding any > impact on the data plane). The charter also says: 3. Generic SFC Encapsulation: This document will describe a single service-level data plane encapsulation format that: I want to emphasize the term "a single ... encapsulation format" It has been my understanding that the intention of this WG from the beginning was to produce one encapsulation, not multiple ones. I think it has been clear for some time already that the WG has selected the NSH document as its desired approach. Are you suggesting that the WG take on this document as an additional encapsulation for SFC? I do not think that is consistent with the intent of the charter. Also, my read of the overall list discussion with respect to this document is that the WG has not shown a strong interest in this document nor indicated a compelling need for it. If the WG disagrees with this assessment, I expect folk would speak up. Thomas From nobody Fri Oct 30 13:56:45 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 207B31AC399; Fri, 30 Oct 2015 13:56:14 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.902 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.902 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 CpHI3Km_DScS; Fri, 30 Oct 2015 13:56:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from na01-bl2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-bl2on0143.outbound.protection.outlook.com [65.55.169.143]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2FDAD1A9112; Fri, 30 Oct 2015 13:56:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from BLUPR0501MB1716.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.163.120.19) by BLUPR0501MB1716.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.163.120.19) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.312.18; Fri, 30 Oct 2015 20:56:08 +0000 Received: from BLUPR0501MB1716.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([10.163.120.19]) by BLUPR0501MB1716.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([10.163.120.19]) with mapi id 15.01.0312.014; Fri, 30 Oct 2015 20:56:08 +0000 From: Kishore Tiruveedhula To: Mach Chen , "mpls@ietf.org" , "mpls-chairs@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [mpls] Poll adoption for draft-tiruveedhula-mpls-mldp-mib-04 Thread-Index: AQHRE1VmLIbhgeLx+0C+M/bn/v1k6Q== Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2015 20:56:08 +0000 Message-ID: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.4.8.150116 authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=kishoret@juniper.net; x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1 x-originating-ip: [66.129.241.11] x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; BLUPR0501MB1716; 5:2djYalc2hUugEaq2z2CVkDzxF95BVT3u7Ds7uqwbUFpoOVSYWva+lA9eTzoeZPiOe7xSTEY+9z4yfsvQ7d6OPsxyZs4FCHbo4p2lLUcbycKccf6XiskHI7xVEf7L1Bh7GpJP6Wnb2wgvd2SFaiMEQw==; 24:QQ6Uly+H0bQUn6HV2xJNnT+NrjOFbLEXCdTCx7hrgK/Dr8J2yFY8o2eSAYRn9l7Nbvw7et2hWjK0FAIMyQk9Aiegy+dM91qZlhA7SsiEEbc=; 20:cumZUYNEytUxcK3ukQQ0ql6t7PM6MNab+dcs2UBXP5+jB0w7DBVdKG8z45YC1lMKkzszdnYW68LwA3YQWf64CA== x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:BLUPR0501MB1716; x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:; x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(601004)(2401047)(5005006)(8121501046)(520078)(3002001)(10201501046)(102215026); SRVR:BLUPR0501MB1716; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:BLUPR0501MB1716; x-forefront-prvs: 07459438AA x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(6009001)(479174004)(24454002)(189002)(199003)(164054003)(377454003)(66066001)(99286002)(19580395003)(83506001)(19580405001)(77096005)(5008740100001)(92566002)(105586002)(122556002)(5007970100001)(15975445007)(5004730100002)(102836002)(10400500002)(106356001)(87936001)(2501003)(2201001)(86362001)(40100003)(106116001)(4001350100001)(5001960100002)(2900100001)(97736004)(101416001)(54356999)(230783001)(107886002)(5001770100001)(50986999)(81156007)(189998001)(36756003)(11100500001)(5002640100001); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:BLUPR0501MB1716; H:BLUPR0501MB1716.namprd05.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; MX:1; A:1; LANG:en; received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: juniper.net does not designate permitted sender hosts) spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:23 spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <1FA2029E815A1644B7623AB9D7DAD2CA@namprd05.prod.outlook.