From kaname@nttv6.jp Tue Apr 2 00:39:35 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C74A221F9803 for ; Tue, 2 Apr 2013 00:39:35 -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_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_JP=1.244, HOST_EQ_JP=1.265, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0qH4fkhDvW2A for ; Tue, 2 Apr 2013 00:39:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from guri.nttv6.jp (guri.nttv6.jp [115.69.228.148]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0347921F9801 for ; Tue, 2 Apr 2013 00:39:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from z.nttv6.jp (z.nttv6.jp [115.69.228.212]) by guri.nttv6.jp (NTTv6MTA) with ESMTP id D9789BDC53 for ; Tue, 2 Apr 2013 16:39:26 +0900 (JST) Received: from [IPv6:2402:c800:ff06:0:656e:cb95:25b2:86b4] (unknown [IPv6:2402:c800:ff06:0:656e:cb95:25b2:86b4]) by z.nttv6.jp (NTTv6MTA) with ESMTP id C8BB2E2274; Tue, 2 Apr 2013 16:39:26 +0900 (JST) Message-ID: <515A8B2E.9060706@nttv6.jp> Date: Tue, 02 Apr 2013 16:39:26 +0900 From: kaname nishizuka User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130307 Thunderbird/17.0.4 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: opsawg@ietf.org References: <20130328141225.16450.37444.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> In-Reply-To: <20130328141225.16450.37444.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> X-Forwarded-Message-Id: <20130328141225.16450.37444.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------090306050001010609050106" Subject: [OPSAWG] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-nishizuka-cgn-deployment-considerations-00.txt X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 02 Apr 2013 07:39:35 -0000 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------090306050001010609050106 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Dear all, As I mentioned before, we are testing CGN under the support of Japanese Government. Now, we've uploaded a new draft based on the result of our verification. The useful information about the average consumption of the ports are available on the document. Please look through it and all kind of feedback are welcome. We mentioned Victor's draft "CGN Deployment with BGP/MPLS IP VPNs Draft" in introduction because part of our research shares the same motivations with it. The document is *NOT* intended to be Standards Track. It's for Informational. The wrong description is just mere mistake, so we'll soon correct it in the next revision. The full report of our work will be available soon on the Web. We've just finished writing. Best regards, kaname -------- Original Message -------- Subject: New Version Notification for draft-nishizuka-cgn-deployment-considerations-00.txt Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2013 07:12:25 -0700 From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: kaname@nttv6.jp A new version of I-D, draft-nishizuka-cgn-deployment-considerations-00.txt has been successfully submitted by Kaname Nishizuka and posted to the IETF repository. Filename: draft-nishizuka-cgn-deployment-considerations Revision: 00 Title: Carrier-Grade-NAT (CGN) Deployment Considerations. Creation date: 2013-03-29 Group: Individual Submission Number of pages: 16 URL: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-nishizuka-cgn-deployment-considerations-00.txt Status: http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-nishizuka-cgn-deployment-considerations Htmlized: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-nishizuka-cgn-deployment-considerations-00 Abstract: This document provides deployment considerations for Carrier-Grade- NAT (CGN) based on the verification result include the investigation of the number of sessions of applications. The verification was conducted in StarBED which is one of the largest scale network experiment environment in Japan. A million of subscribers was emulated and it revealed the realistic behavior of CGN. The IETF Secretariat --------------090306050001010609050106 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 
Dear all,

As I mentioned before, we are testing CGN under the support of Japanese Government.
Now, we've uploaded a new draft based on the result of our verification.
The useful information about the average consumption of the ports are available on the document.
Please look through it and all kind of feedback are welcome.
We mentioned Victor's draft "CGN Deployment with BGP/MPLS IP VPNs Draft" in introduction 
because part of our research shares the same motivations with it.

The document is *NOT* intended to be Standards Track. It's for Informational.
The wrong description is just mere mistake, so we'll soon correct it in the next revision.

The full report of our work will be available soon on the Web.
We've just finished writing.

Best regards,

kaname
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: New Version Notification for draft-nishizuka-cgn-deployment-considerations-00.txt
Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2013 07:12:25 -0700
From: internet-drafts@ietf.org
To: kaname@nttv6.jp 


A new version of I-D, draft-nishizuka-cgn-deployment-considerations-00.txt
has been successfully submitted by Kaname Nishizuka and posted to the
IETF repository.

Filename:	 draft-nishizuka-cgn-deployment-considerations
Revision:	 00
Title:		 Carrier-Grade-NAT (CGN) Deployment Considerations.
Creation date:	 2013-03-29
Group:		 Individual Submission
Number of pages: 16
URL:             http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-nishizuka-cgn-deployment-considerations-00.txt
Status:          http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-nishizuka-cgn-deployment-considerations
Htmlized:        http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-nishizuka-cgn-deployment-considerations-00


Abstract:
   This document provides deployment considerations for Carrier-Grade-
   NAT (CGN) based on the verification result include the investigation
   of the number of sessions of applications.  The verification was
   conducted in StarBED which is one of the largest scale network
   experiment environment in Japan.  A million of subscribers was
   emulated and it revealed the realistic behavior of CGN.

                                                                                  


The IETF Secretariat


--------------090306050001010609050106-- From shtsuchi@cisco.com Fri Apr 5 00:02:44 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 07B0A21F9440 for ; Fri, 5 Apr 2013 00:02:44 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -10.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id aMC3OkEjn04j for ; Fri, 5 Apr 2013 00:02:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bgl-iport-2.cisco.com (bgl-iport-2.cisco.com [72.163.197.26]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 268D421F942C for ; Fri, 5 Apr 2013 00:02:41 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=2870; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1365145362; x=1366354962; h=message-id:date:from:mime-version:to:cc:subject: references:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=D+U66ocAKt+nhj8MreXoo6vWtNHqk0miQbjK71FdwNk=; b=Cza1gO6tEqgF0m0RfphnJa/gBSguB4MzjJCsTeFOv4hf12rZwGW/Kq5m QxixNlObem1pvMhO/V3gOGLbI/IFW3Paf0VwKr22Icg2PPHGLjpxD1MEJ Uj2WBCthnm1zbC9v4WsVZGjRYh5rdWDx7LuaNpNGlY/B3X4qIMeLYPBfF Q=; X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.87,413,1363132800"; d="scan'208";a="28831959" Received: from vla196-nat.cisco.com (HELO bgl-core-2.cisco.com) ([72.163.197.24]) by bgl-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 05 Apr 2013 07:02:36 +0000 Received: from dhcp-10-141-42-168.cisco.com (dhcp-10-141-42-168.cisco.com [10.141.42.168]) by bgl-core-2.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r3572W37023349; Fri, 5 Apr 2013 07:02:32 GMT Message-ID: <515E7708.7010305@cisco.com> Date: Fri, 05 Apr 2013 16:02:32 +0900 From: Shishio Tsuchiya User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130307 Thunderbird/17.0.4 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: draft-nishizuka-cgn-deployment-considerations@tools.ietf.org, opsawg@ietf.org References: <20130328141224.16450.34573.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> In-Reply-To: <20130328141224.16450.34573.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> X-Forwarded-Message-Id: <20130328141224.16450.34573.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-2022-JP Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [OPSAWG] Fwd: I-D Action: draft-nishizuka-cgn-deployment-considerations-00.txt X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 05 Apr 2013 07:02:44 -0000 I read this documents. I think this draft would be useful to consider CGP deployment for service providers. And I have question. http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-nishizuka-cgn-deployment-considerations-00#section-4 Figure 1: The number of sessions of applications. Q.Which browser did you use in your investigation? Our investigation shows that the average number of session of active subscriber is 400. Q.Can you show more detail information? The investigation in the commercial network? or test bed? http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-nishizuka-cgn-deployment-considerations-00#section-5.2 (a) was estimated to be 25% at the value during the busy hour of traffic (21:00 pm to 1:00am). Q.Does the estimation come from your investigation on real network? or erlang and someting? What kind of network?Wireless or Wireline?IPv6 enabled network? http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-nishizuka-cgn-deployment-considerations-00#section-6.1 Q.Is current RFC not enough to measure CGN performance? RFC 3511 Benchmarking Methodology for Firewall Performance http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3511 RFC6645 IP Flow Information Accounting and Export Benchmarking Methodology http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6645 Regards, -Shishio -------- Original Message -------- Subject: I-D Action: draft-nishizuka-cgn-deployment-considerations-00.txt Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2013 07:12:24 -0700 From: Reply-To: To: A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. Title : Carrier-Grade-NAT (CGN) Deployment Considerations. Author(s) : Kaname Nishizuka Filename : draft-nishizuka-cgn-deployment-considerations-00.txt Pages : 16 Date : 2013-03-28 Abstract: This document provides deployment considerations for Carrier-Grade- NAT (CGN) based on the verification result include the investigation of the number of sessions of applications. The verification was conducted in StarBED which is one of the largest scale network experiment environment in Japan. A million of subscribers was emulated and it revealed the realistic behavior of CGN. The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-nishizuka-cgn-deployment-considerations There's also a htmlized version available at: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-nishizuka-cgn-deployment-considerations-00 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 kaname@nttv6.jp Fri Apr 5 03:03:28 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4782221F8651 for ; Fri, 5 Apr 2013 03:03:28 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.6 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, NO_RELAYS=-0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 3V6GSzkq1WFX for ; Fri, 5 Apr 2013 03:03:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from guri.nttv6.jp (guri.nttv6.jp [IPv6:2402:c800:ff06:144::148]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3195221F8526 for ; Fri, 5 Apr 2013 03:03:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from z.nttv6.jp (z.nttv6.jp [IPv6:2402:c800:ff06:208::212]) by guri.nttv6.jp (NTTv6MTA) with ESMTP id 4A54EBDC21; Fri, 5 Apr 2013 19:03:23 +0900 (JST) Received: from [IPv6:2402:c800:ff06:0:b02b:9f06:759:cad6] (unknown [IPv6:2402:c800:ff06:0:b02b:9f06:759:cad6]) by z.nttv6.jp (NTTv6MTA) with ESMTP id 31D64E22E3; Fri, 5 Apr 2013 19:03:23 +0900 (JST) Message-ID: <515EA169.5050408@nttv6.jp> Date: Fri, 05 Apr 2013 19:03:21 +0900 From: kaname nishizuka User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130328 Thunderbird/17.0.5 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Shishio Tsuchiya References: <20130328141224.16450.34573.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <515E7708.7010305@cisco.com> In-Reply-To: <515E7708.7010305@cisco.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: opsawg@ietf.org, draft-nishizuka-cgn-deployment-considerations@tools.ietf.org Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] Fwd: I-D Action: draft-nishizuka-cgn-deployment-considerations-00.txt X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 05 Apr 2013 10:03:28 -0000 Shishio-san Thanks, In response to your questions, > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-nishizuka-cgn-deployment-considerations-00#section-4 > Figure 1: The number of sessions of applications. > > Q.Which browser did you use in your investigation? We used the latest Chrome and FireFox. > Our investigation shows that the average number of session of active subscriber is 400. > > Q.Can you show more detail information? The investigation in the commercial network? or test bed? We captured traffic of our normal activities. So the answer is "in test bed". In a commercial network, the common people activities could be somehow different from researchers:) However, the existing study is showing that our assumption is not extreme. http://www.wand.net.nz/~salcock/someisp/flow_counting/result_page.html > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-nishizuka-cgn-deployment-considerations-00#section-5.2 > (a) was estimated to be 25% at the value during the busy hour of traffic (21:00 pm to 1:00am). > > Q.Does the estimation come from your investigation on real network? or erlang and someting? > What kind of network?Wireless or Wireline?IPv6 enabled network? It's from investigation on the real ISP network. It's mainly wireline network and partly IPv6-enabled. > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-nishizuka-cgn-deployment-considerations-00#section-6.1 > > Q.Is current RFC not enough to measure CGN performance? > RFC 3511 Benchmarking Methodology for Firewall Performance > http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3511 > RFC6645 IP Flow Information Accounting and Export Benchmarking Methodology > http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6645 > Maybe not, though I've not closely read them. As I described in the draft, the CGN performance is limited by the combination of throughput, Max Concurrent Sessions and Connection Per Sec. Thus we used the test bed(StarBED) with powerful calculation power to emulate all subscribers. The assumption of the average subscriber was important for setting up the environment. Best regards, kaname (2013/04/05 16:02), Shishio Tsuchiya wrote: > I read this documents. > I think this draft would be useful to consider CGP deployment for service providers. > > And I have question. > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-nishizuka-cgn-deployment-considerations-00#section-4 > Figure 1: The number of sessions of applications. > > Q.Which browser did you use in your investigation? > > Our investigation shows that the average number of session of active subscriber is 400. > > Q.Can you show more detail information? The investigation in the commercial network? or test bed? > > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-nishizuka-cgn-deployment-considerations-00#section-5.2 > (a) was estimated to be 25% at the value during the busy hour of traffic (21:00 pm to 1:00am). > > Q.Does the estimation come from your investigation on real network? or erlang and someting? > What kind of network?Wireless or Wireline?IPv6 enabled network? > > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-nishizuka-cgn-deployment-considerations-00#section-6.1 > > Q.Is current RFC not enough to measure CGN performance? > RFC 3511 Benchmarking Methodology for Firewall Performance > http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3511 > RFC6645 IP Flow Information Accounting and Export Benchmarking Methodology > http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6645 > > Regards, > -Shishio > > -------- Original Message -------- > Subject: I-D Action: draft-nishizuka-cgn-deployment-considerations-00.txt > Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2013 07:12:24 -0700 > From: > Reply-To: > To: > > > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. > > > Title : Carrier-Grade-NAT (CGN) Deployment Considerations. > Author(s) : Kaname Nishizuka > Filename : draft-nishizuka-cgn-deployment-considerations-00.txt > Pages : 16 > Date : 2013-03-28 > > Abstract: > This document provides deployment considerations for Carrier-Grade- > NAT (CGN) based on the verification result include the investigation > of the number of sessions of applications. The verification was > conducted in StarBED which is one of the largest scale network > experiment environment in Japan. A million of subscribers was > emulated and it revealed the realistic behavior of CGN. > > > The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-nishizuka-cgn-deployment-considerations > > There's also a htmlized version available at: > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-nishizuka-cgn-deployment-considerations-00 > > > 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 > . > > > > _______________________________________________ > OPSAWG mailing list > OPSAWG@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg -- ---- Kaname Nishizuka Innovative Architecture Center NTT Communications Corporation +81-50-3812-4704 From shtsuchi@cisco.com Fri Apr 5 04:21:52 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 538AC21F9734 for ; Fri, 5 Apr 2013 04:21:52 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -10.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id nqUnyBzW4-j1 for ; Fri, 5 Apr 2013 04:21:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bgl-iport-1.cisco.com (bgl-iport-1.cisco.com [72.163.197.25]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 43A9021F8DFB for ; Fri, 5 Apr 2013 04:21:50 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=6313; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1365160910; x=1366370510; h=message-id:date:from:mime-version:to:cc:subject: references:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=i634UOE1KsdL3VjyB2SD2t4xiK7pbSyDUOFVSSv+q8o=; b=Jt33WThDD3yPMH9T6VXU+jykqxmqoxrPPQYfQsUjmzhYJBkWhOhuZ7yc ZlynXgjoScVZGwyUBZPGMIOIwhIp1nxOhmkQtAO6i65/3DIaNNyCBrVDA c/rbDcvMmLtaR9LSUeRAEds/kOGbz+ZECmaWh3k62cfwJFUK1fAFKUYK0 E=; X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.87,413,1363132800"; d="scan'208";a="28843635" Received: from vla196-nat.cisco.com (HELO bgl-core-3.cisco.com) ([72.163.197.24]) by bgl-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 05 Apr 2013 11:21:44 +0000 Received: from Shishio-no-MacBook-Air.local ([10.70.232.5]) by bgl-core-3.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r35BLdNM002192; Fri, 5 Apr 2013 11:21:40 GMT Message-ID: <515EB3C3.6070001@cisco.com> Date: Fri, 05 Apr 2013 20:21:39 +0900 From: Shishio Tsuchiya User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130307 Thunderbird/17.0.4 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: kaname@nttv6.jp References: <20130328141224.16450.34573.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <515E7708.7010305@cisco.com> <515EA169.5050408@nttv6.jp> In-Reply-To: <515EA169.5050408@nttv6.jp> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-2022-JP Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: opsawg@ietf.org, draft-nishizuka-cgn-deployment-considerations@tools.ietf.org Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] Fwd: I-D Action: draft-nishizuka-cgn-deployment-considerations-00.txt X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 05 Apr 2013 11:21:52 -0000 Kaname-san (2013/04/05 19:03), kaname nishizuka wrote: > Shishio-san > Thanks, > > In response to your questions, > >> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-nishizuka-cgn-deployment-considerations-00#section-4 >> Figure 1: The number of sessions of applications. >> >> Q.Which browser did you use in your investigation? > We used the latest Chrome and FireFox. I think, previous version than IE10.0 does not support both Websocket and SPDY. But the share is pretty high. So it would be more useful if you could add the result of old version of IE and latest IE. And cisco and IDC published White Paper of "The Business Case for Delivering IPv6 Service Now". http://www.cisco.com/en/US/solutions/collateral/ns341/ns525/ns1017/idc_ipv6_economics.pdf If you could add result of IPv6 access to your selected site, it would be more powerful. Your investigation result would be more adaptable in all of deployment stage.(NAT44 only,NAT44 + NAT64 and NAT44 and IPv6 native.) > >> Our investigation shows that the average number of session of active subscriber is 400. >> >> Q.Can you show more detail information? The investigation in the commercial network? or test bed? > We captured traffic of our normal activities. So the answer is "in test bed". > In a commercial network, the common people activities could be somehow different from researchers:) > However, the existing study is showing that our assumption is not extreme. > http://www.wand.net.nz/~salcock/someisp/flow_counting/result_page.html Thanks for information. > >> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-nishizuka-cgn-deployment-considerations-00#section-5.2 >> (a) was estimated to be 25% at the value during the busy hour of traffic (21:00 pm to 1:00am). >> >> Q.Does the estimation come from your investigation on real network? or erlang and someting? >> What kind of network?Wireless or Wireline?IPv6 enabled network? > It's from investigation on the real ISP network. > It's mainly wireline network and partly IPv6-enabled. > Thank you for useful information. Do you know the trend of mobile network? > >> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-nishizuka-cgn-deployment-considerations-00#section-6.1 >> >> Q.Is current RFC not enough to measure CGN performance? >> RFC 3511 Benchmarking Methodology for Firewall Performance >> http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3511 >> RFC6645 IP Flow Information Accounting and Export Benchmarking Methodology >> http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6645 >> > Maybe not, though I've not closely read them. > As I described in the draft, the CGN performance is limited by the combination of throughput, Max Concurrent Sessions and Connection Per Sec. > Thus we used the test bed(StarBED) with powerful calculation power to emulate all subscribers. > The assumption of the average subscriber was important for setting up the environment. Yes,I thought you might write another draft for BMWG wg.:-) Regards, -Shishio > > Best regards, > kaname > > (2013/04/05 16:02), Shishio Tsuchiya wrote: >> I read this documents. >> I think this draft would be useful to consider CGP deployment for service providers. >> >> And I have question. >> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-nishizuka-cgn-deployment-considerations-00#section-4 >> Figure 1: The number of sessions of applications. >> >> Q.Which browser did you use in your investigation? >> >> Our investigation shows that the average number of session of active subscriber is 400. >> >> Q.Can you show more detail information? The investigation in the commercial network? or test bed? >> >> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-nishizuka-cgn-deployment-considerations-00#section-5.2 >> (a) was estimated to be 25% at the value during the busy hour of traffic (21:00 pm to 1:00am). >> >> Q.Does the estimation come from your investigation on real network? or erlang and someting? >> What kind of network?Wireless or Wireline?IPv6 enabled network? >> >> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-nishizuka-cgn-deployment-considerations-00#section-6.1 >> >> Q.Is current RFC not enough to measure CGN performance? >> RFC 3511 Benchmarking Methodology for Firewall Performance >> http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3511 >> RFC6645 IP Flow Information Accounting and Export Benchmarking Methodology >> http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6645 >> >> Regards, >> -Shishio >> >> -------- Original Message -------- >> Subject: I-D Action: draft-nishizuka-cgn-deployment-considerations-00.txt >> Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2013 07:12:24 -0700 >> From: >> Reply-To: >> To: >> >> >> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. >> >> >> Title : Carrier-Grade-NAT (CGN) Deployment Considerations. >> Author(s) : Kaname Nishizuka >> Filename : draft-nishizuka-cgn-deployment-considerations-00.txt >> Pages : 16 >> Date : 2013-03-28 >> >> Abstract: >> This document provides deployment considerations for Carrier-Grade- >> NAT (CGN) based on the verification result include the investigation >> of the number of sessions of applications. The verification was >> conducted in StarBED which is one of the largest scale network >> experiment environment in Japan. A million of subscribers was >> emulated and it revealed the realistic behavior of CGN. >> >> >> The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-nishizuka-cgn-deployment-considerations >> >> There's also a htmlized version available at: >> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-nishizuka-cgn-deployment-considerations-00 >> >> >> 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 >> . >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> OPSAWG mailing list >> OPSAWG@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg > > From tony@yaanatech.com Mon Apr 8 08:45:36 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E17FF21F92B2 for ; Mon, 8 Apr 2013 08:45:36 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id rpPjby4Q-7Lb for ; Mon, 8 Apr 2013 08:45:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from extmail1.prd.yaanatech.com (extmail1.prd.yaanatech.com [205.140.198.37]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 718C121F8F08 for ; Mon, 8 Apr 2013 08:45:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.0.7] (pool-71-171-119-5.clppva.fios.verizon.net [71.171.119.5]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by extmail1.prd.yaanatech.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8110E58082; Mon, 8 Apr 2013 15:45:35 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <5162E61E.3090107@yaanatech.com> Date: Mon, 08 Apr 2013 11:45:34 -0400 From: Tony Rutkowski Organization: Yaana Technologies User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130328 Thunderbird/17.0.5 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Victor Kuarsingh References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: "opsawg@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] Deterministic Logging X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: tony@yaanatech.com List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 08 Apr 2013 15:45:37 -0000 I has been a while since any discussion has occurred on this subject - since 21 February to be precise. Any further followup or interest in pursuing the matter? We can take this off the list if there is independent interest. --tony From kaname@nttv6.jp Tue Apr 9 04:56:49 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 15F5D21F8D8E for ; Tue, 9 Apr 2013 04:56:49 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.211 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.211 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.299, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_JP=1.244, HOST_EQ_JP=1.265, J_CHICKENPOX_31=0.6] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Ev6R2SCqAG5f for ; Tue, 9 Apr 2013 04:56:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from guri.nttv6.jp (guri.nttv6.jp [115.69.228.148]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A4A121F8AE6 for ; Tue, 9 Apr 2013 04:56:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from z.nttv6.jp (z.nttv6.jp [IPv6:2402:c800:ff06:208::212]) by guri.nttv6.jp (NTTv6MTA) with ESMTP id 94E29BDC21; Tue, 9 Apr 2013 20:56:43 +0900 (JST) Received: from [IPv6:2402:c800:ff06:0:c41f:a260:6e99:7889] (unknown [IPv6:2402:c800:ff06:0:c41f:a260:6e99:7889]) by z.nttv6.jp (NTTv6MTA) with ESMTP id 8E7CAE2305; Tue, 9 Apr 2013 20:56:43 +0900 (JST) Message-ID: <516401F8.2070506@nttv6.jp> Date: Tue, 09 Apr 2013 20:56:40 +0900 From: kaname nishizuka User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130328 Thunderbird/17.0.5 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Shishio Tsuchiya References: <20130328141224.16450.34573.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <515E7708.7010305@cisco.com> <515EA169.5050408@nttv6.jp> <515EB3C3.6070001@cisco.com> In-Reply-To: <515EB3C3.6070001@cisco.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-2022-JP Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: opsawg@ietf.org, draft-nishizuka-cgn-deployment-considerations@tools.ietf.org Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] Fwd: I-D Action: draft-nishizuka-cgn-deployment-considerations-00.txt X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 09 Apr 2013 11:56:49 -0000 Shishio-san > I think, previous version than IE10.0 does not support both Websocket and SPDY. > But the share is pretty high. > So it would be more useful if you could add the result of old version of IE and latest IE. Exactly. > If you could add result of IPv6 access to your selected site, it would be more powerful. > Your investigation result would be more adaptable in all of deployment stage.(NAT44 only,NAT44 + NAT64 and NAT44 and IPv6 native.) I'd like to do that. Thanks for your useful suggestion. > Do you know the trend of mobile network? Examining mobile network is our future work. > Yes,I thought you might write another draft for BMWG wg.:-) It's been always on my mind.:-) Regards, kaname (2013/04/05 20:21), Shishio Tsuchiya wrote: > Kaname-san > (2013/04/05 19:03), kaname nishizuka wrote: >> Shishio-san >> Thanks, >> >> In response to your questions, >> >>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-nishizuka-cgn-deployment-considerations-00#section-4 >>> Figure 1: The number of sessions of applications. >>> >>> Q.Which browser did you use in your investigation? >> We used the latest Chrome and FireFox. > I think, previous version than IE10.0 does not support both Websocket and SPDY. > But the share is pretty high. > So it would be more useful if you could add the result of old version of IE and latest IE. > And cisco and IDC published White Paper of "The Business Case for Delivering IPv6 Service Now". > http://www.cisco.com/en/US/solutions/collateral/ns341/ns525/ns1017/idc_ipv6_economics.pdf > If you could add result of IPv6 access to your selected site, it would be more powerful. > Your investigation result would be more adaptable in all of deployment stage.(NAT44 only,NAT44 + NAT64 and NAT44 and IPv6 native.) > >>> Our investigation shows that the average number of session of active subscriber is 400. >>> >>> Q.Can you show more detail information? The investigation in the commercial network? or test bed? >> We captured traffic of our normal activities. So the answer is "in test bed". >> In a commercial network, the common people activities could be somehow different from researchers:) >> However, the existing study is showing that our assumption is not extreme. >> http://www.wand.net.nz/~salcock/someisp/flow_counting/result_page.html > Thanks for information. > >>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-nishizuka-cgn-deployment-considerations-00#section-5.2 >>> (a) was estimated to be 25% at the value during the busy hour of traffic (21:00 pm to 1:00am). >>> >>> Q.Does the estimation come from your investigation on real network? or erlang and someting? >>> What kind of network?Wireless or Wireline?IPv6 enabled network? >> It's from investigation on the real ISP network. >> It's mainly wireline network and partly IPv6-enabled. >> > Thank you for useful information. > Do you know the trend of mobile network? > >>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-nishizuka-cgn-deployment-considerations-00#section-6.1 >>> >>> Q.Is current RFC not enough to measure CGN performance? >>> RFC 3511 Benchmarking Methodology for Firewall Performance >>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3511 >>> RFC6645 IP Flow Information Accounting and Export Benchmarking Methodology >>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6645 >>> >> Maybe not, though I've not closely read them. >> As I described in the draft, the CGN performance is limited by the combination of throughput, Max Concurrent Sessions and Connection Per Sec. >> Thus we used the test bed(StarBED) with powerful calculation power to emulate all subscribers. >> The assumption of the average subscriber was important for setting up the environment. > Yes,I thought you might write another draft for BMWG wg.:-) > > Regards, > -Shishio > > > > >> Best regards, >> kaname >> >> (2013/04/05 16:02), Shishio Tsuchiya wrote: >>> I read this documents. >>> I think this draft would be useful to consider CGP deployment for service providers. >>> >>> And I have question. >>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-nishizuka-cgn-deployment-considerations-00#section-4 >>> Figure 1: The number of sessions of applications. >>> >>> Q.Which browser did you use in your investigation? >>> >>> Our investigation shows that the average number of session of active subscriber is 400. >>> >>> Q.Can you show more detail information? The investigation in the commercial network? or test bed? >>> >>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-nishizuka-cgn-deployment-considerations-00#section-5.2 >>> (a) was estimated to be 25% at the value during the busy hour of traffic (21:00 pm to 1:00am). >>> >>> Q.Does the estimation come from your investigation on real network? or erlang and someting? >>> What kind of network?Wireless or Wireline?IPv6 enabled network? >>> >>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-nishizuka-cgn-deployment-considerations-00#section-6.1 >>> >>> Q.Is current RFC not enough to measure CGN performance? >>> RFC 3511 Benchmarking Methodology for Firewall Performance >>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3511 >>> RFC6645 IP Flow Information Accounting and Export Benchmarking Methodology >>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6645 >>> >>> Regards, >>> -Shishio >>> >>> -------- Original Message -------- >>> Subject: I-D Action: draft-nishizuka-cgn-deployment-considerations-00.txt >>> Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2013 07:12:24 -0700 >>> From: >>> Reply-To: >>> To: >>> >>> >>> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. >>> >>> >>> Title : Carrier-Grade-NAT (CGN) Deployment Considerations. >>> Author(s) : Kaname Nishizuka >>> Filename : draft-nishizuka-cgn-deployment-considerations-00.txt >>> Pages : 16 >>> Date : 2013-03-28 >>> >>> Abstract: >>> This document provides deployment considerations for Carrier-Grade- >>> NAT (CGN) based on the verification result include the investigation >>> of the number of sessions of applications. The verification was >>> conducted in StarBED which is one of the largest scale network >>> experiment environment in Japan. A million of subscribers was >>> emulated and it revealed the realistic behavior of CGN. >>> >>> >>> The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: >>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-nishizuka-cgn-deployment-considerations >>> >>> There's also a htmlized version available at: >>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-nishizuka-cgn-deployment-considerations-00 >>> >>> >>> 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 >>> . >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> OPSAWG mailing list >>> OPSAWG@ietf.org >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg >> -- ---- Kaname Nishizuka Innovative Architecture Center NTT Communications Corporation +81-50-3812-4704 From melinda.shore@gmail.com Wed Apr 10 06:16:09 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 97ACD21F9795 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2013 06:16:09 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.071 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.071 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_EQ_IP_ADDR=1.119, RDNS_NONE=0.1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id hVCZjn7gkiBl for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2013 06:16:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-qc0-x22f.google.com (mail-qc0-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c01::22f]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EBCC621F9789 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2013 06:16:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-qc0-f175.google.com with SMTP id j3so182257qcs.6 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2013 06:16:08 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=x-received:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=TPaSmo0GF+Uu085SVZlWZwEmyqWEvH0OMndT66qEwJ4=; b=eR8gmwaIe/o0pHoP8GaEb6xPvqRWfYKGBJGK+v5BnaKQe7N/O1+kvkNtba8KJhGPxy TI0LqZ49aEQK9dijCQzFz/Sr6zZKaFA8vsFKBoFcPF25Kjv5+hMeTnhhQR48ymp8dWqS v1k5vAZIq7TAr649yUswc2OsKCFFiNTB1zo5Knotys8q67fFIvvuKm91EScnpOmAdmRh qsX4yOnD13hNe5fNPJncP2glaRDJl+1qDGFInaQwA85bB67iD9FlORtzLd2g7xofjajz KocxOXnm2dR+bmn9UC2HqVrAw8OeODPBc3FUmTSSbgZZeClCuIo+9sFAdaj+pnQ09xCj fB/g== X-Received: by 10.49.74.71 with SMTP id r7mr2254449qev.52.1365599768418; Wed, 10 Apr 2013 06:16:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [129.6.252.108] ([129.6.252.108]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id e3sm30747213qeo.0.2013.04.10.06.16.07 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Wed, 10 Apr 2013 06:16:07 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <51656616.4070003@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2013 05:16:06 -0800 From: Melinda Shore User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130307 Thunderbird/17.0.4 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: opsawg@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [OPSAWG] Call for adoption, draft-krishnan-opsawg-large-flow-load-balancing/ X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2013 13:16:09 -0000 This is a call for working group adoption of http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-krishnan-opsawg-large-flow-load-balancing/. The authors report that they've incorporated feedback given at the IETF 86 meeting, in particular . information model for flow rebalancing . operational considerations We'll be assessing consensus on 24 April 2013. Thanks, Melinda From lucy.yong@huawei.com Wed Apr 10 06:56:04 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4CCCD21F95E2 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2013 06:56:04 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.598 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.001, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id kbGi1hNjuNBj for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2013 06:56:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [194.213.3.17]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4A6A421F97DE for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2013 06:56:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 172.18.7.190 (EHLO lhreml204-edg.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.7.190]) by lhrrg02-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.3.5-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id AQG10690; Wed, 10 Apr 2013 13:56:02 +0000 (GMT) Received: from LHREML404-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.218) by lhreml204-edg.china.huawei.com (172.18.7.223) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.7; Wed, 10 Apr 2013 14:55:30 +0100 Received: from DFWEML407-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.193.5.132) by lhreml404-hub.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.218) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.7; Wed, 10 Apr 2013 21:56:00 +0800 Received: from DFWEML509-MBX.china.huawei.com ([169.254.11.122]) by dfweml407-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.193.5.132]) with mapi id 14.01.0323.007; Wed, 10 Apr 2013 06:55:57 -0700 From: Lucy yong To: Melinda Shore , "opsawg@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [OPSAWG] Call for adoption, draft-krishnan-opsawg-large-flow-load-balancing/ Thread-Index: AQHONe2ZMD+Q4lap8EaEF96nkeBHUJjPejig Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2013 13:55:56 +0000 Message-ID: <2691CE0099834E4A9C5044EEC662BB9D452478E5@dfweml509-mbx.china.huawei.com> References: <51656616.4070003@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <51656616.4070003@gmail.com> Accept-Language: en-US, zh-CN Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.47.139.240] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] Call for adoption, draft-krishnan-opsawg-large-flow-load-balancing/ X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2013 13:56:04 -0000 Support as one of co-authors. Lucy > -----Original Message----- > From: opsawg-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:opsawg-bounces@ietf.org] On > Behalf Of Melinda Shore > Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2013 8:16 AM > To: opsawg@ietf.org > Subject: [OPSAWG] Call for adoption, draft-krishnan-opsawg-large-flow- > load-balancing/ >=20 > This is a call for working group adoption of > http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-krishnan-opsawg-large-flow-load- > balancing/. >=20 > The authors report that they've incorporated feedback given at > the IETF 86 meeting, in particular > . information model for flow rebalancing > . operational considerations >=20 > We'll be assessing consensus on 24 April 2013. >=20 > Thanks, >=20 > Melinda > _______________________________________________ > OPSAWG mailing list > OPSAWG@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg From ramk@Brocade.com Wed Apr 10 07:18:25 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 54BD921F9810 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2013 07:18:25 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.265 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.265 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, IP_NOT_FRIENDLY=0.334, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id cUM+QJKgC7x6 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2013 07:18:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx0a-000f0801.pphosted.com (mx0a-000f0801.pphosted.com [67.231.144.122]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CEBE621F9808 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2013 07:18:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pps.filterd (m0000542 [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-000f0801.pphosted.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with SMTP id r3AEEGcf022511 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2013 07:18:24 -0700 Received: from hq1wp-exchub02.corp.brocade.com ([144.49.131.13]) by mx0a-000f0801.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 1bn2c0r4xt-3 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT) for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2013 07:18:23 -0700 Received: from HQ1WP-EXHUB02.corp.brocade.com (10.70.38.14) by hq1wp-exchub02.corp.brocade.com (10.70.38.99) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.2.309.2; Wed, 10 Apr 2013 07:13:45 -0700 Received: from HQ1-EXCH01.corp.brocade.com ([fe80::8c73:93bf:41b4:1443]) by HQ1WP-EXHUB02.corp.brocade.com ([fe80::e1f4:a4c8:696b:3780%10]) with mapi; Wed, 10 Apr 2013 07:13:27 -0700 From: ramki Krishnan To: Melinda Shore , "opsawg@ietf.org" Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2013 07:13:15 -0700 Thread-Topic: [OPSAWG] Call for adoption, draft-krishnan-opsawg-large-flow-load-balancing/ Thread-Index: Ac417apip45aKsUHR1qclkHuvoSelgAB8VDg Message-ID: References: <51656616.4070003@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <51656616.4070003@gmail.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:5.10.8626, 1.0.431, 0.0.0000 definitions=2013-04-10_06:2013-04-10, 2013-04-10, 1970-01-01 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 spamscore=0 suspectscore=2 phishscore=0 adultscore=0 bulkscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=7.0.1-1211240000 definitions=main-1304100114 Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] Call for adoption, draft-krishnan-opsawg-large-flow-load-balancing/ X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2013 14:18:25 -0000 Support this draft. Thanks, Ram (aka Ramki) -----Original Message----- From: opsawg-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:opsawg-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of= Melinda Shore Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2013 6:16 AM To: opsawg@ietf.org Subject: [OPSAWG] Call for adoption, draft-krishnan-opsawg-large-flow-load-= balancing/ This is a call for working group adoption of http://datatracker.ietf.org/do= c/draft-krishnan-opsawg-large-flow-load-balancing/. The authors report that they've incorporated feedback given at the IETF 86 = meeting, in particular . information model for flow rebalancing . operational considerations We'll be assessing consensus on 24 April 2013. Thanks, Melinda _______________________________________________ OPSAWG mailing list OPSAWG@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg From linda.dunbar@huawei.com Wed Apr 10 07:34:16 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B48C321F942C for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2013 07:34:16 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id g6jv3IQ82bn6 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2013 07:34:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [194.213.3.17]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 067E421F9776 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2013 07:34:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 172.18.7.190 (EHLO lhreml203-edg.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.7.190]) by lhrrg02-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.3.5-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id AQG13726; Wed, 10 Apr 2013 14:34:07 +0000 (GMT) Received: from LHREML401-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.240) by lhreml203-edg.huawei.com (172.18.7.221) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.7; Wed, 10 Apr 2013 15:33:30 +0100 Received: from DFWEML406-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.193.5.131) by lhreml401-hub.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.240) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.7; Wed, 10 Apr 2013 15:34:02 +0100 Received: from DFWEML509-MBX.china.huawei.com ([169.254.11.122]) by dfweml406-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.193.5.131]) with mapi id 14.01.0323.007; Wed, 10 Apr 2013 07:33:55 -0700 From: Linda Dunbar To: Lucy yong , Melinda Shore , "opsawg@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [OPSAWG] Call for adoption, draft-krishnan-opsawg-large-flow-load-balancing/ Thread-Index: AQHONe2ZmaigRdHyy0CG0sPqCygXNpjP77wA//+VNVA= Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2013 14:33:54 +0000 Message-ID: <4A95BA014132FF49AE685FAB4B9F17F645AFC1CC@dfweml509-mbx.china.huawei.com> References: <51656616.4070003@gmail.com> <2691CE0099834E4A9C5044EEC662BB9D452478E5@dfweml509-mbx.china.huawei.com> In-Reply-To: <2691CE0099834E4A9C5044EEC662BB9D452478E5@dfweml509-mbx.china.huawei.com> Accept-Language: en-US, zh-CN Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.192.11.238] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] Call for adoption, draft-krishnan-opsawg-large-flow-load-balancing/ X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2013 14:34:16 -0000 Support.=20 Linda >=20 > > -----Original Message----- > > From: opsawg-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:opsawg-bounces@ietf.org] On > > Behalf Of Melinda Shore > > Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2013 8:16 AM > > To: opsawg@ietf.org > > Subject: [OPSAWG] Call for adoption, draft-krishnan-opsawg-large- > flow- > > load-balancing/ > > > > This is a call for working group adoption of > > http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-krishnan-opsawg-large-flow- > load- > > balancing/. > > > > The authors report that they've incorporated feedback given at > > the IETF 86 meeting, in particular > > . information model for flow rebalancing > > . operational considerations > > > > We'll be assessing consensus on 24 April 2013. > > > > Thanks, > > > > Melinda > > _______________________________________________ > > OPSAWG mailing list > > OPSAWG@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg > _______________________________________________ > OPSAWG mailing list > OPSAWG@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg From ghanwani@gmail.com Wed Apr 10 09:58:28 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2E2B721F8AF8 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2013 09:58:27 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.977 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.977 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, NO_RELAYS=-0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id lfMnwaU7j4VO for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2013 09:58:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-vb0-x233.google.com (mail-vb0-x233.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400c:c02::233]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B5A9A21F89DE for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2013 09:58:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-vb0-f51.google.com with SMTP id x19so540370vbf.24 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2013 09:58:23 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=OtVT4PzHOsfGugXKXoBcW7QgtBWzJrflLp0D3+dUAkk=; b=kz41uqvzcPJFkMMAaecVsMOe7o4SmkVFQ+4R7kfm5FSXVoSU7Z9lpTlajysEYInuvz h/fTYqMWMkAkvuojRs9xVFCZQn/ShH4ssuzEHDrUP39f+g6G6zzJMS3b4f/9RWeBy0sI BfGrLNJqbvMx/mtBFt69Ff939rEQ9YmE4OaL0QFlKWt/KlYzWOpBDRhJ95fDM0+dCivV QPlOULydIWduI0iS2GZA/z/PhyW2IAhxZTEq7Qx3HyGjs/AmVkH7pkVFojlG1z3jpeWn 3P64MaXGXTs0ZGbpZhH03WJXqyGFW7zJTWuWnjFofTboYyzov7tz+6JPZ4ehBQPlNNIx P+xw== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.52.101.129 with SMTP id fg1mr1833153vdb.112.1365613103141; Wed, 10 Apr 2013 09:58:23 -0700 (PDT) Sender: ghanwani@gmail.com Received: by 10.58.241.170 with HTTP; Wed, 10 Apr 2013 09:58:23 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <51656616.4070003@gmail.com> References: <51656616.4070003@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2013 09:58:23 -0700 X-Google-Sender-Auth: ZkRWI_oamefJzQJHnyK0xAezTmk Message-ID: From: Anoop Ghanwani To: Melinda Shore Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=bcaec548a7f3e9dba304da0493fb Cc: "opsawg@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] Call for adoption, draft-krishnan-opsawg-large-flow-load-balancing/ X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2013 16:58:28 -0000 --bcaec548a7f3e9dba304da0493fb Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Support (as co-author). Anoop On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 6:16 AM, Melinda Shore wrote: > This is a call for working group adoption of > > http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-krishnan-opsawg-large-flow-load-balancing/ > . > > The authors report that they've incorporated feedback given at > the IETF 86 meeting, in particular > . information model for flow rebalancing > . operational considerations > > We'll be assessing consensus on 24 April 2013. > > Thanks, > > Melinda > _______________________________________________ > OPSAWG mailing list > OPSAWG@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg > --bcaec548a7f3e9dba304da0493fb Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Support (as co-author).

Anoop


On Wed, Apr= 10, 2013 at 6:16 AM, Melinda Shore <melinda.shore@gmail.com>= wrote:
This is a call for working group adoption of=
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-k= rishnan-opsawg-large-flow-load-balancing/.

The authors report that they've incorporated feedback given at
the IETF 86 meeting, in particular
=A0 . information model for flow rebalancing
=A0 . operational considerations

We'll be assessing consensus on 24 April 2013.

Thanks,

Melinda
_______________________________________________
OPSAWG mailing list
OPSAWG@ietf.org
= https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg

--bcaec548a7f3e9dba304da0493fb-- From Tina.Tsou.Zouting@huawei.com Wed Apr 10 10:11:22 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E44BE21F8E7B for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2013 10:11:22 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.598 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id bgYU1YNn7pE1 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2013 10:11:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [194.213.3.17]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C1D7821F8F05 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2013 10:11:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 172.18.7.190 (EHLO lhreml203-edg.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.7.190]) by lhrrg01-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.3.5-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id ARR50441; Wed, 10 Apr 2013 17:11:20 +0000 (GMT) Received: from LHREML405-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.242) by lhreml203-edg.huawei.com (172.18.7.221) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.7; Wed, 10 Apr 2013 18:10:44 +0100 Received: from DFWEML408-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.193.5.134) by lhreml405-hub.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.242) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.7; Wed, 10 Apr 2013 18:11:17 +0100 Received: from DFWEML513-MBS.china.huawei.com ([169.254.4.86]) by dfweml408-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.193.5.134]) with mapi id 14.01.0323.007; Wed, 10 Apr 2013 10:11:13 -0700 From: Tina TSOU To: Anoop Ghanwani Thread-Topic: [OPSAWG] Call for adoption, draft-krishnan-opsawg-large-flow-load-balancing/ Thread-Index: AQHONe2XsufLB9e4PU6BXLwf6vghqJjQIraA//+OPCM= Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2013 17:11:12 +0000 Message-ID: References: <51656616.4070003@gmail.com>, In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US, zh-CN Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_E2CC09B30D494AEAAA5F0A7A28B10C28huaweicom_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Cc: "opsawg@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] Call for adoption, draft-krishnan-opsawg-large-flow-load-balancing/ X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2013 17:11:23 -0000 --_000_E2CC09B30D494AEAAA5F0A7A28B10C28huaweicom_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Dear all, I support this adoption. Thank you, Tina On Apr 10, 2013, at 9:58 AM, "Anoop Ghanwani" > wrote: Support (as co-author). Anoop On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 6:16 AM, Melinda Shore > wrote: This is a call for working group adoption of http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-krishnan-opsawg-large-flow-load-balan= cing/. The authors report that they've incorporated feedback given at the IETF 86 meeting, in particular . information model for flow rebalancing . operational considerations We'll be assessing consensus on 24 April 2013. Thanks, Melinda _______________________________________________ OPSAWG mailing list OPSAWG@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg --_000_E2CC09B30D494AEAAA5F0A7A28B10C28huaweicom_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Dear all,
I support this adoption.