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: juniper.net X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 30 Oct 2015 20:56:08.4437 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: bea78b3c-4cdb-4130-854a-1d193232e5f4 X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BLUPR0501MB1716 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [mpls] Poll adoption for draft-tiruveedhula-mpls-mldp-mib-04 X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2015 20:56:14 -0000 I support as a co-author. Thanks, Kishore On 10/30/15, 1:59 AM, "Mach Chen" wrote: >This is to start a three week poll on adopting >draft-tiruveedhula-mpls-mldp-mib-04 as an MPLS working group document. >=20 >Please send your comments (support/not support) to the mpls working group >mailing list (mpls@ietf.org). >=20 >There are no IPR disclosures pertaining to the draft. The authors have >all indicated that they are not aware of any IPR that applies to this >document. >=20 >This poll for adoption will end Friday November 20, 2015. >=20 >Thanks,=20 >Mach (Document shepherd) > >_______________________________________________ >mpls mailing list >mpls@ietf.org >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls From nobody Fri Oct 30 14:51:11 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F130B1A8A96; Fri, 30 Oct 2015 14:50:45 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -14.51 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.51 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham 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 WKnjwg1pQlka; Fri, 30 Oct 2015 14:50:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rcdn-iport-6.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-6.cisco.com [173.37.86.77]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6A42C1A90CA; Fri, 30 Oct 2015 14:50:44 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=3306; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1446241844; x=1447451444; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:mime-version; bh=muuFAn4tR390L9bABcY6CS/Q2G3yoaVPYMJJ31/Z1UM=; b=KY8Hk0nimfpOb7sENpPp9DMTblmK6bIl7A+JPUcM20rTq8oVgf8ilzzS i5EoJUbAyQwcvuXZ9P/4ZguqtHsyAvktrSEzMZrhDbcQthBRDWm1sVsSK sv0ATgFFgVrEBg+mVSPKA8b5J40x3y9Ql3S7IeMUfdsrXWv9Z6qaU/uOi 8=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0D1AQCc5TNW/5ldJa1egztTbwa/LAENgVoXAQmFeAKBNjgUAQEBAQEBAYEKhDYBAQQBAQFrCxACAQgEOwcnCxQRAgQOBYgwDcQVAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBFASGdwGCD4JuiCyBFAWSZoNdAY0kgVmEP5Iwg3EBHwEBQoQEcoR3gQcBAQE X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos; i="5.20,220,1444694400"; d="scan'208,217"; a="42706860" Received: from rcdn-core-2.cisco.com ([173.37.93.153]) by rcdn-iport-6.cisco.com with ESMTP; 30 Oct 2015 21:50:43 +0000 Received: from XCH-ALN-013.cisco.com (xch-aln-013.cisco.com [173.36.7.23]) by rcdn-core-2.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id t9ULohrP010795 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Fri, 30 Oct 2015 21:50:43 GMT Received: from xch-rcd-014.cisco.com (173.37.102.24) by XCH-ALN-013.cisco.com (173.36.7.23) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1104.5; Fri, 30 Oct 2015 16:50:17 -0500 Received: from xch-rcd-014.cisco.com ([173.37.102.24]) by XCH-RCD-014.cisco.com ([173.37.102.24]) with mapi id 15.00.1104.000; Fri, 30 Oct 2015 16:50:16 -0500 From: "Arvind Venkateswaran (arvvenka)" To: Mach Chen Thread-Topic: [mpls] Poll adoption for draft-tiruveedhula-mpls-mldp-mib-04 Thread-Index: AQHRE1z2LIbhgeLx+0C+M/bn/v1k6Q== Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2015 21:50:16 +0000 Message-ID: References: In-Reply-To: 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: [10.24.216.109] Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_ADDE3DBE06D240F78FC929DC5F1808E4ciscocom_" MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: Cc: "mpls@ietf.org" , "mpls-chairs@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [mpls] Poll adoption for draft-tiruveedhula-mpls-mldp-mib-04 X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2015 21:50:46 -0000 --_000_ADDE3DBE06D240F78FC929DC5F1808E4ciscocom_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I support. Thanks, Arvind. On Oct 29, 2015, at 10:59 PM, Mach Chen > wrote: This is to start a three week poll on adopting draft-tiruveedhula-mpls-mldp= -mib-04 as an MPLS working group document. Please send your comments (support/not support) to the mpls working group m= ailing list (mpls@ietf.org). There are no IPR disclosures pertaining to the draft. The authors have all = indicated that they are not aware of any IPR that applies to this document. This poll for adoption will end Friday November 20, 2015. Thanks, Mach (Document shepherd) _______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls --_000_ADDE3DBE06D240F78FC929DC5F1808E4ciscocom_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I support.