Thank you,
Tina

On Apr 10, 2013, at 9:58 AM, "Anoop Ghanwani" <anoop@alumni.duke.edu> wrote:

Support (as co-author).

Anoop


On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 6:16 AM, Melinda Shore <= span dir=3D"ltr"> <melinda.sh= ore@gmail.com> wrote:
This is a call for working group adoption of
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-k= rishnan-opsawg-large-flow-load-balancing/.

The authors report that they've incorporated feedback given at
the IETF 86 meeting, in particular
  . information model for flow rebalancing
  . operational considerations

We'll be assessing consensus on 24 April 2013.

Thanks,

Melinda
_______________________________________________
OPSAWG mailing list
OPSAWG@ietf.org
= https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg

--_000_E2CC09B30D494AEAAA5F0A7A28B10C28huaweicom_-- From panda@hongo.wide.ad.jp Wed Apr 10 17:36:10 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A2C721F89E2 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2013 17:36:10 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.904 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.904 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_JP=1.244, HOST_EQ_JP=1.265, RELAY_IS_203=0.994] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id OAp7TNBq4qlr for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2013 17:36:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.hongo.wide.ad.jp (mail.hongo.wide.ad.jp [203.178.135.13]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 69D2821F890F for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2013 17:36:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [172.16.78.6] (tc.b.scyphus.co.jp [219.117.248.118]) by mail.hongo.wide.ad.jp (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 95BDE108E354; Thu, 11 Apr 2013 09:36:02 +0900 (JST) From: Hirochika Asai Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-2022-jp Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2013 09:36:06 +0900 To: "opsawg@ietf.org" Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.3 \(1503\)) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1503) Subject: [OPSAWG] draft-asai-vmm-mib: Issues on notifications X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2013 00:36:10 -0000 Dear folks, We've uploaded the updated version of our MIB proposal about virtual machines controlled by a hypervisor here: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-asai-vmm-mib-03 The followings are the known issues related to notifications listed on P.42 of our I-D. We would like to discuss the followings (and other issues you find, of course), so please review the I-D and post your comments to the list. o Issue 1-1) Scalability issue on notifications: The number of virtual machines managed by a bunch of hypervisors in a datacenter possibly becomes several thousands or more. If these virtual machines frequently change their administrative state, many notifications could be trapped. Since an SNMP manager has to handle SNMP traps of these notifications, there exists a scalability issue on handling them. Should we add some `vmXXXNotificationEnable' objects to disable traps for each notification? Or any other ideas? o Issue 1-2) vmDeleted: Is `vmDeleted' required? If the virtual machine is not persistent on the hypervisor, its entry will disappear when it has shutdown. `vmShutdown' can trap the event of shutdown of a virtual machine. So do we remove `vmDeleted' and change `vmShutdown' to carry `vmPersistent' in order to distinguish ``just shutdown'' and ``shutdown and automatically deleted''? o Issue 1-3) vmOperState carried with each notification: In our current proposal, each notification corresponds to the new operational state of a virtual machine, and `vmOperState' indicates the old operational state. For example, when a virtual machine is switched on, the operational state is changed to running from shutdown. In this case, vmRunning with shutdown vmOperState is be generated when the operational state of a virtual machine is about to enter running state. Is this simple and reasonable? Thank you. Hirochika Asai -- Hirochika Asai , The University of Tokyo From phdgang@gmail.com Wed Apr 10 20:49:12 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2DB3D21F8C1E for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2013 20:49:12 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.6 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, NO_RELAYS=-0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id N3w6HEfRx-rw for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2013 20:49:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-qc0-x234.google.com (mail-qc0-x234.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c01::234]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6AC6A21F8C1A for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2013 20:49:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-qc0-f180.google.com with SMTP id b40so522501qcq.11 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2013 20:49:10 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=o4LaCKVxK3439pkTZ5JcRNcfp2pqJeLSTbICOVDOiGo=; b=Xc5coUsw/HPW+LVuyEaUh+vaW1zgqNBCHlyq6vH3EpbHFVvMSqEz9b7VV49axQUQkb W4eM7Wh7hXr5wRyYGiR3E26KrvNGt/FfiLMfFAKi8q+jHH4o/tB+PfankQ+WwVk8TuFg GzGsrM/xmHvY2lwPtEJ0wyxa1rswmNGeqLso9C1+oJO6D6IBJwMR5g3MkcKwxKaDz1kE Q4GABo+spZkGIbyQXuiY+Hc/SrXAdzGKZbsKEy1lJZ6thWJindIAv4dzfY49OKd675nP l+v/U4IPmRSb25uiFe/uVoazZ6OI/XOYeN4iyYjxXvV83QpQ+bu6GhyRzeq0Xv7sxMbU aAVw== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.49.64.72 with SMTP id m8mr5952021qes.51.1365652150910; Wed, 10 Apr 2013 20:49:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.49.5.129 with HTTP; Wed, 10 Apr 2013 20:49:10 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <515A8B2E.9060706@nttv6.jp> References: <20130328141225.16450.37444.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <515A8B2E.9060706@nttv6.jp> Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2013 11:49:10 +0800 Message-ID: From: GangChen To: kaname nishizuka Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: opsawg@ietf.org Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-nishizuka-cgn-deployment-considerations-00.txt X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2013 03:49:12 -0000 Hello authors, Thanks for sharing your tests. Some comments are below. Section 5.2 provides two formulas to estimate the address multiplexing. If the formula of static assigment is intended to align with I-D.donley-behave-deterministic-cgn, it may be amended by adding active subscriber's coefficient. CGN may only assign static port block to active users.Meanwhile, log just needs to add one record for each user. Section 6.1 states the MCS is highly dependent with retention time of NAT table. It would be intereted to add some discussions if CGN could interact with PCP. BTW, the table shown CGN sets retention time for DNS. would you do DNS filter on CGN to identify DNS package? I saw you also described DNS bypass CGN. Are those related? Many thanks Gang 2013/4/2, kaname nishizuka : > Dear all, > > As I mentioned before, we are testing CGN under the support of Japanese > Government. > Now, we've uploaded a new draft based on the result of our verification. > The useful information about the average consumption of the ports are > available on the document. > Please look through it and all kind of feedback are welcome. > We mentioned Victor's draft "CGN Deployment with BGP/MPLS IP VPNs Draft" in > introduction > because part of our research shares the same motivations with it. > > The document is *NOT* intended to be Standards Track. It's for > Informational. > The wrong description is just mere mistake, so we'll soon correct it in the > next revision. > > The full report of our work will be available soon on the Web. > We've just finished writing. > > Best regards, > > kaname > > -------- Original Message -------- > Subject: New Version Notification for > draft-nishizuka-cgn-deployment-considerations-00.txt > Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2013 07:12:25 -0700 > From: internet-drafts@ietf.org > To: kaname@nttv6.jp > > > > A new version of I-D, draft-nishizuka-cgn-deployment-considerations-00.txt > has been successfully submitted by Kaname Nishizuka and posted to the > IETF repository. > > Filename: draft-nishizuka-cgn-deployment-considerations > Revision: 00 > Title: Carrier-Grade-NAT (CGN) Deployment Considerations. > Creation date: 2013-03-29 > Group: Individual Submission > Number of pages: 16 > URL: > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-nishizuka-cgn-deployment-considerations-00.txt > Status: > http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-nishizuka-cgn-deployment-considerations > Htmlized: > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-nishizuka-cgn-deployment-considerations-00 > > > Abstract: > This document provides deployment considerations for Carrier-Grade- > NAT (CGN) based on the verification result include the investigation > of the number of sessions of applications. The verification was > conducted in StarBED which is one of the largest scale network > experiment environment in Japan. A million of subscribers was > emulated and it revealed the realistic behavior of CGN. > > > > > The IETF Secretariat > > > > From kaname@nttv6.jp Wed Apr 10 23:03:44 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6CC7D21F8DD1 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2013 23:03:44 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.09 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.09 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_JP=1.244, HOST_EQ_JP=1.265] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id EP9WmPyBAPNv for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2013 23:03:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from guri.nttv6.jp (guri.nttv6.jp [IPv6:2402:c800:ff06:144::148]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A39B21F8DD0 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2013 23:03:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from z.nttv6.jp (z.nttv6.jp [115.69.228.212]) by guri.nttv6.jp (NTTv6MTA) with ESMTP id 7F431BDC21; Thu, 11 Apr 2013 15:03:42 +0900 (JST) Received: from [IPv6:2402:c800:ff06:0:add1:b16b:44f3:d76e] (unknown [IPv6:2402:c800:ff06:0:add1:b16b:44f3:d76e]) by z.nttv6.jp (NTTv6MTA) with ESMTP id 731B0E238A; Thu, 11 Apr 2013 15:03:42 +0900 (JST) Message-ID: <5166523A.8000107@nttv6.jp> Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2013 15:03:38 +0900 From: kaname nishizuka User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130328 Thunderbird/17.0.5 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: GangChen References: <20130328141225.16450.37444.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <515A8B2E.9060706@nttv6.jp> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: opsawg@ietf.org Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-nishizuka-cgn-deployment-considerations-00.txt X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2013 06:03:44 -0000 Thank you for your comments. (2013/04/11 12:49), GangChen wrote: > Hello authors, > > Thanks for sharing your tests. > Some comments are below. > > Section 5.2 provides two formulas to estimate the address multiplexing. > If the formula of static assigment is intended to align with > I-D.donley-behave-deterministic-cgn, it may be amended by adding > active subscriber's coefficient. CGN may only assign static port block > to active users.Meanwhile, log just needs to add one record for each > user. It is dynamic assignment of port block. We are describing the static assignment case. In that case, the same active subscriber's coefficient can not be used. There are potential users who have been assigned an internal IP address (and thus external address and port range) but are not generating any packet. In the dynamic assignment of port block, they don't consume external ports so they are not active subscribers. On the other hand, in the static assignment, they are reserving the external address and port range resources. If there is a mapping rule, that is the static assignment. > Section 6.1 states the MCS is highly dependent with retention time of > NAT table. It would be intereted to add some discussions if CGN could > interact with PCP. > > BTW, the table shown CGN sets retention time for DNS. would you do DNS > filter on CGN to identify DNS package? I saw you also described DNS > bypass CGN. Are those related? Thanks for your suggestion. Yes, those are related. The point is that DNS query almost does not affect the performance of the CGN because retention time for DNS is sufficiently short (3 sec.). I think we need not to bypass DNS queries. regards, kaname > Many thanks > > Gang > > 2013/4/2, kaname nishizuka : >> Dear all, >> >> As I mentioned before, we are testing CGN under the support of Japanese >> Government. >> Now, we've uploaded a new draft based on the result of our verification. >> The useful information about the average consumption of the ports are >> available on the document. >> Please look through it and all kind of feedback are welcome. >> We mentioned Victor's draft "CGN Deployment with BGP/MPLS IP VPNs Draft" in >> introduction >> because part of our research shares the same motivations with it. >> >> The document is *NOT* intended to be Standards Track. It's for >> Informational. >> The wrong description is just mere mistake, so we'll soon correct it in the >> next revision. >> >> The full report of our work will be available soon on the Web. >> We've just finished writing. >> >> Best regards, >> >> kaname >> >> -------- Original Message -------- >> Subject: New Version Notification for >> draft-nishizuka-cgn-deployment-considerations-00.txt >> Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2013 07:12:25 -0700 >> From: internet-drafts@ietf.org >> To: kaname@nttv6.jp >> >> >> >> A new version of I-D, draft-nishizuka-cgn-deployment-considerations-00.txt >> has been successfully submitted by Kaname Nishizuka and posted to the >> IETF repository. >> >> Filename: draft-nishizuka-cgn-deployment-considerations >> Revision: 00 >> Title: Carrier-Grade-NAT (CGN) Deployment Considerations. >> Creation date: 2013-03-29 >> Group: Individual Submission >> Number of pages: 16 >> URL: >> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-nishizuka-cgn-deployment-considerations-00.txt >> Status: >> http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-nishizuka-cgn-deployment-considerations >> Htmlized: >> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-nishizuka-cgn-deployment-considerations-00 >> >> >> Abstract: >> This document provides deployment considerations for Carrier-Grade- >> NAT (CGN) based on the verification result include the investigation >> of the number of sessions of applications. The verification was >> conducted in StarBED which is one of the largest scale network >> experiment environment in Japan. A million of subscribers was >> emulated and it revealed the realistic behavior of CGN. >> >> >> >> >> The IETF Secretariat >> >> >> >> -- ---- Kaname Nishizuka Innovative Architecture Center NTT Communications Corporation +81-50-3812-4704 From phdgang@gmail.com Thu Apr 11 00:54:49 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3D84D21F8ECA for ; Thu, 11 Apr 2013 00:54:49 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.6 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, NO_RELAYS=-0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id FMXPtywCHYp2 for ; Thu, 11 Apr 2013 00:54:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-qc0-x236.google.com (mail-qc0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c01::236]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5697721F8EC9 for ; Thu, 11 Apr 2013 00:54:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-qc0-f182.google.com with SMTP id k19so587685qcs.27 for ; Thu, 11 Apr 2013 00:54:41 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=01PwSUPc+Fdfuq9RXOuvWZyuumTHE36thzsh9117SKM=; b=L4rRYdw0ZDe4Vjbq+eHdvWCM4QVeZylnL2w6koc+OUhwewgJs3VBCNwxVUjfZnX/b7 Ncw1chY6bPevPVZn2+X2q80n7DhWUq8sCJCaUqMBZ5rzkkYl0wCWv9uQpi0w+qMIErjC FeLAfznED4uX63BwICas0Off2VhBQ1ju0mp/7hIIkpTi3ZWooBEW5JwLMpkYgyicrRAq YBbbZqitgX/TUMaaNG5XM3uhW/Y26BT8iTov3mpzFUfAz+ZRm862GyFgvaN5XCtqZUS9 Hdm+oCbt/eXLkeztLk3HhmJbNirExrY6h/sQ7SYrDgw0Tv/twpOgtEcrn1mROjGem68m Gk9w== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.224.181.200 with SMTP id bz8mr6017589qab.68.1365666881012; Thu, 11 Apr 2013 00:54:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.49.5.129 with HTTP; Thu, 11 Apr 2013 00:54:40 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <5166523A.8000107@nttv6.jp> References: <20130328141225.16450.37444.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <515A8B2E.9060706@nttv6.jp> <5166523A.8000107@nttv6.jp> Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2013 15:54:40 +0800 Message-ID: From: GangChen To: kaname nishizuka Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: opsawg@ietf.org Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-nishizuka-cgn-deployment-considerations-00.txt X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2013 07:54:49 -0000 Kaname-san, 2013/4/11, kaname nishizuka : > Thank you for your comments. > > (2013/04/11 12:49), GangChen wrote: >> Hello authors, >> >> Thanks for sharing your tests. >> Some comments are below. >> >> Section 5.2 provides two formulas to estimate the address multiplexing. >> If the formula of static assigment is intended to align with >> I-D.donley-behave-deterministic-cgn, it may be amended by adding >> active subscriber's coefficient. CGN may only assign static port block >> to active users.Meanwhile, log just needs to add one record for each >> user. > It is dynamic assignment of port block. That is correct. In some senses, a bulk of port is *statically* reserved to a particular user. It's worth to be noted several implementations are doing deterministic NAT behavior just following those rules. > We are describing the static assignment case. > In that case, the same active subscriber's coefficient can not be used. > > There are potential users who have been assigned an internal IP address > (and thus external address and port range) but are not generating any > packet. > In the dynamic assignment of port block, they don't consume external > ports so they are not active subscribers. > On the other hand, in the static assignment, they are reserving the > external address and port range resources. > If there is a mapping rule, that is the static assignment. > >> Section 6.1 states the MCS is highly dependent with retention time of >> NAT table. It would be intereted to add some discussions if CGN could >> interact with PCP. >> >> BTW, the table shown CGN sets retention time for DNS. would you do DNS >> filter on CGN to identify DNS package? I saw you also described DNS >> bypass CGN. Are those related? > Thanks for your suggestion. > Yes, those are related. > The point is that DNS query almost does not affect the performance of > the CGN because > retention time for DNS is sufficiently short (3 sec.). > I think we need not to bypass DNS queries. When I read the section at first time, I thought bypass DNS queries is recommended since there is additional load(e.g. translation and logs) to CGN. I guess the statement may be more clear if you could add discussions what is the loss of bypass DNS queires. Best Regards Gang > regards, > kaname > >> Many thanks >> >> Gang >> >> 2013/4/2, kaname nishizuka : >>> Dear all, >>> >>> As I mentioned before, we are testing CGN under the support of Japanese >>> Government. >>> Now, we've uploaded a new draft based on the result of our verification. >>> The useful information about the average consumption of the ports are >>> available on the document. >>> Please look through it and all kind of feedback are welcome. >>> We mentioned Victor's draft "CGN Deployment with BGP/MPLS IP VPNs Draft" >>> in >>> introduction >>> because part of our research shares the same motivations with it. >>> >>> The document is *NOT* intended to be Standards Track. It's for >>> Informational. >>> The wrong description is just mere mistake, so we'll soon correct it in >>> the >>> next revision. >>> >>> The full report of our work will be available soon on the Web. >>> We've just finished writing. >>> >>> Best regards, >>> >>> kaname >>> >>> -------- Original Message -------- >>> Subject: New Version Notification for >>> draft-nishizuka-cgn-deployment-considerations-00.txt >>> Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2013 07:12:25 -0700 >>> From: internet-drafts@ietf.org >>> To: kaname@nttv6.jp >>> >>> >>> >>> A new version of I-D, >>> draft-nishizuka-cgn-deployment-considerations-00.txt >>> has been successfully submitted by Kaname Nishizuka and posted to the >>> IETF repository. >>> >>> Filename: draft-nishizuka-cgn-deployment-considerations >>> Revision: 00 >>> Title: Carrier-Grade-NAT (CGN) Deployment Considerations. >>> Creation date: 2013-03-29 >>> Group: Individual Submission >>> Number of pages: 16 >>> URL: >>> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-nishizuka-cgn-deployment-considerations-00.txt >>> Status: >>> http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-nishizuka-cgn-deployment-considerations >>> Htmlized: >>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-nishizuka-cgn-deployment-considerations-00 >>> >>> >>> Abstract: >>> This document provides deployment considerations for Carrier-Grade- >>> NAT (CGN) based on the verification result include the >>> investigation >>> of the number of sessions of applications. The verification was >>> conducted in StarBED which is one of the largest scale network >>> experiment environment in Japan. A million of subscribers was >>> emulated and it revealed the realistic behavior of CGN. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> The IETF Secretariat >>> >>> >>> >>> > > > -- > ---- > Kaname Nishizuka > Innovative Architecture Center > NTT Communications Corporation > +81-50-3812-4704 > > From melinda.shore@gmail.com Thu Apr 11 07:36:45 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2876021F8A52 for ; Thu, 11 Apr 2013 07:36:45 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.764 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.764 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.835, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id XOe-B6vR3aHy for ; Thu, 11 Apr 2013 07:36:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-vc0-f173.google.com (mail-vc0-f173.google.com [209.85.220.173]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 959A421F8E96 for ; Thu, 11 Apr 2013 07:36:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-vc0-f173.google.com with SMTP id gf12so629271vcb.32 for ; Thu, 11 Apr 2013 07:36:44 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=x-received:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=ALEgkWm8CYXXAociaBgEdrX2dSVln7lWN32Fqs7SVjQ=; b=gSYxX6RHVgukvLWsRgnAh3/y7Lb8We2GV0YxO2dvH+prxbEbIQyCb8v1HfsUoonGhs HjKCQnUxfPB9fQ04SWGTRkx38vxhvmFJF6PP9X7msQoToxwELH/t+GjSHgVhGNZ2gpD1 5EbwkwjhQUJeHb6287pY+EjSbA3bYHuCLqMH6btk3NZpSVWcdagmxKQ78gDXnOSUFdTN kQ/uqwz+IlId3tZ9PzhNL8GOpK7V6ABh0mxWzXN47temNL47rj1xFiN5EkujUyzPwk/H r1dMLZ+cDsyI0rIV+kPMjgjrJ1x5cM+xChIBDJ4YU9aa1+sQ+RdzPulMaUpa5r6ZfuaF LTCQ== X-Received: by 10.52.176.38 with SMTP id cf6mr4373476vdc.132.1365691003957; Thu, 11 Apr 2013 07:36:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [129.6.252.108] ([129.6.252.108]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id dz9sm4419607vdc.4.2013.04.11.07.36.42 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Thu, 11 Apr 2013 07:36:43 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <5166CA78.1070504@gmail.com> Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2013 06:36:40 -0800 From: Melinda Shore User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130328 Thunderbird/17.0.5 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: opsawg@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [OPSAWG] Call for adoption, two capwap-related documents X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2013 14:36:45 -0000 This is a call for working group adoption of two drafts related to capwap use for 802.11n. http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-shao-opsawg-capwap-hybridmac-00.txt http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-chen-opsawg-capwap-extension-00.txt Since the IETF 86 meeting the authors have gotten expert review of their documents and feel that the documents are ready for working group adoption. We'll be assessing consensus on 25 April 2013. Please indicate which draft or drafts you're supporting or not supporting. Thanks, Melinda, Scott, and Chris From ietfdbh@comcast.net Thu Apr 11 11:28:39 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6D1CE21F8F10 for ; Thu, 11 Apr 2013 11:28:39 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -100.437 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-100.437 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_NET=0.611, RDNS_NONE=0.1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id uTQpteKsKI6S for ; Thu, 11 Apr 2013 11:28:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from qmta02.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net (qmta02.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net [IPv6:2001:558:fe2d:43:76:96:30:24]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 649C321F882A for ; Thu, 11 Apr 2013 11:28:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from omta11.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net ([76.96.30.36]) by qmta02.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net with comcast id Nd4q1l0060mlR8UA2iUe4V; Thu, 11 Apr 2013 18:28:38 +0000 Received: from [192.168.1.104] ([72.222.201.3]) by omta11.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net with comcast id NiU51l00T04uFuo8XiUBP7; Thu, 11 Apr 2013 18:28:32 +0000 User-Agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.3.2.130206 Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2013 11:28:04 -0700 From: David Harrington To: Melinda Shore , Message-ID: Thread-Topic: [OPSAWG] Call for adoption, two capwap-related documents In-Reply-To: <5166CA78.1070504@gmail.com> Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=comcast.net; s=q20121106; t=1365704918; bh=RS12D1QXI6fBQaEslf4IMQMg6pLHKvk7V7XH1NxU/Is=; h=Received:Received:Date:Subject:From:To:Message-ID:Mime-version: Content-type; b=aJdDsikwm2tGH/yqiDzeYtQM/zH8VnYIw2gswTMUuBtrzZ/pk8AWPAEPjX9EiKJah s4+afnzOyr6A2pJNuTqC2dZzkVSpmQI8RjFkjR2JUSjtSBWIG2Te50CKn8XVsPDIcP UY180f3nvwu0Fm/Ny0S1WgV45R68/SGEUhIc7IAZdJrFAaRBK44FydBfSTabz/fHDZ PKdarYcws/NJ6vQb7dmAhRIpw/CEc6BgKr5hmZHSHPd6yJIUACaCfHl5zldRJ9VV52 wzOflaDrvIwZyWhiOTRFd0uQ4yIoBg0QN1okDeENhz+lKobIs1+AIzdECHiHM2rGZA WaLu8aW537RZQ== Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] Call for adoption, two capwap-related documents X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2013 18:28:39 -0000 Which types of expert review? CAPWAP experts? 802.11n experts? Security experts? Network management experts? Operator experts? -- David Harrington Ietfdbh@comcast.net +1-603-828-1401 On 4/11/13 7:36 AM, "Melinda Shore" wrote: >This is a call for working group adoption of two drafts >related to capwap use for 802.11n. > >http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-shao-opsawg-capwap-hybridmac-00.txt >http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-chen-opsawg-capwap-extension-00.txt > >Since the IETF 86 meeting the authors have gotten expert review >of their documents and feel that the documents are ready for >working group adoption. > >We'll be assessing consensus on 25 April 2013. Please indicate >which draft or drafts you're supporting or not supporting. > >Thanks, > >Melinda, Scott, and Chris >_______________________________________________ >OPSAWG mailing list >OPSAWG@ietf.org >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg From melinda.shore@gmail.com Thu Apr 11 11:29:50 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D64521F8F2A for ; Thu, 11 Apr 2013 11:29:50 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.305 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.305 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.376, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_EQ_IP_ADDR=1.119, RDNS_NONE=0.1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id DigjWbk+Ss3m for ; Thu, 11 Apr 2013 11:29:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-ob0-x22a.google.com (mail-ob0-x22a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c01::22a]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 87F7821F8EF1 for ; Thu, 11 Apr 2013 11:29:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ob0-f170.google.com with SMTP id uy19so1685911obc.29 for ; Thu, 11 Apr 2013 11:29:49 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=x-received:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc :subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=qjPUAK22c5LmHN/TOqE+gLTlBqabTkNzKx1ZncuRnKU=; b=DGGZ+5Kdg2O3FBhyaZMnnK5j+MrwoLkJZPWotVPhLPbMShQQka1f+fALjoy0Y0uPjk +Ncsks/DtpdUwfUF0aP3HKJEybayLy+Rh45YSvg+2oNt7vDHZUPFgJXii3nJHfGdX3pb AvrCnFjk0KTHfmW4F+WA7EDKFA9RmlruvNYY2Wmhlf/VMSGv/cSxQkaaXu/z7aBFNrYR QdzXKpRwnef5EQ+jeafsXtIfbcJRwaAG07s6lpIYhpBjyu0d1VUacMSJEc2H0fJhWBWI F4yTTOZYJiannxCq/kPpDyYVKhPFIHBn39uzSJlJEKPICLqkLCYvmZ0qQRCJpgs8WbKm dmAg== X-Received: by 10.182.107.66 with SMTP id ha2mr2808517obb.43.1365704989077; Thu, 11 Apr 2013 11:29:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [129.6.252.108] ([129.6.252.108]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id n1sm923416obc.10.2013.04.11.11.29.47 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Thu, 11 Apr 2013 11:29:48 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <51670119.9060107@gmail.com> Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2013 10:29:45 -0800 From: Melinda Shore User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130328 Thunderbird/17.0.5 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: David Harrington References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: opsawg@ietf.org Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] Call for adoption, two capwap-related documents X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2013 18:29:50 -0000 On 4/11/2013 10:28 AM, David Harrington wrote: > Which types of expert review? CAPWAP experts? 802.11n experts? Security > experts? Network management experts? Operator experts? Apologies for the lack of clarity. CAPWAP, 802.11n,and operators. Melinda From joelja@bogus.com Thu Apr 11 12:50:11 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3518A21F8F2E for ; Thu, 11 Apr 2013 12:50:11 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Z94UHiWiBJGa for ; Thu, 11 Apr 2013 12:50:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nagasaki.bogus.com (nagasaki.bogus.com [IPv6:2001:418:1::81]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A62EE21F8F27 for ; Thu, 11 Apr 2013 12:50:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from joels-MacBook-Air.local (host-64-47-153-50.masergy.com [64.47.153.50]) (authenticated bits=0) by nagasaki.bogus.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r3BJo6Xw002218 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 11 Apr 2013 19:50:06 GMT (envelope-from joelja@bogus.com) Message-ID: <516713E9.4030509@bogus.com> Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2013 12:50:01 -0700 From: joel jaeggli User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:20.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/20.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Melinda Shore , David Harrington References: <51670119.9060107@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <51670119.9060107@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (nagasaki.bogus.com [147.28.0.81]); Thu, 11 Apr 2013 19:50:07 +0000 (UTC) Cc: opsawg@ietf.org Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] Call for adoption, two capwap-related documents X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2013 19:50:11 -0000 On 4/11/13 11:29 AM, Melinda Shore wrote: > On 4/11/2013 10:28 AM, David Harrington wrote: >> Which types of expert review? CAPWAP experts? 802.11n experts? Security >> experts? Network management experts? Operator experts? > Apologies for the lack of clarity. CAPWAP, 802.11n,and > operators. capwap overlaps with the ieee and the previous document series had a review team with expertise on both sides. even if extensions might not require harmonization (I'm not saying they do or don't), review should be to insure the lack of messy accident. > Melinda > > > _______________________________________________ > OPSAWG mailing list > OPSAWG@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg > From denghui02@gmail.com Thu Apr 11 20:00:09 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6B9F021F86FA for ; Thu, 11 Apr 2013 20:00:09 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -103.598 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 8WqEil4DYLGO for ; Thu, 11 Apr 2013 20:00:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-qe0-f49.google.com (mail-qe0-f49.google.com [209.85.128.49]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9606121F8678 for ; Thu, 11 Apr 2013 20:00:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-qe0-f49.google.com with SMTP id 6so1287564qeb.8 for ; Thu, 11 Apr 2013 20:00:08 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=0n+Orss+oigp/9dBCWPN/iRJGhRzYi3FaWxqR2m3Za0=; b=dm/ULl9mrEnQv0cIBYof9zJSzlwWFgMqVIGzs1wZFuHWWP4BCS327xj3AP00BoUk+j ScP/KbVjHecVSRJvHhOHXiQyuidixkCNcyR4lxhG8kFJAsZeDzniTG3wvOpZ5lCeeaps hZagGfGjCmKQV4cy1eGffO4jKFql0B4iBMb7dxHHaOUgcXqKRXTZhnaa7OLVFH2e804j RWYtncEp53wrkP6Wts2UPCAN12BDVV48LJWyyM7NOnli2/Hl5RW1Jk8WyHGz9ub/GKwN O/sSX8IdLKU9i0A453aDHnlQ614KWCy2j3+POEWho5sloRI7iYgRD7dfSaNv13xfRngp ipJA== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.224.186.11 with SMTP id cq11mr3288593qab.13.1365735607844; Thu, 11 Apr 2013 20:00:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.49.103.134 with HTTP; Thu, 11 Apr 2013 20:00:07 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <5166CA78.1070504@gmail.com> References: <5166CA78.1070504@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2013 11:00:07 +0800 Message-ID: From: Hui Deng To: Melinda Shore Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=20cf30334f35c3608204da21195d Cc: opsawg@ietf.org Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] Call for adoption, two capwap-related documents X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2013 03:00:09 -0000 --20cf30334f35c3608204da21195d Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 thanks chair, I have seen the frustration before about IETF's product of capwap. Today, there are opeartors coming back and like to use IETF's CAPWAP, It will be more than millions usage and will help SP's wifi deployment. Seeing that there is no any revision of IEEE specification. thanks expert's review. I would suppor the adoption of this two documents. Best, -Hui 2013/4/11 Melinda Shore > This is a call for working group adoption of two drafts > related to capwap use for 802.11n. > > http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-shao-opsawg-capwap-hybridmac-00.txt > http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-chen-opsawg-capwap-extension-00.txt > > Since the IETF 86 meeting the authors have gotten expert review > of their documents and feel that the documents are ready for > working group adoption. > > We'll be assessing consensus on 25 April 2013. Please indicate > which draft or drafts you're supporting or not supporting. > > Thanks, > > Melinda, Scott, and Chris > _______________________________________________ > OPSAWG mailing list > OPSAWG@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg > --20cf30334f35c3608204da21195d Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
thanks chair, I have seen the frustration before abou= t IETF's product of capwap.
Today, there are opeartors coming= back and like to use IETF's CAPWAP,=A0
It=A0will be more tha= n millions usage and will help SP's wifi deployment.
=A0
Seeing that there is no any revision of IEEE specificati= on. thanks expert's review.
I would suppor the adoption of th= is two=A0documents.
=A0
Best,
=A0
-= Hui


2013/4/= 11 Melinda Shore <melinda.shore@gmail.com>
This is a call for working group adoption of two drafts
related to capwap use for 802.11n.

http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-shao-opsawg-capwap-hybridm= ac-00.txt
http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-chen-opsawg-capwap-extensi= on-00.txt

Since the IETF 86 meeting the authors have gotten expert review
of their documents and feel that the documents are ready for
working group adoption.

We'll be assessing consensus on 25 April 2013. =A0Please indicate
which draft or drafts you're supporting or not supporting.

Thanks,

Melinda, Scott, and Chris
_______________________________________________
OPSAWG mailing list
OPSAWG@ietf.org
= https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg

--20cf30334f35c3608204da21195d-- From randy_presuhn@mindspring.com Thu Apr 11 21:54:17 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8953021F86A6 for ; Thu, 11 Apr 2013 21:54:17 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -99.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-99.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id RpCR3kEbDjIb for ; Thu, 11 Apr 2013 21:54:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from elasmtp-curtail.atl.sa.earthlink.net (elasmtp-curtail.atl.sa.earthlink.net [209.86.89.64]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D86DF21F8499 for ; Thu, 11 Apr 2013 21:54:16 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=dk20050327; d=mindspring.com; b=MocqfrWJuW9L5p7uee8JHP6l1h+SQYafnTkp6kocE5AVzyFfC5h+pRuOJR4hlz6E; h=Received:Message-ID:From:To:References:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-Priority:X-MSMail-Priority:X-Mailer:X-MimeOLE:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Received: from [99.101.140.205] (helo=oemcomputer) by elasmtp-curtail.atl.sa.earthlink.net with esmtpa (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1UQW08-0008F1-1u for opsawg@ietf.org; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 00:54:16 -0400 Message-ID: <00f101ce373a$0cce4a80$6b01a8c0@oemcomputer> From: "Randy Presuhn" To: References: Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2013 21:56:08 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1478 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1478 X-ELNK-Trace: 4488c18417c9426da92b9037bc8bcf44d4c20f6b8d69d88880ff2f3e23ebe946a1a72c705937b3e9c4e2a0cc13f80565350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 99.101.140.205 Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] draft-asai-vmm-mib: Issues on notifications X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2013 04:54:17 -0000 Hi - > From: "Hirochika Asai" > To: > Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2013 5:36 PM > Subject: [OPSAWG] draft-asai-vmm-mib: Issues on notifications ... > o Issue 1-1) Scalability issue on notifications: The number of > virtual machines managed by a bunch of hypervisors in a datacenter > possibly becomes several thousands or more. If these virtual > machines frequently change their administrative state, many > notifications could be trapped. Since an SNMP manager has to > handle SNMP traps of these notifications, there exists a > scalability issue on handling them. Should we add some > `vmXXXNotificationEnable' objects to disable traps for each > notification? Or any other ideas? ... RFC 3014 might be helpful here, and possibly RFC 3877. Randy From j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de Thu Apr 11 23:36:46 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0DBE621F8A66 for ; Thu, 11 Apr 2013 23:36:46 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.957 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.957 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.292, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id vp8KLwFJy-WF for ; Thu, 11 Apr 2013 23:36:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hermes.jacobs-university.de (hermes.jacobs-university.de [212.201.44.23]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0055521F89B0 for ; Thu, 11 Apr 2013 23:36:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (demetrius4.jacobs-university.de [212.201.44.49]) by hermes.jacobs-university.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 90A4920BF1; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 08:36:43 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at jacobs-university.de Received: from hermes.jacobs-university.de ([212.201.44.23]) by localhost (demetrius4.jacobs-university.de [212.201.44.32]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id YWsPGej2kMdi; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 08:36:43 +0200 (CEST) Received: from elstar.local (elstar.jacobs.jacobs-university.de [10.50.231.133]) by hermes.jacobs-university.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 016DF20BE1; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 08:36:42 +0200 (CEST) Received: by elstar.local (Postfix, from userid 501) id 519F8259C88E; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 08:36:47 +0200 (CEST) Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2013 08:36:47 +0200 From: Juergen Schoenwaelder To: Randy Presuhn Message-ID: <20130412063647.GA14310@elstar.local> Mail-Followup-To: Randy Presuhn , opsawg@ietf.org References: <00f101ce373a$0cce4a80$6b01a8c0@oemcomputer> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <00f101ce373a$0cce4a80$6b01a8c0@oemcomputer> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Cc: opsawg@ietf.org Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] draft-asai-vmm-mib: Issues on notifications X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: Juergen Schoenwaelder List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2013 06:36:46 -0000 On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 09:56:08PM -0700, Randy Presuhn wrote: > Hi - > > > From: "Hirochika Asai" > > To: > > Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2013 5:36 PM > > Subject: [OPSAWG] draft-asai-vmm-mib: Issues on notifications > ... > > o Issue 1-1) Scalability issue on notifications: The number of > > virtual machines managed by a bunch of hypervisors in a datacenter > > possibly becomes several thousands or more. If these virtual > > machines frequently change their administrative state, many > > notifications could be trapped. Since an SNMP manager has to > > handle SNMP traps of these notifications, there exists a > > scalability issue on handling them. Should we add some > > `vmXXXNotificationEnable' objects to disable traps for each > > notification? Or any other ideas? > ... > > RFC 3014 might be helpful here, and possibly RFC 3877. > I think Michael wanted to post notification definitions that help reduce the number of notifications emitted if for example all virtual machines of a hypervisor change state at about the same time (e.g., because the physical server is restarted). This may be a good thing since it reduces the number of notifications at the source and as such works independently of RFCs 3014 or 3877. /js -- Juergen Schoenwaelder Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH Phone: +49 421 200 3587 Campus Ring 1, 28759 Bremen, Germany Fax: +49 421 200 3103 From hening@huawei.com Thu Apr 11 23:58:45 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A4B2521F8AA8 for ; Thu, 11 Apr 2013 23:58:45 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 2.788 X-Spam-Level: ** X-Spam-Status: No, score=2.788 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, CHARSET_FARAWAY_HEADER=3.2, CN_BODY_35=0.339, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, MIME_BASE64_TEXT=1.753, MIME_CHARSET_FARAWAY=2.45, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, SARE_SUB_ENC_GB2312=1.345] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id imOp+YV-0pbH for ; Thu, 11 Apr 2013 23:58:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [194.213.3.17]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9922F21F8A3F for ; Thu, 11 Apr 2013 23:58:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 172.18.7.190 (EHLO lhreml204-edg.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.7.190]) by lhrrg02-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.3.5-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id AQH71403; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 06:58:43 +0000 (GMT) Received: from LHREML406-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.243) by lhreml204-edg.china.huawei.com (172.18.7.223) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.7; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 07:58:06 +0100 Received: from NKGEML410-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.98.56.41) by lhreml406-hub.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.243) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.7; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 07:58:40 +0100 Received: from NKGEML505-MBS.china.huawei.com ([169.254.2.63]) by nkgeml410-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.98.56.41]) with mapi id 14.01.0323.007; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 14:58:36 +0800 From: "Hening (A)" To: Melinda Shore , "opsawg@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [OPSAWG] Call for adoption, two capwap-related documents Thread-Index: AQHONsIEa0crF6v62kmaGS+5P4QwtpjR+77g Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2013 06:58:36 +0000 Message-ID: References: <5166CA78.1070504@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <5166CA78.1070504@gmail.com> Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US Content-Language: zh-CN X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.111.67.17] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="gb2312" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Subject: [OPSAWG] =?gb2312?b?tPC4tDogIENhbGwgZm9yIGFkb3B0aW9uLCB0d28gY2Fw?= =?gb2312?b?d2FwLXJlbGF0ZWQgZG9jdW1lbnRz?= X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2013 06:58:45 -0000 SGksIGFsbA0KQSBnb29kIHByb3RvY29sIHNob3VsZCBiZSBvcHRpbWl6ZWQgYWxvbmcgd2l0aCB0 aGUgZGV2ZWxvcG1lbnQgb2YgbmV3IHRlY2hub2xvZ3kuIDgwMi4xMW4gaXMgd2VsbC1zdXBwb3J0 ZWQgaW4gZHJhZnQtY2hlbi1vcHNhd2ctY2Fwd2FwLWV4dGVuc2lvbi0wMC50eHQuDQpBIGdvb2Qg cHJvdG9jb2wgc2hvdWxkIGFsc28gYmUgb3B0aW1pemVkIHdpdGggbmV3IHJlcXVpcmVtZW50LiBk cmFmdC1zaGFvLW9wc2F3Zy1jYXB3YXAtaHlicmlkbWFjLTAwLnR4dCB3aWxsIHNvbHZlIHRoZSBw cm9ibGVtIG9mIGNvb3JkaW5hdGlvbiBvZiBkaWZmZXJlbnQgbWFudWZhY3R1cmVycy4NCg0KU28s IEkgc3VwcG9ydCB0aGUgYWRvcHRpb24gb2YgdGhlc2UgdHdvIGRyYWZ0cy4NCg0KQmVzdCByZWdh cmRzDQpIZW5pbmcNCg0KLS0tLS3Tyrz+1K28/i0tLS0tDQq3orz+yMs6IG9wc2F3Zy1ib3VuY2Vz QGlldGYub3JnIFttYWlsdG86b3BzYXdnLWJvdW5jZXNAaWV0Zi5vcmddILT6se0gTWVsaW5kYSBT aG9yZQ0Kt6LLzcqxvOQ6IDIwMTPE6jTUwjExyNUgMjI6MzcNCsrVvP7Iyzogb3BzYXdnQGlldGYu b3JnDQrW98ziOiBbT1BTQVdHXSBDYWxsIGZvciBhZG9wdGlvbiwgdHdvIGNhcHdhcC1yZWxhdGVk IGRvY3VtZW50cw0KDQpUaGlzIGlzIGEgY2FsbCBmb3Igd29ya2luZyBncm91cCBhZG9wdGlvbiBv ZiB0d28gZHJhZnRzDQpyZWxhdGVkIHRvIGNhcHdhcCB1c2UgZm9yIDgwMi4xMW4uDQoNCmh0dHA6 Ly93d3cuaWV0Zi5vcmcvaWQvZHJhZnQtc2hhby1vcHNhd2ctY2Fwd2FwLWh5YnJpZG1hYy0wMC50 eHQNCmh0dHA6Ly93d3cuaWV0Zi5vcmcvaWQvZHJhZnQtY2hlbi1vcHNhd2ctY2Fwd2FwLWV4dGVu c2lvbi0wMC50eHQNCg0KU2luY2UgdGhlIElFVEYgODYgbWVldGluZyB0aGUgYXV0aG9ycyBoYXZl IGdvdHRlbiBleHBlcnQgcmV2aWV3DQpvZiB0aGVpciBkb2N1bWVudHMgYW5kIGZlZWwgdGhhdCB0 aGUgZG9jdW1lbnRzIGFyZSByZWFkeSBmb3INCndvcmtpbmcgZ3JvdXAgYWRvcHRpb24uDQoNCldl J2xsIGJlIGFzc2Vzc2luZyBjb25zZW5zdXMgb24gMjUgQXByaWwgMjAxMy4gIFBsZWFzZSBpbmRp Y2F0ZQ0Kd2hpY2ggZHJhZnQgb3IgZHJhZnRzIHlvdSdyZSBzdXBwb3J0aW5nIG9yIG5vdCBzdXBw b3J0aW5nLg0KDQpUaGFua3MsDQoNCk1lbGluZGEsIFNjb3R0LCBhbmQgQ2hyaXMNCl9fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fDQpPUFNBV0cgbWFpbGluZyBs aXN0DQpPUFNBV0dAaWV0Zi5vcmcNCmh0dHBzOi8vd3d3LmlldGYub3JnL21haWxtYW4vbGlzdGlu Zm8vb3BzYXdnDQo= From lei.zhu@huawei.com Fri Apr 12 00:16:21 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AAD1521F8B07 for ; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 00:16:21 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.396 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.396 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, MIME_BASE64_TEXT=1.753, MIME_CHARSET_FARAWAY=2.45, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id jt8LZ87wj8c7 for ; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 00:16:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [194.213.3.17]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C1B4921F8804 for ; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 00:16:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 172.18.7.190 (EHLO lhreml204-edg.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.7.190]) by lhrrg02-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.3.5-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id AQH72777; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 07:16:20 +0000 (GMT) Received: from LHREML403-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.217) by lhreml204-edg.china.huawei.com (172.18.7.223) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.7; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 08:15:44 +0100 Received: from NKGEML401-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.98.56.32) by lhreml403-hub.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.217) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.7; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 08:16:19 +0100 Received: from NKGEML512-MBS.china.huawei.com ([169.254.8.50]) by nkgeml401-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.98.56.32]) with mapi id 14.01.0323.007; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 15:16:16 +0800 From: "Zhulei (A)" To: "opsawg@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [OPSAWG] Call for adoption, two capwap-related documents Thread-Index: AQHONsIEa0crF6v62kmaGS+5P4QwtpjSLCdAgAAAHVA= Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2013 07:16:15 +0000 Message-ID: <470F27D1263A1B4EB73491ED995DE6252554326A@NKGEML512-MBS.china.huawei.com> References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US Content-Language: zh-CN X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.111.65.68] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="gb2312" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] Call for adoption, two capwap-related documents X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2013 07:16:21 -0000 SGksIA0KDQpBcG9sb2dpemUgbm90IHRvIGdvIE9QU0FXRyBpbiA4NnRoLCBhcyBhIHByZXNlbnRh dGlvbiBhdCB0aGUgc2FtZSBtZWV0aW5nIHNsb3QuIEJ1dCwgb2J2aW91c2x5IHN1cHBvcnQgc3Vj aCB0d28gZG9jdW1lbnRzIHRvIGFkb3B0aW9uIGFzIGJhc2UgbGluZSB0byBkZXZlbG9wLg0KDQpU aGUgcmVhc29uIGRvaW5nIHRoaXMgaXMgc29tZSBwcmFjdGljYWwgbmVlZHMgb2YgY2Fwd2FwIGV4 dGVuc2lvbnMgZnJvbSBjb25jbHVzaW9uIG9mIHN1Y2ggd29yay4NCg0KQmVzdCByZWdhcmRzLA0K Wmh1IExlaQ0KDQoNCg0Kt6K8/sjLOiBvcHNhd2ctYm91bmNlc0BpZXRmLm9yZyBbbWFpbHRvOm9w c2F3Zy1ib3VuY2VzQGlldGYub3JnXSC0+rHtIE1lbGluZGEgU2hvcmUNCreiy83KsbzkOiAyMDEz xOo01MIxMcjVIDIyOjM3DQrK1bz+yMs6IG9wc2F3Z0BpZXRmLm9yZw0K1vfM4jogW09QU0FXR10g Q2FsbCBmb3IgYWRvcHRpb24sIHR3byBjYXB3YXAtcmVsYXRlZCBkb2N1bWVudHMNCg0KVGhpcyBp cyBhIGNhbGwgZm9yIHdvcmtpbmcgZ3JvdXAgYWRvcHRpb24gb2YgdHdvIGRyYWZ0cw0KcmVsYXRl ZCB0byBjYXB3YXAgdXNlIGZvciA4MDIuMTFuLg0KDQpodHRwOi8vd3d3LmlldGYub3JnL2lkL2Ry YWZ0LXNoYW8tb3BzYXdnLWNhcHdhcC1oeWJyaWRtYWMtMDAudHh0DQpodHRwOi8vd3d3LmlldGYu b3JnL2lkL2RyYWZ0LWNoZW4tb3BzYXdnLWNhcHdhcC1leHRlbnNpb24tMDAudHh0DQoNClNpbmNl IHRoZSBJRVRGIDg2IG1lZXRpbmcgdGhlIGF1dGhvcnMgaGF2ZSBnb3R0ZW4gZXhwZXJ0IHJldmll dw0Kb2YgdGhlaXIgZG9jdW1lbnRzIGFuZCBmZWVsIHRoYXQgdGhlIGRvY3VtZW50cyBhcmUgcmVh ZHkgZm9yDQp3b3JraW5nIGdyb3VwIGFkb3B0aW9uLg0KDQpXZSdsbCBiZSBhc3Nlc3NpbmcgY29u c2Vuc3VzIG9uIDI1IEFwcmlsIDIwMTMuICBQbGVhc2UgaW5kaWNhdGUNCndoaWNoIGRyYWZ0IG9y IGRyYWZ0cyB5b3UncmUgc3VwcG9ydGluZyBvciBub3Qgc3VwcG9ydGluZy4NCg0KVGhhbmtzLA0K DQpNZWxpbmRhLCBTY290dCwgYW5kIENocmlzDQpfX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fXw0KT1BTQVdHIG1haWxpbmcgbGlzdA0KT1BTQVdHQGlldGYub3Jn DQpodHRwczovL3d3dy5pZXRmLm9yZy9tYWlsbWFuL2xpc3RpbmZvL29wc2F3Zw0K From shtsuchi@cisco.com Fri Apr 12 00:16:32 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 74A6E21F8BC5; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 00:16:32 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -10.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id bXCTdoTGk7dp; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 00:16:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bgl-iport-2.cisco.com (bgl-iport-2.cisco.com [72.163.197.26]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 26AA721F8BBA; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 00:16:30 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1429; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1365750991; x=1366960591; h=message-id:date:from:mime-version:to:cc:subject: references:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=fu8gMvxyMAAwPFhrAM+kIW/Dg6YUmTRq3JYrg9hHuDo=; b=f0qaYGiWVeGXAtWRl8nsCEC91Nf9up4RcdZEWazwGYhiLbF7KcavuRTw uXWC8rGlgrnvJTv2OaRRiLZS3s1fbwxQCm5tnxpYWz5IKcc88v0j99CKa mKxyIB/LR74rtjxRt0jtG7MF3GdQx9Ell+h6qTPD4rMHQPMLVmD0lC6xW U=; X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.87,461,1363132800"; d="scan'208";a="29251927" Received: from vla196-nat.cisco.com (HELO bgl-core-1.cisco.com) ([72.163.197.24]) by bgl-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 12 Apr 2013 07:16:26 +0000 Received: from tky-shtsuchi-8917.cisco.com (tky-shtsuchi-8917.cisco.com [10.71.44.88]) by bgl-core-1.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r3C7GMvg031774; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 07:16:22 GMT Message-ID: <5167B4C5.7000909@cisco.com> Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2013 16:16:21 +0900 From: Shishio Tsuchiya User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130328 Thunderbird/17.0.5 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ted.Lemon@nominum.com References: <20121018225055.13626.59722.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <5146CD8B.3030108@cisco.com> <8D23D4052ABE7A4490E77B1A012B630775111F85@mbx-01.win.nominum.com> In-Reply-To: <8D23D4052ABE7A4490E77B1A012B630775111F85@mbx-01.win.nominum.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-2022-JP Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: opsawg@ietf.org, pcp@ietf.org Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] [pcp] Fwd: I-D Action: draft-ietf-opsawg-firewalls-01.txt X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2013 07:16:32 -0000 Ted Thanks for comments. I also found hipnet draft. The description and discussion might resolve today's homenet securty issue. http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-grundemann-homenet-hipnet-01#section-4.1 http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-grundemann-homenet-hipnet-01#section-8 Regards, -Shishio (2013/03/18 21:38), Ted Lemon wrote: > On Mar 18, 2013, at 4:17 AM, Shishio Tsuchiya wrote: > >> CPE would do firewall to the user traffic for all of delegated prefix, Home GW might do firewall to user traffic. >> If security policy is same then user traffic would be double count/check on both HomeGW and CPE. >> It is waste of resource and might be downgraded for user experience. >> >> It is enough to do by each of one. >> What do think? > > You might want to look at the work Erik Kline and Lorenzo Colitti have been doing in homenet on homenet edge detection. > > As for hierarchical prefix delegation, the current way of doing it is broken$B!=(Bif you divide the prefix arbitrarily and delegate larger prefixes than /64 within the home, you wind up with a mess, although it does make routing simple until it fails. If you want to do prefix delegation within the home, the CPE edge router that got the delegation from the ISP should be the delegating router for the entire home, and the routers below it in the hierarchy should relay PD requests up to the CPE edge. > > > From ningso@yahoo.com Fri Apr 12 06:00:34 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 18F1221F8BAE for ; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 06:00:34 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.184 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.184 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_40=-0.185, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id STtOd2fzgOTt for ; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 06:00:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nm11-vm1.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com (nm11-vm1.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com [98.138.91.40]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A85F621F8B16 for ; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 06:00:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [98.138.90.57] by nm11.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 12 Apr 2013 13:00:26 -0000 Received: from [98.138.89.233] by tm10.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 12 Apr 2013 13:00:26 -0000 Received: from [127.0.0.1] by omp1048.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 12 Apr 2013 13:00:26 -0000 X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 249386.33624.bm@omp1048.mail.ne1.yahoo.com Received: (qmail 88939 invoked by uid 60001); 12 Apr 2013 13:00:26 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoo.com; s=s1024; t=1365771625; bh=f+13vlfTx3xTiI8RI8462byYjuHEJqLmvUuvYgSg4JY=; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Rocket-MIMEInfo:X-Mailer:References:Message-ID:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=SctCLWGsfxbeXy5pADNdgN1+53GsyNsvdnD4IOwE2cv4Asy2SZYQV/xcTVB1PVc+cST7uJzYU77dPfKDB/kHTeEveM7WIC5M2BXSWGasxmeTyKuG6uo5gLBVtx6SL1zv9qVItVZiwFPKOH0EUrmt0/prpr5HTYv/tJOBrltI9ok= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Rocket-MIMEInfo:X-Mailer:References:Message-ID:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=LXfSvBr4x13XPwjb/g0f6RUkrvHvmjPDIPyfLi/ZidJHvBsAVcrzZMmFnGiU2vrdVuibcDo3s1V6MkPj7SHaFefQpOwy3q+PAGfu6B2RHTQFhvle7qa9cEZg/1i94DWTB+Uj85m//+g+hMyUgxadGDOIfKlOHGa6775Gs/C9pzM=; X-YMail-OSG: 0mZLZ_gVM1ldJx2_AZ5KyWSTnHNv8FZ43qNMoNbRP6dtJno GEhr6kBTxrJjf8cZFPyLQyWi6eK8P.Aol5aBxDG5BrbnXqLsfUZObYj0pr1L aZ56nIelisfItal7rEtpNnGT7O6fwaGtv8_hHnbwKowNxnYDA8HcBgyBQdg7 vDnAkCOnf6r.uZOMjzWOoJ9m52_mlo6Heclnv3Mwb_DqalsytHZdFdQLA5Dd w9dQDAxZwDK.gD2BrlElnL0.GnJIgO7zqv3W5AfaRxlvNzZCWkjj.Ev9CedL XLU24MDQ5AYIr2I5MaWN1766rQ.MjXDVqt0OBp.RsjEPZDlVBZrpsBUyDmn6 CiDGF9Zz3ppYB8DUMoCQ0OvRjFtp7gNbQ_KNra0dE83vykBLHUHiMM5rI8ks IcV1GPekdGMeUNjzciqqIchwRPvoniDystS3y_c7x4XG.4qnLBhX7FYu2ajC OIQYZc1pHmN46IeyTVDrkhNJqnhrwsxld3AoM5tpnHLM4BmiEREGyXqhlPPZ 17coG5.6cdklnOr9bKHel6gNAUP.JECbCMoa9CbLqU0561rmUe1HsntkDZT. 8al7o5RlecCXo3kAubxT7i5kmmVsuElIMie_G1CHiu4xUfT.Y.ROLuJ2KPUA QOBqgeezEdILCHzSnsMHk9jc6iE.XCg-- Received: from [66.198.167.9] by web84502.mail.ne1.yahoo.com via HTTP; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 06:00:25 PDT X-Rocket-MIMEInfo: 002.001, U3VwcG9ydCBhcyBjby1hdXRob3IuCsKgCk5pbmcgU28KwqAKX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX18KVGhpcyBpcyBhIGNhbGwgZm9yIHdvcmtpbmcgZ3JvdXAgYWRvcHRpb24gb2YgaHR0cDovL2RhdGF0cmFja2VyLmlldGYub3JnL2RvYy9kcmFmdC1rcmlzaG5hbi1vcHNhd2ctbGFyZ2UtZmxvdy1sb2FkLWJhbGFuY2luZy8uCsKgClRoZSBhdXRob3JzIHJlcG9ydCB0aGF0IHRoZXkndmUgaW5jb3Jwb3IBMAEBAQE- X-Mailer: YahooMailWebService/0.8.140.532 References: Message-ID: <1365771625.88849.YahooMailNeo@web84502.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2013 06:00:25 -0700 (PDT) From: Ning So To: "opsawg@ietf.org" In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="1508702382-1676761161-1365771625=:88849" Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] Subject: Call for adoption, draft-krishnan-opsawg-large-flow-load-balancing/ X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: Ning So List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2013 13:00:34 -0000 --1508702382-1676761161-1365771625=:88849 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Support as co-author.=0A=A0=0ANing So=0A=A0=0A_____________________________= ______________________________________________________=0AThis is a call for= working group adoption of http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-krishnan-o= psawg-large-flow-load-balancing/.=0A=A0=0AThe authors report that they've i= ncorporated feedback=0Agiven at the IETF 86 meeting, in particular=0A=A0 . = information=0Amodel for flow rebalancing=0A=A0 . operational=0Aconsideratio= ns=0A=A0=0AWe'll be assessing consensus on 24 April 2013.=0A=A0=0AThanks,= =0A=A0=0AMelinda=A0=A0=A0 --1508702382-1676761161-1365771625=:88849 Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Support as= co-author.
 