Thanks,
Arvind.

On Oct 29, 2015, at 10:59 PM, Mach Chen <mach.chen@huawei.com> wrote:

This is to start a three week poll on adopting dr= aft-tiruveedhula-mpls-mldp-mib-04 as an MPLS working group document.

Please send your comments (support/not support) to the mpls working group m= ailing list (mpls@ietf.org).

There are no IPR disclosures pertaining to the draft. The authors have all = indicated that they are not aware of any IPR that applies to this document.=

This poll for adoption will end Friday November 20, 2015.

Thanks,
Mach (Document shepherd)

_______________________________________________
mpls mailing list
mpls@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls

--_000_ADDE3DBE06D240F78FC929DC5F1808E4ciscocom_-- From nobody Sat Oct 31 01:33:43 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2FA9D1A6F02; Sat, 31 Oct 2015 01:33:42 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 BZdZm2a1SwB7; Sat, 31 Oct 2015 01:33:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-wm0-x22e.google.com (mail-wm0-x22e.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c09::22e]) (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 A23B81A6F39; Sat, 31 Oct 2015 01:33:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: by wmec75 with SMTP id c75so27101886wme.1; Sat, 31 Oct 2015 01:33:39 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=U2ux0f4XX5d4dLZO+rS63k6AfupMU1J6Tho7JpCdntU=; b=LIlHUVs/nbcm3qh0ddGJRwhY+F9xNwlT34m7yLvCv4X5tH7qpM/BipAcgWMVlZ1EI2 H/Hxh4BjmfgUQRxg10bZ303DwpS/KCctvhb7z8cKe53jiV0g9gmjKTK8O29l8VzELZGi Upa0tQJ3wiGkhU4c78NH1oWRmF8QOKjowIXkuHOIbMg5MmQweSNZ6CzyPkUrDjrpDPLB UXD1AdaHf+gayRWI2luK8gepFWU9jAgYqOHJ/FHNzOGGlkkq4W5FrgI0WuopenWDe/wG oEWi8PfucHBsQNkfjmCV7WlqtoYL9BKkJo9LlbsZ4T7gsXWwINqkXyTK9zTY3zWcfWhV YK2A== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.28.8.205 with SMTP id 196mr2675780wmi.50.1446280419288; Sat, 31 Oct 2015 01:33:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.194.70.161 with HTTP; Sat, 31 Oct 2015 01:33:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.194.70.161 with HTTP; Sat, 31 Oct 2015 01:33:38 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Sat, 31 Oct 2015 04:33:38 -0400 Message-ID: From: Gyan Mishra To: Mach Chen Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11443a7ea32be605236266f6 Archived-At: Cc: mpls@ietf.org, "mpls-chairs@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [mpls] Poll adoption for draft-tiruveedhula-mpls-mldp-mib-04 X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 31 Oct 2015 08:33:42 -0000 --001a11443a7ea32be605236266f6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 I support. Gyan Verizon IT On Oct 30, 2015 1:59 AM, "Mach Chen" wrote: > This is to start a three week poll on adopting > draft-tiruveedhula-mpls-mldp-mib-04 as an MPLS working group document. > > Please send your comments (support/not support) to the mpls working group > mailing list (mpls@ietf.org). > > There are no IPR disclosures pertaining to the draft. The authors have all > indicated that they are not aware of any IPR that applies to this document. > > This poll for adoption will end Friday November 20, 2015. > > Thanks, > Mach (Document shepherd) > > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > --001a11443a7ea32be605236266f6 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I support.

Gyan
Verizon IT

On Oct 30, 2015 1:59 AM, "Mach Chen" &= lt;mach.chen@huawei.com> wro= te:
This is to start= a three week poll on adopting draft-tiruveedhula-mpls-mldp-mib-04 as an MP= LS working group document.