Ning So
 
=0A=0A_____________________________________= ______________________________________________
This is a call f= or working group adoption of http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-krishnan-opsawg-large-flow-load-bal= ancing/.
=0A= =0A
 
=0A=0A
The= authors report that they've incorporated feedback=0Agiven at the IETF 86 m= eeting, in particular
=0A=0A
  . information=0Amodel for flow r= ebalancing
=0A=0A
  . operational=0Aconsiderations
=0A=0A
 
=0A= =0A
We'll be assessing consensus on 24 April 2013.
=0A=0A
 
=0A= =0A
Thanks,
=0A=0A
 
=0A=0A
Melinda
=0A=0A
   
--1508702382-1676761161-1365771625=:88849-- From ramk@Brocade.com Fri Apr 12 09:38:24 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 089C821F8F1C for ; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 09:38:24 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.265 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.265 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, IP_NOT_FRIENDLY=0.334, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id x7Qty7jQq0sd for ; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 09:38:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx0a-000f0801.pphosted.com (mx0a-000f0801.pphosted.com [67.231.144.122]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 50FA021F8F13 for ; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 09:38:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pps.filterd (m0000542 [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-000f0801.pphosted.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with SMTP id r3CGb6O6001502 for ; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 09:38:23 -0700 Received: from hq1wp-exchub01.corp.brocade.com ([144.49.131.13]) by mx0a-000f0801.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 1bp0q70fht-18 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT) for ; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 09:38:22 -0700 Received: from HQ1WP-EXHUB02.corp.brocade.com (10.70.38.14) by HQ1WP-EXCHUB01.corp.brocade.com (10.70.36.99) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.2.309.2; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 09:38:11 -0700 Received: from HQ1-EXCH01.corp.brocade.com ([fe80::8c73:93bf:41b4:1443]) by HQ1WP-EXHUB02.corp.brocade.com ([fe80::e1f4:a4c8:696b:3780%10]) with mapi; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 09:37:49 -0700 From: ramki Krishnan To: "opsawg@ietf.org" Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2013 09:37:38 -0700 Thread-Topic: [OPSAWG] Call for adoption, draft-krishnan-opsawg-large-flow-load-balancing/ Thread-Index: Ac417apip45aKsUHR1qclkHuvoSelgAQ6LEQAAAvQ4AALH6H0AAAYFPwAA8ytnAAHk5bMA== Message-ID: References: <51656616.4070003@gmail.com> <3F73AF37684DDD44903405EE90ADDCB001E57511BEFC@HQ1-EXCH02.corp.brocade.com> <3F73AF37684DDD44903405EE90ADDCB001E57511C03F@HQ1-EXCH02.corp.brocade.com> In-Reply-To: <3F73AF37684DDD44903405EE90ADDCB001E57511C03F@HQ1-EXCH02.corp.brocade.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:5.10.8626, 1.0.431, 0.0.0000 definitions=2013-04-12_06:2013-04-12, 2013-04-12, 1970-01-01 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 spamscore=0 suspectscore=2 phishscore=0 adultscore=0 bulkscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=7.0.1-1211240000 definitions=main-1304120141 Cc: Pete Moyer Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] Call for adoption, draft-krishnan-opsawg-large-flow-load-balancing/ X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2013 16:38:24 -0000 Below are comments from Pete (as an individual) and responses below. Agreed Pete - will do. Thanks, Ramki -----Original Message----- From: Pete Moyer=20 Sent: Thursday, April 11, 2013 7:08 PM To: ramki Krishnan Subject: RE: [OPSAWG] Call for adoption, draft-krishnan-opsawg-large-flow-l= oad-balancing/ Cool. One last comment - >>Did you mean "....is required to allow the import of large flow informati= on from the router."? No, in this case, the large flow recognition (detection) is handled in a ex= ternal management station. The detected large flows need to be imported to = the router for re-balancing purposes. OK, I missed that but now I read it correctly. Perhaps you might say "expor= t" (aka: push) to the router rather than "import" (aka: pull) to the router= . That will also avoid confusion I think. Thanks. -----Original Message----- From: ramki Krishnan=20 Sent: Thursday, April 11, 2013 12:12 PM To: Pete Moyer; Sanjay Khanna; Gary Seebaum; Norival Figueira Subject: RE: [OPSAWG] Call for adoption, draft-krishnan-opsawg-large-flow-l= oad-balancing/ Hi Pete, Thanks a lot. For some of the questions, I will cc the opsawg mailing list.= The chairs love to see activity in the mailing list. >>Section 3, Step 2) The egress component links are periodically scanned fo= r link utilization. If the egress component link utilization exceeds a pre- programmed threshold, an operator alert is generated. The large flows mapped to the congested egress component link are exported to a central management entity. >>Did you mean "Information about the large flows mapped to the congested e= gress component link are exported to a central management entity." Yes, thanks for catching this. >>Section 4.2) In cases where large flow recognition is handled by an exter= nal management station (see Section 3.1.3), an information model for flows is required to allow the import of large flow information to the router. >>Did you mean "....is required to allow the import of large flow informati= on from the router."? No, in this case, the large flow recognition (detection) is handled in a ex= ternal management station. The detected large flows need to be imported to = the router for re-balancing purposes. >> Also, have you considered any OpenFlow/SDN use case for re-balancing the= flows? Certainly. I have not explicitly mentioned OpenFlow since it is not advocat= ed by IETF. Regarding SDN, it is covered in section 4.2 " In cases where large flow rec= ognition is handled by an external management station (see Section 3.1.3),= an information model for flows is required to allow the import of large fl= ow information to the router....". The SDN application would be an sFlow c= ollector performing the large flow recognition. Thanks, Ramki -----Original Message----- From: Pete Moyer=20 Sent: Thursday, April 11, 2013 11:45 AM To: ramki Krishnan; Sanjay Khanna; Gary Seebaum; Norival Figueira Subject: RE: [OPSAWG] Call for adoption, draft-krishnan-opsawg-large-flow-l= oad-balancing/ I will do that. I do have a few comments: Section 3, Step 2) The egress component links are periodically scanned for = link utilization. If the egress component link utilization exceeds a pre- programmed threshold, an operator alert is generated. The large flows mapped to the congested egress component link are exported to a central management entity. Did you mean "Information about the large flows mapped to the congested egr= ess component link are exported to a central management entity." Section 4.2) In cases where large flow recognition is handled by an externa= l management station (see Section 3.1.3), an information model for flows is required to allow the import of large flow information to the router. Did you mean "....is required to allow the import of large flow information= from the router."? Also, have you considered any OpenFlow/SDN use case for re-balancing the fl= ows?=20 Thanks. -----Original Message----- From: opsawg-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:opsawg-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of= Melinda Shore Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2013 6:16 AM To: opsawg@ietf.org Subject: [OPSAWG] Call for adoption, draft-krishnan-opsawg-large-flow-load-= balancing/ This is a call for working group adoption of http://datatracker.ietf.org/do= c/draft-krishnan-opsawg-large-flow-load-balancing/. The authors report that they've incorporated feedback given at the IETF 86 = meeting, in particular . information model for flow rebalancing . operational considerations We'll be assessing consensus on 24 April 2013. Thanks, Melinda _______________________________________________ OPSAWG mailing list OPSAWG@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg From randy_presuhn@mindspring.com Fri Apr 12 11:07:29 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A4E5F21F83DF for ; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 11:07:29 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -101.299 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.299 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.300, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id fL-QiTNT1Fyh for ; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 11:07:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from elasmtp-mealy.atl.sa.earthlink.net (elasmtp-mealy.atl.sa.earthlink.net [209.86.89.69]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED99121F8D7A for ; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 11:07:28 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=dk20050327; d=mindspring.com; b=tT91lPuPHh7iR3tuW6L4zUnuWsKwwvtQMOeJLYhjxeraXUKb6TXjjTS8coYApnjB; h=Received:Message-ID:From:To:Cc:References:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-Priority:X-MSMail-Priority:X-Mailer:X-MimeOLE:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Received: from [99.101.140.205] (helo=oemcomputer) by elasmtp-mealy.atl.sa.earthlink.net with esmtpa (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1UQiNj-0002RY-Px; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 14:07:28 -0400 Message-ID: <002001ce37a8$db221380$6b01a8c0@oemcomputer> From: "Randy Presuhn" To: "Juergen Schoenwaelder" References: <00f101ce373a$0cce4a80$6b01a8c0@oemcomputer> <20130412063647.GA14310@elstar.local> Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2013 11:09:18 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1478 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1478 X-ELNK-Trace: 4488c18417c9426da92b9037bc8bcf44d4c20f6b8d69d88880ff2f3e23ebe9463ed55d281e04b2048161805912cc2a58350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 99.101.140.205 Cc: opsawg@ietf.org Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] draft-asai-vmm-mib: Issues on notifications X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2013 18:07:29 -0000 Hi - > From: "Juergen Schoenwaelder" > To: "Randy Presuhn" > Cc: > Sent: Thursday, April 11, 2013 11:36 PM > Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] draft-asai-vmm-mib: Issues on notifications ... > > > o Issue 1-1) Scalability issue on notifications: The number of ... > I think Michael wanted to post notification definitions that help > reduce the number of notifications emitted if for example all virtual > machines of a hypervisor change state at about the same time (e.g., > because the physical server is restarted). This may be a good thing > since it reduces the number of notifications at the source and as > such works independently of RFCs 3014 or 3877. For that specific use case, a notifcation identifying the hypervisor to which those VMs belong, rather than the individual virtual machines, would seem a better way to go. One might even argue that the coldStart notification type could be sufficient to do the job. Randy From j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de Fri Apr 12 12:33:48 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0578B21F8FE5 for ; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 12:33:48 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -103.055 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.055 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.194, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id eFEwrgTL+b6n for ; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 12:33:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hermes.jacobs-university.de (hermes.jacobs-university.de [212.201.44.23]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 92A1E21F8FDF for ; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 12:33:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (demetrius4.jacobs-university.de [212.201.44.49]) by hermes.jacobs-university.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB33720BF9; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 21:33:45 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at jacobs-university.de Received: from hermes.jacobs-university.de ([212.201.44.23]) by localhost (demetrius4.jacobs-university.de [212.201.44.32]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 29_UwmSiPdpY; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 21:33:45 +0200 (CEST) Received: from elstar.local (elstar.jacobs.jacobs-university.de [10.50.231.133]) by hermes.jacobs-university.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7109D20BE8; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 21:33:45 +0200 (CEST) Received: by elstar.local (Postfix, from userid 501) id DA84C259EAD2; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 21:33:50 +0200 (CEST) Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2013 21:33:49 +0200 From: Juergen Schoenwaelder To: Randy Presuhn Message-ID: <20130412193348.GA16448@elstar.local> Mail-Followup-To: Randy Presuhn , opsawg@ietf.org References: <00f101ce373a$0cce4a80$6b01a8c0@oemcomputer> <20130412063647.GA14310@elstar.local> <002001ce37a8$db221380$6b01a8c0@oemcomputer> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <002001ce37a8$db221380$6b01a8c0@oemcomputer> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Cc: opsawg@ietf.org Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] draft-asai-vmm-mib: Issues on notifications X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: Juergen Schoenwaelder List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2013 19:33:48 -0000 On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 11:09:18AM -0700, Randy Presuhn wrote: > Hi - > > > From: "Juergen Schoenwaelder" > > To: "Randy Presuhn" > > Cc: > > Sent: Thursday, April 11, 2013 11:36 PM > > Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] draft-asai-vmm-mib: Issues on notifications > ... > > > > o Issue 1-1) Scalability issue on notifications: The number of > ... > > I think Michael wanted to post notification definitions that help > > reduce the number of notifications emitted if for example all virtual > > machines of a hypervisor change state at about the same time (e.g., > > because the physical server is restarted). This may be a good thing > > since it reduces the number of notifications at the source and as > > such works independently of RFCs 3014 or 3877. > > For that specific use case, a notifcation identifying the hypervisor > to which those VMs belong, rather than the individual virtual machines, > would seem a better way to go. One might even argue that the > coldStart notification type could be sufficient to do the job. Yes, for this use case - I assume Michael has more insights whether there are other use cases where subsets of all machines of a hypervisor change state together. /js -- Juergen Schoenwaelder Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH Phone: +49 421 200 3587 Campus Ring 1, 28759 Bremen, Germany Fax: +49 421 200 3103 From fb5431@att.com Fri Apr 12 09:38:27 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D0AB21F8F4F for ; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 09:38:27 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -105.598 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-105.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, EXTRA_MPART_TYPE=1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id h-xBMC2ckgSK for ; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 09:38:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nbfkord-smmo07.seg.att.com (nbfkord-smmo07.seg.att.com [209.65.160.93]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 888E821F8F75 for ; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 09:38:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from unknown [144.160.112.28] (EHLO tlpi048.enaf.dadc.sbc.com) by nbfkord-smmo07.seg.att.com(mxl_mta-6.15.0-1) over TLS secured channel with ESMTP id d7838615.0.179154.00-388.497755.nbfkord-smmo07.seg.att.com (envelope-from ); Fri, 12 Apr 2013 16:38:26 +0000 (UTC) X-MXL-Hash: 5168388249ef07b6-252f2ba7980905d2fc48e1f394962130e944dc07 Received: from enaf.dadc.sbc.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by tlpi048.enaf.dadc.sbc.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r3CGcKLU002729 for ; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 11:38:20 -0500 Received: from alpi134.aldc.att.com (alpi134.aldc.att.com [130.8.217.4]) by tlpi048.enaf.dadc.sbc.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r3CGcC2w002586 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 11:38:16 -0500 Received: from WABOTH9MSGHUB8F.ITServices.sbc.com (waboth9msghub8f.itservices.sbc.com [135.163.35.68]) by alpi134.aldc.att.com (RSA Interceptor) for ; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 17:38:01 +0100 Received: from WABOTH9MSGUSR8D.ITServices.sbc.com ([135.163.35.90]) by WABOTH9MSGHUB8F.ITServices.sbc.com ([135.163.35.68]) with mapi id 14.02.0342.003; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 09:38:00 -0700 From: "BARI, FAROOQ" To: "OPSAWG@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: Re: [OPSAWG] Call for adoption, two capwap-related documents Thread-Index: Ac43nBfaVVW49WMCRq+w2rn96B4P/g== Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2013 16:38:00 +0000 Message-ID: <5E1F45A93ED6EA40A37348DFBC21A1AE1EB06102@WABOTH9MSGUSR8D.ITServices.sbc.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: yes X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [135.163.34.4] Content-Type: multipart/related; boundary="_004_5E1F45A93ED6EA40A37348DFBC21A1AE1EB06102WABOTH9MSGUSR8D_"; type="multipart/alternative" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-RSA-Inspected: yes X-RSA-Classifications: DAM Allow Patterns, Dam_Text, public X-Spam: [F=0.2000000000; CM=0.500; S=0.200(2010122901)] X-MAIL-FROM: X-SOURCE-IP: [144.160.112.28] X-AnalysisOut: [v=2.0 cv=f7b/8pOM c=1 sm=0 a=srMsL6ituuWTYeky9Bs9mA==:17 a] X-AnalysisOut: [=YnP4VLJI-BoA:10 a=VWRCxtbRraQA:10 a=ofMgfj31e3cA:10 a=BLc] X-AnalysisOut: [eEmwcHowA:10 a=zQP7CpKOAAAA:8 a=XIqpo32RAAAA:8 a=RRca_lURt] X-AnalysisOut: [boA:10 a=48vgC7mUAAAA:8 a=JBu6wBeHFswt6LcDHugA:9 a=CjuIK1q] X-AnalysisOut: [_8ugA:10 a=r_pdws-IuSkA:10 a=-FPFUOWkErUA:10 a=lZB815dzVvQ] X-AnalysisOut: [A:10 a=Hz7IrDYlS0cA:10 a=yMhMjlubAAAA:8 a=SSmOFEACAAAA:8 a] X-AnalysisOut: [=gKO2Hq4RSVkA:10 a=UiCQ7L4-1S4A:10 a=hTZeC7Yk6K0A:10 a=frz] X-AnalysisOut: [4AuCg-hUA:10 a=tXsnliwV7b4A:10 a=wbYeO_SEjia42DFt:21 a=R3H] X-AnalysisOut: [R34HaAjfJ7muh9zMA:9 a=KQqxNPgzF0kA:10 a=pYKTcjfSPkOQzn9d:1] X-AnalysisOut: [8] X-Mailman-Approved-At: Fri, 12 Apr 2013 15:28:18 -0700 Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] Call for adoption, two capwap-related documents X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2013 16:38:27 -0000 --_004_5E1F45A93ED6EA40A37348DFBC21A1AE1EB06102WABOTH9MSGUSR8D_ Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_5E1F45A93ED6EA40A37348DFBC21A1AE1EB06102WABOTH9MSGUSR8D_" --_000_5E1F45A93ED6EA40A37348DFBC21A1AE1EB06102WABOTH9MSGUSR8D_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I express support for working group adoption of the following two drafts. Farooq --- This is a call for working group adoption of two drafts related to capwap use for 802.11n. http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-shao-opsawg-capwap-hybridmac-00.txt http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-chen-opsawg-capwap-extension-00.txt Since the IETF 86 meeting the authors have gotten expert review of their documents and feel that the documents are ready for working group adoption. We'll be assessing consensus on 25 April 2013. Please indicate which draft or drafts you're supporting or not supporting. Thanks, Melinda, Scott, and Chris _______________________________________________ OPSAWG mailing list OPSAWG@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg --- Farooq Bari, PhD Lead Member Technical Staff Strategic Standards AT&T Services, Inc. Email: farooq.bari@att.com Tel: +1 425 580 5526 [Bari_Bari.5240000053802400] This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are AT&T property, are confid= ential, and are intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to = whom this email is addressed. If you are not one of the named recipient(s) = or otherwise have reason to believe that you have received this message in = error, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately from yo= ur computer. Any other use, retention, dissemination, forwarding, printing,= or copying of this e-mail is strictly prohibited --_000_5E1F45A93ED6EA40A37348DFBC21A1AE1EB06102WABOTH9MSGUSR8D_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

 

I express support for working group adoption of the = following two drafts.

 

Farooq

---

This is a call for working group adoption of two dra= fts
related to capwap use for 802.11n.

http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-shao-opsawg-capwap-hybridm= ac-00.txt
http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-chen-opsawg-capwap-extensi= on-00.txt

Since the IETF 86 meeting the authors have gotten expert review
of their documents and feel that the documents are ready for
working group adoption.

We'll be assessing consensus on 25 April 2013.  Please indicate
which draft or drafts you're supporting or not supporting.

Thanks,

Melinda, Scott, and Chris
_______________________________________________
OPSAWG mailing list
OPSAWG@ietf.org
= https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg

---

Farooq Bari, PhD
Lead Member Technical Staff
Strategic Standards

AT&T Services, Inc.<= /p>

 

Email: farooq.bari@att.com
Tel: +1 425 580 5526

 

3D"Bari_Bari.5240000053802400"


This e-mail and any files transmitted wit= h it are AT&T property, are confidential, and are intended solely for t= he use of the individual or entity to whom this email is addressed. If you are not one of the named recipient(s) or otherwise have reason to b= elieve that you have received this message in error, please notify the send= er and delete this message immediately from your computer. Any other use, r= etention, dissemination, forwarding, printing, or copying of this e-mail is strictly prohibited

 

--_000_5E1F45A93ED6EA40A37348DFBC21A1AE1EB06102WABOTH9MSGUSR8D_-- --_004_5E1F45A93ED6EA40A37348DFBC21A1AE1EB06102WABOTH9MSGUSR8D_ Content-Type: image/jpeg; name="image003.jpg" Content-Description: image003.jpg Content-Disposition: inline; filename="image003.jpg"; size=2680; creation-date="Fri, 12 Apr 2013 16:38:00 GMT"; modification-date="Fri, 12 Apr 2013 16:38:00 GMT" Content-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 /9j/4AAQSkZJRgABAQEAeAB4AAD/2wBDAAoHBwkHBgoJCAkLCwoMDxkQDw4ODx4WFxIZJCAmJSMg IyIoLTkwKCo2KyIjMkQyNjs9QEBAJjBGS0U+Sjk/QD3/wAALCABuAGMBAREA/8QAHwAAAQUBAQEB AQEAAAAAAAAAAAECAwQFBgcICQoL/8QAtRAAAgEDAwIEAwUFBAQAAAF9AQIDAAQRBRIhMUEGE1Fh ByJxFDKBkaEII0KxwRVS0fAkM2JyggkKFhcYGRolJicoKSo0NTY3ODk6Q0RFRkdISUpTVFVWV1hZ WmNkZWZnaGlqc3R1dnd4eXqDhIWGh4iJipKTlJWWl5iZmqKjpKWmp6ipqrKztLW2t7i5usLDxMXG x8jJytLT1NXW19jZ2uHi4+Tl5ufo6erx8vP09fb3+Pn6/9oACAEBAAA/APZqKKKKKKKKKKKKK84+ JXxJv/BOrWlpZ2dtOk8Hmlpd2QdxGOD7Vs+OPF914W8Hw6va28M00jxqUkztG4Enp9Kr/DTxveeN rG+nvbaCBreRUURZ5yCecmuX074xare+NIdGfT7JYZL37MXBbcF3bc9etb/xM+IN94Im09LK0t5x dK5Yy7uNpHTB966Ua3N/whP9teUnn/YPtXl87d2zdj1xmua+GfxBvvG8+oJe2lvALVUKmLdzuJ65 PtVLxd8TtR8PeOotDt7K1lgcxDzH3bvnxnocd61viX43vPBNhYz2VtBO1xIyMJc4GBnjBq78PfFV z4w8NHUryCKCTz2i2xZxgAc8/Wupoorwf4+/8jLpn/Xof/QzVH4Lyvd+OvKuXaaP7JIdkh3DqvY1 654m8caH4HuIIL+GZGuVLr9nhBBAOOeRXgnhi4S7+J9hcRZ8ubUhIueuC+RX1DLbwz486KOTHTeo OK4r/ha/hz+2v7F8u78/7R9lx5A2bt2316ZrtYreGDPkxRx567FAzXJa74+8PaL4lTSdQt5nvmMY DLAGHzfd5JrrZYIpwBNEkgHQMoOK8w8cfDzXdb8YQ6ho8lvBZIkYZPNMfIJJ4Ar1OiivB/j7/wAj Lpn/AF6H/wBDNaMvhqH4SabD4qsJ3v55FWDyJwFUBxknI54xTtPsV+N6Pfak501tOPkotuN4cNzk 7vpXlttdHwx4sW4hUTHT7slVfjfsbjOPpX0B8NvHl144hv3ubOG2+ysgHlsTu3Z65+lZ5+DVifE/ 9tf2pdeb9r+1eXsXGd+7GfTtXo9fP/xN/wCSyW3+9bfzFem/EjxxceB7GyntrSK5NzIyESMRjAz2 rg7b49alPdRRHR7QB3Ck+Y3GTXt9FFeD/H3/AJGXTP8Ar0P/AKGa7b4m6Vfax8N7S2021lup/Mhb y4l3HAU5OK8KvbHXfDDrFdx3unNMNyqxaPfjjPvUs3g/xFHZPfz6Rei3Cea0zRnG3GdxNM0LS9f1 FZjoMF9KqEeb9l3cemcfjXu03i/RrbwA9hPrNvHqcenGJ4mmxKsojwVPfdnj61zPwGvbm7utZ+03 M021IsCSQtjluma9P1+xtZNIv55LaFpltpCJGjBYEKcc9a8W+Emv6fDqWonxNqEJiMS+V9tfcN2e cbu+K9Tj8SeBmkVY73RS5ICgBM5/Kusoorwf4+/8jLpn/Xof/QzXt+n/APINtf8Arin8hXi37QH/ ACGNH/64P/6EK9VXTBrXgSLTmlMS3VgkRkUZK5QDOK81uZv+FGlYbQf2r/anzsZT5Xl7OOMZznd+ lTR/Bq28TRrrb6vLA2pD7WYlhDBDJ820HPOM4zXX+A/h3D4GlvHi1CS7+1KoIaMLt259z61jeNvi PNpXih/DC6fHJHdIkRnMhBXzBjOMds1l/wDDP1p/0HZ//Acf/FVJB8A7WC4jlGuTkowbH2cc4OfW vW6KK8H+Pv8AyMumf9eh/wDQzXCafqXiTUZhbade6rcShciOGaRiAPYHpXsPwm0W8utO1E+KrCaa ZZVEJ1GIuwXBzt39s+leoIqoioihVUYAAwAKytcn0CFof7ebTlYg+V9r2fjjd+FZmseJ9Ek8O3tr perWRuGtnjt4reddxbaQqqAeucAYrlPgzB4ghudV/t5NRVSkflfbN+M5bON34Vw/xndk+I8zoxVl giIIOCDitr4N+KhDqmpHXtZKxmFPL+13Jxndzjcal8fXGtav44t7rw1Nf3WmBIlaSxd2i3BjuGV4 zjGa9uoorwf4+/8AIy6Z/wBeh/8AQzXYfD/4Xf8ACKavFrH9p/aPMtyvleTt+9g9c+1X/iB8SP8A hBr2zg/s77X9pjZ93m7NuDjHQ12Nhc/bdPtrnbs86JZNuc4yAcfrXjn7QP8Ax9aJ/uS/zWpPC3wY z/ZGtf2x/wA8bvyvI+jbc5/DNdt8QfH3/CDRWT/YPtf2ouP9Zs27cex9a8D8a+KP+Ev8RSap9m+z b41Ty9+77oxnOBWBXpHw/wDij/wimkR6P/Zn2jzLgv5vnbcbsDpj2r6Eoorwf4+/8jLpn/Xof/Qz Xt+nf8gy1/64p/IV5B8dNLvtQ1fSmsrK5uFWBwxiiZwDuHXAqn4Y8beOI9W0y01GKaDTFkjjmeWy 2KkYwCSxHHHel+O2o2eoXGjmyu7e4CJLu8mQPt5Xriuc0/4r+Lba2trGzuoykarFEgt1YkAYA6ZJ qHxLqXjPxalumsafeSrbljHtsmTGcZ6D2Fdl4O+GWl6l4Bmv9W027XU1E21WZ0Jxnb8teX/8I3rX /QI1D/wGf/CvTPh74K8M3GiJP4nX7Lqi3B2xz3BhbaMbTsJHGc17dRRXg/x9/wCRl0z/AK9D/wCh mu08BfFGDxVqkWjx6bJbtHblvMaUMDtwOmPevRKztf0xta8P3+nLIImuoGiDkZC5GM4r5x8eeAZf A0lkkt8l39qDkbYyu3bj3PrXZ+Ffgzc+ZpGtDWItuYbryxCc44bbnP4V7ZXB+JPijB4d8XR6E+mS zO5jHmrKFHz47Y7ZrvK868afC6fxX4ri1iPUo7dI0jTymiLE7ST1z716LRRXh/x1sLu78R6a1taz zKtoQTHGWAO8+lcL4cu/EXhXVPt+l2Fws/lmPMlszDBxnjHtXVf8LS8f/wDPp/5IGj/haXj/AP59 P/JA1z3ijWvFHjB7ZtWsZmNuGEfl2jL1xnt7Ctqy+I/juwsYLSC0IigjWNAbEk4AwP5VP/wtLx// AM+n/kga5fWL/wASa5r6aze2M5vEKEFbVgvy9OMV1H/C0vH/APz6f+SBqW1+J/j2S7hSS1+RnUN/ oJ6Zr3uiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiori4itIHmncJGgyWPas8+JtLCKzXQGTggqcr9fTrUra5YLdG3 +0KZeRtGeoGcZ9cVXtPFGmXYgAnCPOcIrAjnOMUXfijTbQspm3sH2YVScnPOD7Vrg5AI6Glooooo oqpqVgmpWbQO5TkMrDqrA5B/MVkv4YmkeaRtVlM1woSd/KX51HQAdvwq2nh+GN4isrhYpzMBgc5U rj9az08HMsqM2pzOiTLMqtEp24OQAewqdvDDmHyF1GVbdM+TH5a/u8nPXv8AjW8AQoBOT6+tLX// 2Q== --_004_5E1F45A93ED6EA40A37348DFBC21A1AE1EB06102WABOTH9MSGUSR8D_-- From mrw@lilacglade.org Fri Apr 12 17:55:52 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D76A521F8EC1 for ; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 17:55:52 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Lh7he7sCDg-8 for ; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 17:55:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.painless-security.com (mail.painless-security.com [23.30.188.241]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 516E521F8E8F for ; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 17:55:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.painless-security.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1BB3D2032A; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 20:54:18 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mail.painless-security.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.suchdamage.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id qa65RYmmnFlI; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 20:54:16 -0400 (EDT) Received: from new-host-3.home (pool-71-184-79-25.bstnma.fios.verizon.net [71.184.79.25]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) (Authenticated sender: mrw@mail.suchdamage.org) by mail.painless-security.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 20:54:16 -0400 (EDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.2 \(1499\)) From: Margaret Wasserman In-Reply-To: <5166CA78.1070504@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2013 20:55:48 -0400 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <5166CA78.1070504@gmail.com> To: Melinda Shore X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1499) Cc: opsawg@ietf.org Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] Call for adoption, two capwap-related documents X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 13 Apr 2013 00:55:53 -0000 I have no objection to this work being adopted by the OPS area working = group. I do think that it is important for CAPWAP to be = updated/extended for IEEE 802.1n, and I think that these drafts are a = good starting point. Both drafts will need some work before they are = ready for publication, though. For example, both of these drafts have empty IANA Considerations = sections, and that isn't right in either case. I'm the IANA Expert = Reviewer for CAPWAP allocations, so I'd like to make sure we properly = understand what allocations are being requested by these documents. I = have discussed the IANA items below that I think will need to be = allocated by these documents. Am I missing anything? On Apr 11, 2013, at 10:36 AM, Melinda Shore = wrote: > http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-shao-opsawg-capwap-hybridmac-00.txt This document needs to allocate another WTP Mac Type for the Hybrid MAC, = but the document doesn't seem to mention the WTP MAC Type at all. It = don't see how the Hybrid MAC Type can be used without assigning a WTP = Mac Type value. The registry for this value is described in section = 15.26 of the base CAPWAP spec. > http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-chen-opsawg-capwap-extension-00.txt This document requests the allocation of several new Element IDs. I = think that these would be allocated from the CAPWAP Message Element Type = registry, as defined in section 15.7 of the CAPAP base spec (RFC 5415). = There are a couple of types that include values in the spec (133 and = 134, specifically). Those values have not been allocated (to my = knowledge) and should be removed from the specification until they have = been requested and allocated by IANA. I'd be happy to work with the authors to properly document these = allocations, so that they can request the allocations from IANA. I = think that can happen after these drafts are adopted by the WG, though. Margaret From melinda.shore@gmail.com Fri Apr 12 18:46:59 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 164AB21F8E8F for ; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 18:46:59 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id BDzNtsu0nn+F for ; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 18:46:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pd0-f175.google.com (mail-pd0-f175.google.com [209.85.192.175]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C135521F8E7E for ; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 18:46:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pd0-f175.google.com with SMTP id g10so1674821pdj.6 for ; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 18:46:50 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=x-received:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc :subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=jy+tndO3909va8wS9OxotRdW2Hpq+SLqhlWpwEitS2U=; b=nPt+6v1uef7kASw5YX6AKIWV68P/DXji6hE5wtSCv1OnJIRvuVMqIsAZ1Y3+lfg2Xm 2V+ZRRKzbbBeGWedEB97QDcB7bhWgreqxOtKz7bUF8d+mI3GY5z8SbFSN+9zBBCG9e4L 9e8x/L5KL8ujiFuvjYCIe9bn2Py6bjcsdPEaNAAl97fyNJ/DaMeahNIllhT94qS2PNaz qo9g11SjoKsQHUGg63OCTuPMqEq7zGMbKYD3QVf3j57huxMDq07XtcgCKAowx1o27cYU 0qmozaY36SlBQriTHc1CwoDsjS69inf59ZHNduaNlwZk4igaNnxqtr2yhOYtiIi1IRlo E0OQ== X-Received: by 10.68.172.65 with SMTP id ba1mr17826991pbc.166.1365817610838; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 18:46:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from spandex.local (66-230-88-244-rb1.fai.dsl.dynamic.acsalaska.net. [66.230.88.244]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id ce16sm11740860pac.5.2013.04.12.18.46.48 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Fri, 12 Apr 2013 18:46:49 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <5168B905.4040006@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2013 17:46:45 -0800 From: Melinda Shore User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130328 Thunderbird/17.0.5 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Margaret Wasserman References: <5166CA78.1070504@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: opsawg@ietf.org Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] Call for adoption, two capwap-related documents X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 13 Apr 2013 01:46:59 -0000 On 4/12/13 4:55 PM, Margaret Wasserman wrote: > I have discussed the IANA items below that I think will need to be > allocated by these documents. Am I missing anything? [ ... ] > I'd be happy to work with the authors to properly document these > allocations, so that they can request the allocations from IANA. I > think that can happen after these drafts are adopted by the WG, > though. Thanks, that's exactly the sort of feedback we need and it's much appreciated. Melinda From you.jianjie@zte.com.cn Fri Apr 12 19:57:02 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 44E2521F8EA5 for ; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 19:57:02 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -101.799 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.799 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_FROM_START_YOU=0.799, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id yLaSuuTWlzAx for ; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 19:57:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from zte.com.cn (mx6.zte.com.cn [95.130.199.165]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2896A21F8EB7 for ; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 19:57:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from zte.com.cn (unknown [192.168.168.119]) by Websense Email Security Gateway with ESMTP id 0D96418E9F58 for ; Sat, 13 Apr 2013 10:56:34 +0800 (CST) Received: from mse01.zte.com.cn (unknown [10.30.3.20]) by Websense Email Security Gateway with ESMTPS id 39845193BDEE for ; Sat, 13 Apr 2013 10:56:33 +0800 (CST) Received: from notes_smtp.zte.com.cn ([10.30.1.239]) by mse01.zte.com.cn with ESMTP id r3D2uYKl099181 for ; Sat, 13 Apr 2013 10:56:34 +0800 (GMT-8) (envelope-from you.jianjie@zte.com.cn) To: "OPSAWG@ietf.org" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 6.5.4 March 27, 2005 Message-ID: From: you.jianjie@zte.com.cn Date: Sat, 13 Apr 2013 10:56:20 +0800 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on notes_smtp/zte_ltd(Release 8.5.3FP1 HF212|May 23, 2012) at 2013-04-13 10:56:25, Serialize complete at 2013-04-13 10:56:25 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=_alternative 0010265648257B4C_=" X-MAIL: mse01.zte.com.cn r3D2uYKl099181 Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] Call for adoption, two capwap-related documents X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 13 Apr 2013 02:57:02 -0000 This is a multipart message in MIME format. --=_alternative 0010265648257B4C_= Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" supporting both +1 BR, Jianjie --------------------------------------------------------------------------- This is a call for working group adoption of two drafts related to capwap use for 802.11n. http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-shao-opsawg-capwap-hybridmac-00.txt http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-chen-opsawg-capwap-extension-00.txt Since the IETF 86 meeting the authors have gotten expert review of their documents and feel that the documents are ready for working group adoption. We'll be assessing consensus on 25 April 2013. Please indicate which draft or drafts you're supporting or not supporting. Thanks, Melinda, Scott, and Chris _______________________________________________ OPSAWG mailing list OPSAWG@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg --=_alternative 0010265648257B4C_= Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
supporting both +1

BR,
Jianjie


---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is a call for working group adoption of two drafts
related to capwap use for 802.11n.

http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-shao-opsawg-capwap-hybridmac-00.txt
http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-chen-opsawg-capwap-extension-00.txt

Since the IETF 86 meeting the authors have gotten expert review
of their documents and feel that the documents are ready for
working group adoption.