Please send your comments (support/not support) to the mpls working group m= ailing list (mpls@ietf.org).

There are no IPR disclosures pertaining to the draft. The authors have all = indicated that they are not aware of any IPR that applies to this document.=

This poll for adoption will end Friday November 20, 2015.

Thanks,
Mach (Document shepherd)

_______________________________________________
mpls mailing list
mpls@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls
--001a11443a7ea32be605236266f6-- From nobody Sat Oct 31 09:21:17 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8ED851A8715 for ; Sat, 31 Oct 2015 09:21:16 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 5sp2bR-TRam8 for ; Sat, 31 Oct 2015 09:21:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-wi0-x22d.google.com (mail-wi0-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c05::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 B26111A7D81 for ; Sat, 31 Oct 2015 09:21:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: by wicfx6 with SMTP id fx6so27152240wic.1 for ; Sat, 31 Oct 2015 09:21:13 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=6Q+dWdmTK88gr7bwujjtD9/coRIUanKiimhQj3cZJOg=; b=hz4vLR0vdlcm38P5vnnrmBAOzJ17JE7D7wGqdvSNoC1ryJah3jIVmjqwaRGwT+/hlx M+ffIiEkWvKpepWf6/cWDcfwu05Vu6k9CmDn7cjSq3uG/75kMvpexxFTLSTdJthC2h1Z 84zwJA3JcHYjNCKr44cvamqR7yEllJwti4t5FXKxHQjd7ARUV6X97T1esOolFkan/47p ljDyHp2XT5nQFOw0mFF/ETlJbOVdbIY/AfOIH0NLgwrisAf8kddG7w0fhIcwj2ytNJEr lHvbkg1PodvcU6gY89bG5aEhbvlerUwcwvnmCNh6QZ6A4g+ahd5jIDU2snfqdrjxy5IT nOnA== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.194.71.84 with SMTP id s20mr14665267wju.89.1446308473197; Sat, 31 Oct 2015 09:21:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.28.31.20 with HTTP; Sat, 31 Oct 2015 09:21:13 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20151026101114.1E98A18046B@rfc-editor.org> References: <20151026101114.1E98A18046B@rfc-editor.org> Date: Sat, 31 Oct 2015 14:21:13 -0200 Message-ID: From: Renato Westphal To: RFC Errata System Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Archived-At: Cc: mpls@ietf.org, jiessie.xu@ericsson.com, rhthomas@cisco.com, rcallon@juniper.net, loa@pi.se, ina@juniper.net Subject: Re: [mpls] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC5036 (4512) X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 31 Oct 2015 16:21:16 -0000 You need to read the RFC more carefully. The advertised Transport Address (implicity or explicity) is to be used only when opening a TCP connection with the neighbor. Link hello packets are always sent with a source address of the underlying interface. 2015-10-26 8:11 GMT-02:00 RFC Errata System : > The following errata report has been submitted for RFC5036, > "LDP Specification". > > -------------------------------------- > You may review the report below and at: > http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=5036&eid=4512 > > -------------------------------------- > Type: Technical > Reported by: Jiessie > > Section: 2.5.2 > > Original Text > ------------- > 2.4.1. Basic Discovery Mechanism > > To engage in LDP Basic Discovery on an interface, an LSR periodically > sends LDP Link Hellos out the interface. LDP Link Hellos are sent as > UDP packets addressed to the well-known LDP discovery port for the > \\"all routers on this subnet\\" group multicast address. > > > 2.5.2. Transport Connection Establishment > > Note that when an LSR sends a Hello, it selects the transport address > for its end of the session connection and uses the Hello to advertise > the address, either explicitly by including it in an optional > Transport Address TLV or implicitly by omitting the TLV and using it > as the Hello source address. > > Corrected Text > -------------- > > > Notes > ----- > According to 2.4.1, an LSR send Hellos to \\"all routers on this subnet\\", the eligible reception LSR should be on this subnet. > > 2.5.2 states that one way for an LSR to advertise Transport Address is to uses it as Hello source address. > > On the topology below, LSRa uses 1.1.1.1 as Transport Address and sends Hello(source:1.1.1.1 destination:224.0.0.2) to LSRb. > LSRb will ignore this packet which is not on its interface subnet. > > 1.1.1.1 > |LSRa|--------------|LSRb| > 10.1.1.1 10.1.1.2 > > My question is: > What\\'s the scenario to use \\"implicitly\\" way to send