We'll be assessing consensus on 25 April 2013.  Please indicate
which draft or drafts you're supporting or not supporting.

Thanks,

Melinda, Scott, and Chris
_______________________________________________
OPSAWG mailing list
OPSAWG@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg --=_alternative 0010265648257B4C_=-- From vumip1@gmail.com Sun Apr 14 05:35:25 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 583B321F8FFB for ; Sun, 14 Apr 2013 05:35:25 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.598 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id w10bh53k7d6u for ; Sun, 14 Apr 2013 05:35:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-wg0-f50.google.com (mail-wg0-f50.google.com [74.125.82.50]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1891B21F8FF5 for ; Sun, 14 Apr 2013 05:35:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-wg0-f50.google.com with SMTP id k13so3791940wgh.17 for ; Sun, 14 Apr 2013 05:35:23 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :subject:from:to:content-type; bh=KzEiGFzBH0XP75UMnzzSa+9Yi10LM3o4J/MvtuVHPXQ=; b=ln6ArktatPr9KR8Tg4GH/n9o6OVh9hAjTDbKApwUTPEjiQitwkqzOEAQPb2mT3Fjhu WwqNDBQcyD5J8F3e4HniQy3RqPkk0xePw/Ex2hIm5/NlLtIramOBzuAcUOEjAf0UzpWQ RXsQNracXjxqhD4nwgwAmrYqN89eIA+3V0WJ1WiB1cZYDdbCWm7CqllcjKQqjCtEMQDI rSE08mpocYhtIPe4DZ1oLiEy2JqNcsElLxm3UU/VU9/Y8oJNlxtRFWvaS3JuDLaSfNH5 VDgbExW0OP3+GeyQlrnU3Gg80BVhPqttoIj89qgE0MxWB3Es98xd+wEYeCnJ5nZTje6I iv6w== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.194.173.228 with SMTP id bn4mr26753739wjc.20.1365942923024; Sun, 14 Apr 2013 05:35:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.216.111.193 with HTTP; Sun, 14 Apr 2013 05:35:22 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <1365771625.88849.YahooMailNeo@web84502.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> References: <1365771625.88849.YahooMailNeo@web84502.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2013 08:35:22 -0400 Message-ID: From: "B.Khasnabish@ieee.org" To: "opsawg@ietf.org" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e0122e8dcb5dfd204da515e46 Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] Subject: Call for adoption, draft-krishnan-opsawg-large-flow-load-balancing/ X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2013 12:35:25 -0000 --089e0122e8dcb5dfd204da515e46 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Yes, support as a co-author. Thanks. Best. Bhumip > > ___________________________________________________________________________________ > This is a call for working group adoption of > http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-krishnan-opsawg-large-flow-load-balancing/ > .**** > ** ** > The authors report that they've incorporated feedback given at the IETF > 86 meeting, in particular**** > . information model for flow rebalancing**** > . operational considerations**** > ** ** > We'll be assessing consensus on 24 April 2013.**** > ** ** > Thanks,**** > ** ** > Melinda**** > > > _______________________________________________ > OPSAWG mailing list > OPSAWG@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg > > --089e0122e8dcb5dfd204da515e46 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Yes, support as a co-a= uthor. Thanks.=A0
=A0
Best.
=A0
Bhumip


=A0
=A0_______________________________________= ____________________________________________
=A0<= u>
The authors report= that they've incorporated feedback given at the IETF 86 meeting, in pa= rticular
=A0 .= information model for flow rebalancing
=A0 .= operational considerations
=A0<= u>
We'll be asses= sing consensus on 24 April 2013.
=A0<= u>
Thanks,<= /u>
=A0<= u>
Melinda<= /u>
=A0=A0=A0

______________________________________= _________
OPSAWG mailing list
OPSAWG@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/= opsawg

=A0=A0
--089e0122e8dcb5dfd204da515e46-- From dromasca@avaya.com Sun Apr 14 08:44:50 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B61D321F913E for ; Sun, 14 Apr 2013 08:44:50 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.33 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.33 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.269, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id p5jn7AhcfCri for ; Sun, 14 Apr 2013 08:44:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from de307622-de-outbound.net.avaya.com (de307622-de-outbound.net.avaya.com [198.152.71.100]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED51221F9122 for ; Sun, 14 Apr 2013 08:44:49 -0700 (PDT) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AicFABHOalHGmAcF/2dsb2JhbAAuIoJlIcF2gQQWdIIfAQEBAQMSCx0xDgwEAgEIDQQEAQEBChQJBzIUCQgCBAENBQgah3IBnWubYheOZiYLBwaCWmEDnS2KaYMLgig X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.87,471,1363147200"; d="scan'208";a="5370654" Received: from unknown (HELO co300216-co-erhwest.avaya.com) ([198.152.7.5]) by de307622-de-outbound.net.avaya.com with ESMTP; 14 Apr 2013 11:44:48 -0400 Received: from unknown (HELO AZ-FFEXHC01.global.avaya.com) ([135.64.58.11]) by co300216-co-erhwest-out.avaya.com with ESMTP; 14 Apr 2013 11:41:45 -0400 Received: from AZ-FFEXMB04.global.avaya.com ([fe80::6db7:b0af:8480:c126]) by AZ-FFEXHC01.global.avaya.com ([135.64.58.11]) with mapi id 14.02.0328.009; Sun, 14 Apr 2013 11:44:46 -0400 From: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" To: joel jaeggli , Melinda Shore , David Harrington Thread-Topic: [OPSAWG] Call for adoption, two capwap-related documents Thread-Index: AQHONsIAQd3bOSkD6EyxtjkUbZPOyZjRmiYAgAAAeICAABZtgIAELwFA Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2013 15:44:46 +0000 Message-ID: <9904FB1B0159DA42B0B887B7FA8119CA0C9E2C@AZ-FFEXMB04.global.avaya.com> References: <51670119.9060107@gmail.com> <516713E9.4030509@bogus.com> In-Reply-To: <516713E9.4030509@bogus.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [135.64.58.45] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: "opsawg@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] Call for adoption, two capwap-related documents X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2013 15:44:50 -0000 > -----Original Message----- > From: opsawg-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:opsawg-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf > Of joel jaeggli > Sent: Thursday, April 11, 2013 10:50 PM > To: Melinda Shore; David Harrington > Cc: opsawg@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] Call for adoption, two capwap-related documents >=20 > On 4/11/13 11:29 AM, Melinda Shore wrote: > > On 4/11/2013 10:28 AM, David Harrington wrote: > >> Which types of expert review? CAPWAP experts? 802.11n experts? > >> Security experts? Network management experts? Operator experts? > > Apologies for the lack of clarity. CAPWAP, 802.11n,and operators. > capwap overlaps with the ieee and the previous document series had a > review team with expertise on both sides. even if extensions might not > require harmonization (I'm not saying they do or don't), review should > be to insure the lack of messy accident. [[DR]] Absolutely so. If these items are adopted as work items by the OPSAW= G I will suggest to add explicit text in the charter concerning coordinatio= n with and reviews by IEEE 802.11=20 Regards, Dan From kartbill@gmail.com Sun Apr 14 23:02:36 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 00C3721F850E for ; Sun, 14 Apr 2013 23:02:36 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id wDq5BjkKe-6m for ; Sun, 14 Apr 2013 23:02:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-ve0-f193.google.com (mail-ve0-f193.google.com [209.85.128.193]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 68C9221F845D for ; Sun, 14 Apr 2013 23:02:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ve0-f193.google.com with SMTP id jz10so864350veb.8 for ; Sun, 14 Apr 2013 23:02:31 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=p9GdVOn87SLvFc/vvGR4UvLWDnGQgz5Gfvv7dhxKJNY=; b=oBHHONmmwCu2UvveCNoe0jWNvE15vyYmUPcEs/VbnauAvIwWhgIdH6aDWVVDCujem9 rxFXisVpLdbwC9324l5a9gzryb/myRCBn/SakB02uKS1b4ZgrXwoB2CtRaDcBC5SN7Le xwPvvBORrIwTa6gglCN5LRHZIgJvRj+S2v3Mb4GjDG5gFOdJGO9TuZoZkvRRzs7+lV0S FS8e7yaMpr3G+5DwLJmSr612vm6I/bP1y1+XydG+g2O3qot0Z0DO9d8Ayf/Wsns7ZVf0 cl7VDvUwex1vu2SFZJIcyFBuLDiWEgdd7scaH3vahXPQarwXpuffiP0/GPpNvQm6yGJA /pxw== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.220.138.75 with SMTP id z11mr783685vct.0.1366005751827; Sun, 14 Apr 2013 23:02:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.220.138.14 with HTTP; Sun, 14 Apr 2013 23:02:31 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2013 14:02:31 +0800 Message-ID: From: kart bill To: opsawg@ietf.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b342e7499525b04da5fff6f Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] Call for adoption, two capwap-related documents X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2013 07:07:22 -0000 --047d7b342e7499525b04da5fff6f Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Support for adoption of these two drafts. Regards, Fan --047d7b342e7499525b04da5fff6f Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Support for adoption of th= ese two drafts.

Regards,

Fan

--047d7b342e7499525b04da5fff6f-- From kartbill@gmail.com Mon Apr 15 00:14:01 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A48821F8E94 for ; Mon, 15 Apr 2013 00:14:01 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.415 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.415 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.584, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id tevbajCAdrE1 for ; Mon, 15 Apr 2013 00:14:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-ve0-f193.google.com (mail-ve0-f193.google.com [209.85.128.193]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D4EE621F8E9A for ; Mon, 15 Apr 2013 00:14:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ve0-f193.google.com with SMTP id jz10so874335veb.0 for ; Mon, 15 Apr 2013 00:14:00 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=zCgi4szKkPyfIVuckW5PAm7agF3ZG5jUS2ZXrU5mbA4=; b=mZKvpLViRcm4jr3D2boFtVibnmvH3I9oOYMLMjDylnk4Z1wX52wef+UOd83DJtJcaG tnCS6A9koLG/uGhl9gBjOmgW0vytFeI9Zx0Obd9ovLNeZSH72GsiBwr3duUb5jJSs38X rVhr8bNdXxxAvYYPz593+3eYGNrQFlM6PL/fFzfKw3Jeg0qCC70M8MoXsj9TsQtgI0Pp n4Z94uf2wSKeupm6ndOyRNTIn2VbweI5IiWxmmuLd7OzQdIi9nVinvjBFNn0eP6bMePs bKCAvFQ5GqfuuZ7UCla0dxfxjXvi8AzHx4fCTCPNofZIuPnvxmj/Lsum1G0tqEWcRhLT e5XQ== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.220.115.135 with SMTP id i7mr14971205vcq.30.1366010040360; Mon, 15 Apr 2013 00:14:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.220.138.14 with HTTP; Mon, 15 Apr 2013 00:14:00 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2013 15:14:00 +0800 Message-ID: From: kart bill To: opsawg@ietf.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f46d043d67ef3725db04da60ff33 Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] Call for adoption, two capwap-related documents X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2013 07:14:01 -0000 --f46d043d67ef3725db04da60ff33 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Support for adoption of these two drafts. Regards, Fan --f46d043d67ef3725db04da60ff33 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1

Support for adoption of these two drafts.

Regards,

Fan

--f46d043d67ef3725db04da60ff33-- From Tina.Tsou.Zouting@huawei.com Mon Apr 15 13:24:17 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D74621F93E6 for ; Mon, 15 Apr 2013 13:24:17 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.598 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id s9Am8C847NjC for ; Mon, 15 Apr 2013 13:24:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [194.213.3.17]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 11A1C21F93E5 for ; Mon, 15 Apr 2013 13:24:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 172.18.7.190 (EHLO lhreml203-edg.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.7.190]) by lhrrg02-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.3.5-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id AQK20765; Mon, 15 Apr 2013 20:24:14 +0000 (GMT) Received: from LHREML404-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.218) by lhreml203-edg.huawei.com (172.18.7.221) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.7; Mon, 15 Apr 2013 21:24:06 +0100 Received: from DFWEML405-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.193.5.102) by lhreml404-hub.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.218) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.7; Tue, 16 Apr 2013 04:24:11 +0800 Received: from DFWEML513-MBS.china.huawei.com ([169.254.4.156]) by dfweml405-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.193.5.102]) with mapi id 14.01.0323.007; Mon, 15 Apr 2013 13:24:05 -0700 From: Tina TSOU To: kart bill Thread-Topic: [OPSAWG] Call for adoption, two capwap-related documents Thread-Index: AQHOOajNGq95D/Gml0WDm2lqLsYdhpjXuwZt Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2013 20:24:04 +0000 Message-ID: <85CAFBB1-A79B-4FF9-BE0B-4D0EE3B3DB32@huawei.com> References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US, zh-CN Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_85CAFBB1A79B4FF9BE0B4D0EE3B3DB32huaweicom_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Cc: "opsawg@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] Call for adoption, two capwap-related documents X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2013 20:24:17 -0000 --_000_85CAFBB1A79B4FF9BE0B4D0EE3B3DB32huaweicom_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Dear all, I support the adoption of these two drafts related to capwap use for 802.11= n. http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-shao-opsawg-capwap-hybridmac-00.txt http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-chen-opsawg-capwap-extension-00.txt Thank you, Tina On Apr 15, 2013, at 12:14 AM, "kart bill" > wrote: Support for adoption of these two drafts. Regards, Fan --_000_85CAFBB1A79B4FF9BE0B4D0EE3B3DB32huaweicom_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Dear all,
I support the adoption of these two drafts related to capwap use for 802.11n.

On Apr 15, 2013, at 12:14 AM, "kart bill" <kartbill@gmail.com> wrote:

Support for adoption of these two drafts.

Regards,

Fan

--_000_85CAFBB1A79B4FF9BE0B4D0EE3B3DB32huaweicom_-- From zehn.cao@gmail.com Mon Apr 15 22:15:17 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 39BBB21F95F6 for ; Mon, 15 Apr 2013 22:15:17 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, NO_RELAYS=-0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id hChy0rnv0p85 for ; Mon, 15 Apr 2013 22:15:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-wi0-x229.google.com (mail-wi0-x229.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c05::229]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2E0B321F95F4 for ; Mon, 15 Apr 2013 22:15:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-wi0-f169.google.com with SMTP id c10so2286447wiw.4 for ; Mon, 15 Apr 2013 22:15:09 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=kKQHB5vZn6UwwE6BrJfRLMEJbOjKIJfsVlRREW++yQ0=; b=Pte5foptM//MiczyztiA/8okU/SLN6uc03QegZ20bXoX/wT25uYeGvwkUyjMHvuM3+ qWOoD+Jw1pJiLF+inMwgqgQl7vYeovw9JtsGpIk6ujT4mZX/B2n0VeJ77ibVHFcjbJ5Q fIc0GdyS/Afn5VofGQ2Gd6OIJiZjM0mxRhvhKtgMcHhd8SZlF/xZJSHdvefsyG4whQ86 7R3owpAcwX8ryD97NAMQIUIRHIVLrvMSGpNDg0HyaqASEkL7aYUZvcul1yCAr928p3fu 3ESFZ3tBPxkBRnQC/0kI9+EoXQYn1RGVz1azM09pXmlP3hdtYONgmEPNx4C2clJ4WWc4 s+Fw== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.194.143.50 with SMTP id sb18mr830287wjb.44.1366089309175; Mon, 15 Apr 2013 22:15:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.216.212.65 with HTTP; Mon, 15 Apr 2013 22:15:08 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <51656616.4070003@gmail.com> References: <51656616.4070003@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2013 13:15:08 +0800 Message-ID: From: "Cao,Zhen (cz)" To: Melinda Shore Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e0115f79a014f1104da737423 Cc: opsawg@ietf.org Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] Call for adoption, draft-krishnan-opsawg-large-flow-load-balancing/ X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2013 05:15:17 -0000 --089e0115f79a014f1104da737423 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Hi All, This is a useful document for DC operators as well as SPs that are operating data centers. And I would like to support this adoption. With the following comments, 1. title of section 2, "Hash-based Load Distribu tion in LAG/ECMP", you might need to remove the space within 'distribution' 2. For Section 3.1.1., there is a short discussion about flow identification of several tunneling protocols, VXLAN, NVGRE, etc, I expect more description of the challenges and problems for these protocols as they are happening with the DC, e.g., mapping of the overlay flow pattern to the physical layer, could be a useful guidance for those who are operating these tunnel. Best regards, zhen chinamobile On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 9:16 PM, Melinda Shore wrote: > This is a call for working group adoption of > > http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-krishnan-opsawg-large-flow-load-balancing/ > . > > The authors report that they've incorporated feedback given at > the IETF 86 meeting, in particular > . information model for flow rebalancing > . operational considerations > > We'll be assessing consensus on 24 April 2013. > > Thanks, > > Melinda > _______________________________________________ > OPSAWG mailing list > OPSAWG@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg > --089e0115f79a014f1104da737423 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi All,=A0

This is a useful docum= ent for DC operators as well as SPs that are operating data centers. And I = would like to support this adoption.

W= ith the following comments,=A0
1. title of section 2, "Hash-based Load Distribu tion in LAG/ECMP", = you might need to remove the space within 'distribution'
2. For Section 3.1.1., there is a short discussion about flow id= entification of several tunneling protocols, VXLAN, NVGRE, etc, I expect mo= re description of the challenges and problems for these protocols as they a= re happening with the DC, e.g., mapping of the overlay flow pattern to the = physical layer, could be a useful guidance for those who are operating thes= e tunnel.=A0

Best regards,
zhen
chinamobile



On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 9:16 PM, Mel= inda Shore <melinda.shore@gmail.com> wrote:
This is a call for working group adoption of=
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-k= rishnan-opsawg-large-flow-load-balancing/.

The authors report that they've incorporated feedback given at
the IETF 86 meeting, in particular
=A0 . information model for flow rebalancing
=A0 . operational considerations

We'll be assessing consensus on 24 April 2013.

Thanks,

Melinda
_______________________________________________
OPSAWG mailing list
OPSAWG@ietf.org
= https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg

--089e0115f79a014f1104da737423-- From bclaise@cisco.com Tue Apr 16 03:53:14 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3BD5D21F8E51 for ; Tue, 16 Apr 2013 03:53:14 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -10.438 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.438 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.160, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id WxxTNBEy2QBp for ; Tue, 16 Apr 2013 03:53:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from av-tac-bru.cisco.com (weird-brew.cisco.com [144.254.15.118]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7437F21F8D28 for ; Tue, 16 Apr 2013 03:53:12 -0700 (PDT) X-TACSUNS: Virus Scanned Received: from strange-brew.cisco.com (localhost.cisco.com [127.0.0.1]) by av-tac-bru.cisco.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id r3GAr9MY016695; Tue, 16 Apr 2013 12:53:10 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [10.60.67.88] (ams-bclaise-8917.cisco.com [10.60.67.88]) by strange-brew.cisco.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id r3GAqYJ7010891; Tue, 16 Apr 2013 12:52:45 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <516D2D72.8080202@cisco.com> Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2013 12:52:34 +0200 From: Benoit Claise User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130307 Thunderbird/17.0.4 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Melinda Shore References: <51656616.4070003@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <51656616.4070003@gmail.com> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------000808090800090306050009" Cc: opsawg@ietf.org Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] Call for adoption, draft-krishnan-opsawg-large-flow-load-balancing/ X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2013 10:53:14 -0000 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------000808090800090306050009 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Dear all, My analysis is that the mechanism described in the draft is a local load-balancing optimization, which doesn't influence the bits on the wire. Note that Curtis had a similar concern during the OPSAWG meeting (see the minutes ), Curtis Villamizar: Looks like implementation details, not operational issues. Not appropriate here, even as an Informational RFC. Also has concerns with specific approach, which requires configuration. Therefore, I don't believe that this draft is appropriate for the WG. Regards, Benoit (as a contributor) > This is a call for working group adoption of > http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-krishnan-opsawg-large-flow-load-balancing/. > > The authors report that they've incorporated feedback given at > the IETF 86 meeting, in particular > . information model for flow rebalancing > . operational considerations > > We'll be assessing consensus on 24 April 2013. > > Thanks, > > Melinda > _______________________________________________ > OPSAWG mailing list > OPSAWG@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg > > --------------000808090800090306050009 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Dear all,

My analysis is that the mechanism described in the draft is a local load-balancing optimization, which doesn't influence the bits on the wire.

Note that Curtis had a similar concern during the OPSAWG meeting (see the minutes), 

Curtis Villamizar: Looks like implementation details, not operational issues.
Not appropriate here, even as an Informational RFC.  Also has concerns with
specific approach, which requires configuration.
Therefore, I don't believe that this draft is appropriate for the WG.

Regards, Benoit (as a contributor)
This is a call for working group adoption of
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-krishnan-opsawg-large-flow-load-balancing/.

The authors report that they've incorporated feedback given at
the IETF 86 meeting, in particular
  . information model for flow rebalancing
  . operational considerations

We'll be assessing consensus on 24 April 2013.