Hello? > > Instructions: > ------------- > This erratum is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, please > use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or > rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party (IESG) > can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary. > > -------------------------------------- > RFC5036 (draft-ietf-mpls-rfc3036bis-04) > -------------------------------------- > Title : LDP Specification > Publication Date : October 2007 > Author(s) : L. Andersson, Ed., I. Minei, Ed., B. Thomas, Ed. > Category : DRAFT STANDARD > Source : Multiprotocol Label Switching > Area : Routing > Stream : IETF > Verifying Party : IESG > > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls -- Renato Westphal From nobody Sat Oct 31 22:55:51 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 827E41B6586 for ; Sat, 31 Oct 2015 22:55:49 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.91 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham 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 g-KMd7drBvxU for ; Sat, 31 Oct 2015 22:55:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pipi.pi.nu (pipi.pi.nu [83.168.239.141]) (using TLSv1.1 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0CEB41B6585 for ; Sat, 31 Oct 2015 22:55:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [133.93.24.128] (unknown [133.93.24.128]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: loa@pi.nu) by pipi.pi.nu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id EF17218013DA for ; Sun, 1 Nov 2015 06:55:44 +0100 (CET) References: <20151101030818.29117.14633.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> To: "mpls@ietf.org" From: Loa Andersson X-Forwarded-Message-Id: <20151101030818.29117.14633.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Message-ID: <5635A951.4020402@pi.nu> Date: Sun, 1 Nov 2015 14:55:29 +0900 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20151101030818.29117.14633.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: Subject: [mpls] Fwd: NomCom 2015 - Second Request for feedback X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 01 Nov 2015 05:55:49 -0000 Working Group, Please give the NomCom the feedback it needs!! /Loa mpls wg co-chair -------- Forwarded Message -------- Subject: NomCom 2015 - Second Request for feedback Date: Sat, 31 Oct 2015 20:08:18 -0700 From: NomCom Chair 2015 Reply-To: ietf@ietf.org To: IETF Announcement List CC: ietf@ietf.org The 2015-16 Nominating Committee has collected a list of willing candidates for the positions outlined below. You can see the list at: https://datatracker.ietf.org/nomcom/2015/feedback/ You may provide feedback using the web form there; it is secure. All feedback goes into the datatracker using asymmetric encryption, which is decrypted by the nomcom members as they read it. So your feedback can not be seen by the secretariat, the tools people, or any of the management. Your feedback through the web form is not anonymous as you need a login to provide it. You may also provide feedback by emailing nomcom15@ietf.org, which enters the same system through email; it is as non-anonymous as email is, but I do have to sort it out. A separate email per candidate is easier to deal with. If you want to give truly anonymous feedback, please contact one of the NomCom members that you trust directly, and ask him/her to relay the feedback anonymously to the NomCom. Here in Yokohama, you can find Nomcom members by looking for the orange dots. We are also accessible in room 314 at the Yokohama Nomcom office hours: - Tuesday at 12:45 - Wednesday at 13:30 Feedback is more useful to us the earlier it comes, since we can ask the candidates about issues raised in feedback if we have it this week. The positions to be filled are those currently held by: IAB - Mary Barnes - Joe Hildebrand - Ted Hardie - Erik Nordmark - Brian Trammell - Marc Blanchet IESG - Alissa Cooper (ART) - Barry Leiba (ART) - Brian Haberman (Internet) (*) - Benoit Claise (Operations and Management) - Alia Atlas (Routing) - Kathleen Moriarty (Security) - Martin Stiemerling (Transport) (*) Harald Alvestrand, Nomcom chair 2015 nomcom-chair-2015@ietf.org, hta+nomcom@alvestrand.no -- Loa Andersson email: loa@mail01.huawei.com Senior MPLS Expert loa@pi.nu Huawei Technologies (consultant) phone: +46 739 81 21 64