Thanks,

Melinda
_______________________________________________
OPSAWG mailing list
OPSAWG@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg

--------------000808090800090306050009-- From lucy.yong@huawei.com Tue Apr 16 05:34:54 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B1EF821F9382 for ; Tue, 16 Apr 2013 05:34:54 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id E180yftpZQ0H for ; Tue, 16 Apr 2013 05:34:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [194.213.3.17]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CEEA321F935D for ; Tue, 16 Apr 2013 05:34:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 172.18.7.190 (EHLO lhreml204-edg.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.7.190]) by lhrrg01-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.3.5-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id ARW88075; Tue, 16 Apr 2013 12:34:52 +0000 (GMT) Received: from LHREML405-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.242) by lhreml204-edg.china.huawei.com (172.18.7.223) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.7; Tue, 16 Apr 2013 13:34:41 +0100 Received: from DFWEML408-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.193.5.134) by lhreml405-hub.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.242) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.7; Tue, 16 Apr 2013 13:34:49 +0100 Received: from DFWEML509-MBX.china.huawei.com ([169.254.11.204]) by dfweml408-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.193.5.134]) with mapi id 14.01.0323.007; Tue, 16 Apr 2013 05:34:45 -0700 From: Lucy yong To: Melinda Shore Thread-Topic: [OPSAWG] Call for adoption, two capwap-related documents Thread-Index: AQHONsIELFlrE/bzL0OMfury2bRfKpjYz+oA Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2013 12:34:44 +0000 Message-ID: <2691CE0099834E4A9C5044EEC662BB9D45254419@dfweml509-mbx.china.huawei.com> References: <5166CA78.1070504@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <5166CA78.1070504@gmail.com> Accept-Language: en-US, zh-CN Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.200.216.195] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Cc: "opsawg@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] Call for adoption, two capwap-related documents X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2013 12:34:54 -0000 Support both. Lucy > -----Original Message----- > From: opsawg-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:opsawg-bounces@ietf.org] On > Behalf Of Melinda Shore > Sent: Thursday, April 11, 2013 9:37 AM > To: opsawg@ietf.org > Subject: [OPSAWG] Call for adoption, two capwap-related documents >=20 > This is a call for working group adoption of two drafts > related to capwap use for 802.11n. >=20 > http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-shao-opsawg-capwap-hybridmac-00.txt > http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-chen-opsawg-capwap-extension-00.txt >=20 > Since the IETF 86 meeting the authors have gotten expert review > of their documents and feel that the documents are ready for > working group adoption. >=20 > We'll be assessing consensus on 25 April 2013. Please indicate > which draft or drafts you're supporting or not supporting. >=20 > Thanks, >=20 > Melinda, Scott, and Chris > _______________________________________________ > OPSAWG mailing list > OPSAWG@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg From ramk@Brocade.com Tue Apr 16 13:48:26 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C041021F9783 for ; Tue, 16 Apr 2013 13:48:26 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.664 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.664 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, IP_NOT_FRIENDLY=0.334, J_CHICKENPOX_34=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 46YLmKeMwRRE for ; Tue, 16 Apr 2013 13:48:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx0b-000f0801.pphosted.com (mx0b-000f0801.pphosted.com [67.231.152.113]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 845AF21F9772 for ; Tue, 16 Apr 2013 13:48:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pps.filterd (m0000700 [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-000f0801.pphosted.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with SMTP id r3GKmOln024517 for ; Tue, 16 Apr 2013 13:48:24 -0700 Received: from hq1wp-exchub02.corp.brocade.com ([144.49.131.13]) by mx0b-000f0801.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 1bsc900227-1 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT) for ; Tue, 16 Apr 2013 13:48:24 -0700 Received: from HQ1WP-EXHUB02.corp.brocade.com (10.70.38.14) by hq1wp-exchub02.corp.brocade.com (10.70.38.99) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.2.309.2; Tue, 16 Apr 2013 13:48:22 -0700 Received: from HQ1-EXCH01.corp.brocade.com ([fe80::8c73:93bf:41b4:1443]) by HQ1WP-EXHUB02.corp.brocade.com ([fe80::e1f4:a4c8:696b:3780%10]) with mapi; Tue, 16 Apr 2013 13:48:22 -0700 From: ramki Krishnan To: "Cao,Zhen (cz)" , Melinda Shore Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2013 13:48:07 -0700 Thread-Topic: [OPSAWG] Call for adoption, draft-krishnan-opsawg-large-flow-load-balancing/ Thread-Index: Ac46YWWG4DNjFi2kQzeffR8iT39RngAghftg Message-ID: References: <51656616.4070003@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_C7634EB63EFD984A978DFB46EA5174F2BFD818E34FHQ1EXCH01corp_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:5.10.8626, 1.0.431, 0.0.0000 definitions=2013-04-16_08:2013-04-16, 2013-04-16, 1970-01-01 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 spamscore=0 suspectscore=2 phishscore=0 adultscore=0 bulkscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=7.0.1-1211240000 definitions=main-1304160189 Cc: "opsawg@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] Call for adoption, draft-krishnan-opsawg-large-flow-load-balancing/ X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2013 20:48:26 -0000 --_000_C7634EB63EFD984A978DFB46EA5174F2BFD818E34FHQ1EXCH01corp_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Dear Zhen, Thanks a lot for your comments. We will incorporate the appropriate changes= in the next version. Thanks, Ramki From: opsawg-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:opsawg-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of= Cao,Zhen (cz) Sent: Monday, April 15, 2013 10:15 PM To: Melinda Shore Cc: opsawg@ietf.org Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] Call for adoption, draft-krishnan-opsawg-large-flow-l= oad-balancing/ Hi All, This is a useful document for DC operators as well as SPs that are operatin= g data centers. And I would like to support this adoption. With the following comments, 1. title of section 2, "Hash-based Load Distribu tion in LAG/ECMP", you mig= ht need to remove the space within 'distribution' 2. For Section 3.1.1., there is a short discussion about flow identificatio= n of several tunneling protocols, VXLAN, NVGRE, etc, I expect more descript= ion of the challenges and problems for these protocols as they are happenin= g with the DC, e.g., mapping of the overlay flow pattern to the physical la= yer, could be a useful guidance for those who are operating these tunnel. Best regards, zhen chinamobile On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 9:16 PM, Melinda Shore > wrote: This is a call for working group adoption of http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-krishnan-opsawg-large-flow-load-balan= cing/. The authors report that they've incorporated feedback given at the IETF 86 meeting, in particular . information model for flow rebalancing . operational considerations We'll be assessing consensus on 24 April 2013. Thanks, Melinda _______________________________________________ OPSAWG mailing list OPSAWG@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg --_000_C7634EB63EFD984A978DFB46EA5174F2BFD818E34FHQ1EXCH01corp_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Dear Zhen,<= o:p>

 

=

Thanks a lot for your comments. We will incorpora= te the appropriate changes in the next version.

 

T= hanks,

Ramki

 

From: opsawg-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:opsawg-bounces@ietf.org]= On Behalf Of Cao,Zhen (cz)
Sent: Monday, April 15, 2013 1= 0:15 PM
To: Melinda Shore
Cc: opsawg@ietf.org
Sub= ject: Re: [OPSAWG] Call for adoption, draft-krishnan-opsawg-large-flow-= load-balancing/

 =

Hi All, 

 

This is= a useful document for DC operators as well as SPs that are operating data = centers. And I would like to support this adoption.

 

With the following comments, 

1. title of section 2, "Hash-based = Load Distribu tion in LAG/ECMP", you might need to remove the s= pace within 'distribution'

2.= For Section 3.1.1., there is a short discussion about flow identification = of several tunneling protocols, VXLAN, NVGRE, etc, I expect more descriptio= n of the challenges and problems for these protocols as they are happening = with the DC, e.g., mapping of the overlay flow pattern to the physical laye= r, could be a useful guidance for those who are operating these tunnel.&nbs= p;

 

Best regards,

zhen

chinamobile=

 

<= /div>

 

On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 9:16 PM, Melinda = Shore <meli= nda.shore@gmail.com> wrote:

This = is a call for working group adoption of
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-krishnan-opsawg-large-flow-load-b= alancing/.

The authors report that they've incorporated feedback= given at
the IETF 86 meeting, in particular
  . information mod= el for flow rebalancing
  . operational considerations

We'll= be assessing consensus on 24 April 2013.

Thanks,

Melinda
= _______________________________________________
OPSAWG mailing list
<= a href=3D"mailto:OPSAWG@ietf.org">OPSAWG@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.o= rg/mailman/listinfo/opsawg

 

= --_000_C7634EB63EFD984A978DFB46EA5174F2BFD818E34FHQ1EXCH01corp_-- From satoru.matsushima@gmail.com Fri Apr 19 00:46:36 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9389B21F9079 for ; Fri, 19 Apr 2013 00:46:36 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.98 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.98 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB=0.619] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id YeeiHXDAqYnf for ; Fri, 19 Apr 2013 00:46:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pa0-f41.google.com (mail-pa0-f41.google.com [209.85.220.41]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F177C21F8EFC for ; Fri, 19 Apr 2013 00:46:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pa0-f41.google.com with SMTP id kx10so267711pab.14 for ; Fri, 19 Apr 2013 00:46:35 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=x-received:content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date :cc:content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to:x-mailer; bh=m29zBt/MQ3Kx0zdLZ0jW7cUzJkvnWUBGKLbVlt6S/zQ=; b=poVwK7zgmbv0WXW98Hg2u0Onh1xxYzWsfXX3FTc2468WlyJS1kmKO9EmGD2Ove8uiF fo7YYeaVjUFMsY1yGLhA3H40WXbDkQ8HMaKohscT1nFvrCLKCMriP7dHvXcoHIGUALWh uvj7RrfRBoKlGHWcdFppumt2HBK35+0yLmnuorTibkLUMSYpWLmN8r5P7opTUt07OLVs OpzesvWmraxF+f1wdxLGlIRPxvNIf13h0FoU+pXqJMCyHlYV5JhUgG2a0oBjpegZutrN 6fD2riYu04QgDB+qD65ur6XS94zFmarIqsFt2W3sr+7jjJqHEwCutYczSwpg3rF2R3Wv AhAA== X-Received: by 10.68.180.132 with SMTP id do4mr17668742pbc.96.1366357595705; Fri, 19 Apr 2013 00:46:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.248.67.24] (i118-21-136-4.s30.a048.ap.plala.or.jp. [118.21.136.4]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id ak5sm13822852pac.4.2013.04.19.00.46.31 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Fri, 19 Apr 2013 00:46:33 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.3 \(1503\)) From: Satoru Matsushima In-Reply-To: <5166CA78.1070504@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2013 16:46:35 +0900 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <4A31B27E-B097-4DE7-94C4-18E0A7816918@gmail.com> References: <5166CA78.1070504@gmail.com> To: Melinda Shore X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1503) Cc: opsawg@ietf.org Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] Call for adoption, two capwap-related documents X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2013 07:46:36 -0000 Hi, I support both. cheers, --satoru On 2013/04/11, at 23:36, Melinda Shore wrote: > This is a call for working group adoption of two drafts > related to capwap use for 802.11n. > > http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-shao-opsawg-capwap-hybridmac-00.txt > http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-chen-opsawg-capwap-extension-00.txt > > Since the IETF 86 meeting the authors have gotten expert review > of their documents and feel that the documents are ready for > working group adoption. > > We'll be assessing consensus on 25 April 2013. Please indicate > which draft or drafts you're supporting or not supporting. > > Thanks, > > Melinda, Scott, and Chris > _______________________________________________ > OPSAWG mailing list > OPSAWG@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg From dave.mcdysan@verizon.com Fri Apr 19 10:07:22 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E346E21F9027 for ; Fri, 19 Apr 2013 10:07:22 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id UxZ28Z4h01xn for ; Fri, 19 Apr 2013 10:07:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fldsmtpe01.verizon.com (fldsmtpe01.verizon.com [140.108.26.140]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0A9CA21F8FEB for ; Fri, 19 Apr 2013 10:07:18 -0700 (PDT) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: false Received: from unknown (HELO fldsmtpi01.verizon.com) ([166.68.71.143]) by fldsmtpe01.verizon.com with ESMTP; 19 Apr 2013 17:06:55 +0000 From: "Mcdysan, David E" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.87,510,1363132800"; d="scan'208";a="463042770" Received: from fhdp1lumxc7hb05.verizon.com (HELO FHDP1LUMXC7HB05.us.one.verizon.com) ([166.68.59.192]) by fldsmtpi01.verizon.com with ESMTP; 19 Apr 2013 17:06:55 +0000 Received: from fhdp1lumxc7v11.us.one.verizon.com ([166.68.59.148]) by FHDP1LUMXC7HB05.us.one.verizon.com ([166.68.59.192]) with mapi; Fri, 19 Apr 2013 13:06:55 -0400 To: "OPSAWG@ietf.org" Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2013 13:06:53 -0400 Thread-Topic: [OPSAWG] Call for adoption, draft-krishnan-opsawg-large-flow-load-balancing/ Thread-Index: Ac49IEtZt/iyYiZbQwq8R7upXszqbA== Message-ID: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.2.5.121010 acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: [OPSAWG] Call for adoption, draft-krishnan-opsawg-large-flow-load-balancing/ X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2013 17:07:23 -0000 I support adoption of this draft. There are several operational use cases for this form of load balancing in our networks. Thanks, Dave From: opsawg-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:opsawg-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Melinda Shore Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2013 6:16 AM To: opsawg@ietf.org Subject: [OPSAWG] Call for adoption, draft-krishnan-opsawg-large-flow-load-balancing/ This is a call for working group adoption of http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-krishnan-opsawg-large-flow-load-balan cing/. The authors report that they've incorporated feedback given at the IETF 86 meeting, in particular . information model for flow rebalancing . operational considerations We'll be assessing consensus on 24 April 2013. Thanks, Melinda _______________________________________________ OPSAWG mailing list OPSAWG@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg From agmalis@gmail.com Fri Apr 19 10:46:56 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 093AC21F95EF for ; Fri, 19 Apr 2013 10:46:56 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, NO_RELAYS=-0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id mLGYjb3gTJVv for ; Fri, 19 Apr 2013 10:46:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-qc0-x22a.google.com (mail-qc0-x22a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c01::22a]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 43E1E21F944A for ; Fri, 19 Apr 2013 10:46:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-qc0-f170.google.com with SMTP id d42so2035988qca.29 for ; Fri, 19 Apr 2013 10:46:54 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=x-received:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=Kygsk5NWdwwdf6WUanc6MWpD37bwqQQ5tIGO24j4SG0=; b=O1suKc5gS2EYVgG2SKKV8BQ8pE/LVhwiehIVmTL7jMNV1LcGvuCxhvgPIRIC2ow79x czFBEEieVLhSIbltrt/nMN2r54fkPma9bfxRxGh0nZgbTz2XKWXooz0NmWJOjkqZvVUl OA3h/1EeBO8PBD2FBUDnhWxvWc8TtQQqjb+Apb4uycpY0BUwqSrgJjjayMEsMybUue4A tOixLjSiQhnXMbLnGzAb6WgebGmxoa2ikxGWO+frcMjRNdUacJbYTA/B9fl66FXkttdc pnaPCGHVIaqRS09dQE/3BfbJK7maFyln01RE8Y4p5L18baFO+6/biicaz0Ls0SqMS5Oq 66bQ== X-Received: by 10.224.160.203 with SMTP id o11mr6462370qax.38.1366393614762; Fri, 19 Apr 2013 10:46:54 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.229.138.145 with HTTP; Fri, 19 Apr 2013 10:46:34 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <516D2D72.8080202@cisco.com> References: <51656616.4070003@gmail.com> <516D2D72.8080202@cisco.com> From: "Andrew G. Malis" Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2013 10:46:34 -0700 Message-ID: To: Benoit Claise Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e0149cc54080a1804daba4e3a Cc: opsawg@ietf.org Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] Call for adoption, draft-krishnan-opsawg-large-flow-load-balancing/ X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2013 17:46:56 -0000 --089e0149cc54080a1804daba4e3a Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Benoit, Discussion of issues like these (without changing the bits on the wire) are often found in BCPs and other informational RFCs. see http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc4928.txt as an exmple. I support this draft being adopted by the WG. Cheers, Andy On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 3:52 AM, Benoit Claise wrote: > Dear all, > > My analysis is that the mechanism described in the draft is a local > load-balancing optimization, which doesn't influence the bits on the wire. > > Note that Curtis had a similar concern during the OPSAWG meeting (see the > minutes ), > > Curtis Villamizar: Looks like implementation details, not operational issues. > Not appropriate here, even as an Informational RFC. Also has concerns with > specific approach, which requires configuration. > > Therefore, I don't believe that this draft is appropriate for the WG. > > Regards, Benoit (as a contributor) > > This is a call for working group adoption ofhttp://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-krishnan-opsawg-large-flow-load-balancing/. > > The authors report that they've incorporated feedback given at > the IETF 86 meeting, in particular > . information model for flow rebalancing > . operational considerations > > We'll be assessing consensus on 24 April 2013. > > Thanks, > > Melinda > _______________________________________________ > OPSAWG mailing listOPSAWG@ietf.orghttps://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg > > > > _______________________________________________ > OPSAWG mailing list > OPSAWG@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg > > --089e0149cc54080a1804daba4e3a Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Benoit,

Discussion of issues like these (without ch= anging the bits on the wire) are often found in BCPs and other informationa= l RFCs. see http://ww= w.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc4928.txt as an exmple. I support this draft bei= ng adopted by the WG.

Cheers,
Andy


On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 3:52 AM, Benoit Claise <bclaise= @cisco.com> wrote:
=20 =20 =20
Dear all,

My analysis is that the mechanism described in the draft is a local load-balancing optimization, which doesn't influence the bits on the wire.

Note that Curtis had a similar concern during the OPSAWG meeting (see the minutes), 

Curtis Villamizar: Looks like implementation details, not oper=
ational issues.
Not appropriate here, even as an Informational RFC.  Also has concerns with
specific approach, which requires configuration.
Therefore, I don't believe that this draft is appropriate for the WG.

Regards, Benoit (as a contributor)
This is a call for working group adoption of
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-k=
rishnan-opsawg-large-flow-load-balancing/.

The authors report that they've incorporated feedback given at
the IETF 86 meeting, in particular
  . information model for flow rebalancing
  . operational considerations

We'll be assessing consensus on 24 April 2013.

Thanks,

Melinda
_______________________________________________
OPSAWG mailing list
OPSAWG@ietf.org
=
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg


_______________________________________________
OPSAWG mailing list
OPSAWG@ietf.org
= https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg


--089e0149cc54080a1804daba4e3a-- From gu@centecnetworks.com Mon Apr 15 08:05:58 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 325EF21F93F9 for ; Mon, 15 Apr 2013 08:05:58 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id NMY1p5xeRIAX for ; Mon, 15 Apr 2013 08:05:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from centecnetworks.com (centecnetworks.com [58.210.9.219]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 769F221F93CC for ; Mon, 15 Apr 2013 08:05:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [172.17.74.237] ([173.164.209.210]) (envelope-sender ) by 192.168.25.7 with ESMTP for ; Mon, 15 Apr 2013 23:06:17 +0800 Message-ID: <516C1752.9030700@centecnetworks.com> Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2013 08:05:54 -0700 From: Tao User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130328 Thunderbird/17.0.5 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: opsawg@ietf.org References: <2691CE0099834E4A9C5044EEC662BB9D45253F92@dfweml509-mbx.china.huawei.com> In-Reply-To: <2691CE0099834E4A9C5044EEC662BB9D45253F92@dfweml509-mbx.china.huawei.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailman-Approved-At: Sun, 21 Apr 2013 18:22:59 -0700 Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] : Call for adoption, draft-krishnan-opsawg-large-flow-load-balancing/ X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2013 15:28:02 -0000 Hi Melinda, We support for the adoption of this draft. Thanks for the consideration. Best regards, Tao Gu Centec Networks On 4/15/2013 7:45 AM, Lucy yong wrote: > Hi Weifeng and Tao, > > Do you like to give the support for the adoption? > > You can send the message to opsawg@ietf.org. > > I am in MEFQ2 meeting this week, don't see Tao here. > > Thanks, > Lucy > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: opsawg-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:opsawg-bounces@ietf.org] On >> Behalf Of Melinda Shore >> Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2013 8:16 AM >> To: opsawg@ietf.org >> Subject: [OPSAWG] Call for adoption, draft-krishnan-opsawg-large-flow- >> load-balancing/ >> >> This is a call for working group adoption of >> http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-krishnan-opsawg-large-flow-load- >> balancing/. >> >> The authors report that they've incorporated feedback given at >> the IETF 86 meeting, in particular >> . information model for flow rebalancing >> . operational considerations >> >> We'll be assessing consensus on 24 April 2013. >> >> Thanks, >> >> Melinda >> _______________________________________________ >> OPSAWG mailing list >> OPSAWG@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg From pjmoyer@gmail.com Mon Apr 22 19:25:59 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2BF1C21F90A1 for ; Mon, 22 Apr 2013 19:25:59 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, NO_RELAYS=-0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id VZJ5MwvRexcN for ; Mon, 22 Apr 2013 19:25:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-ia0-x233.google.com (mail-ia0-x233.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c02::233]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A10221F909A for ; Mon, 22 Apr 2013 19:25:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ia0-f179.google.com with SMTP id p22so113962iad.38 for ; Mon, 22 Apr 2013 19:25:58 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=AfRS6o2immR0iL1fG9oglMJQw68mf4SUYavd1hShK5A=; b=I2BvbWlM+fvg2I3MHKtaLTYXHsiLyLYKMp9iMLmbFkgY9xeWmmGpb0yY6JYxZJ1PHJ XLrkYKlr8y3SHwKnZls7qyfsE4FMNBABYZnlQ0TGKRpFdEYhfl0/f59K8qMGMymT2GZB VgcyNzldKdfYZ3DTTmunpEI3pr40AtQ4se7P8t+bunwk1nROLNh5OXKBmrehKiDTD2XX AhPytHx7z/Vbww4FuqQ7XX3t+kkpxLU5txdNoAKB3gWLxPjZHgcpmt5tcKW6WyQnDkjX 7lB978n93zJaYKu0NRdVdTna3vHOOU9vgoLCHNGoPNGqy26+gtJtUQA3RZvfJE++7ont SQYw== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.50.118.33 with SMTP id kj1mr9047001igb.72.1366683958078; Mon, 22 Apr 2013 19:25:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.231.102.74 with HTTP; Mon, 22 Apr 2013 19:25:57 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2013 19:25:57 -0700 Message-ID: From: pete To: "Mcdysan, David E" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e01294752d7756704dafde77a Cc: "OPSAWG@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] Call for adoption, draft-krishnan-opsawg-large-flow-load-balancing/ X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2013 02:25:59 -0000 --089e01294752d7756704dafde77a Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 +1. In addition to this type of solution being applicable to traditional networks, I believe it is particularly important to research and education networks that frequently carry large flows. Thanks. pete On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 10:06 AM, Mcdysan, David E wrote: > I support adoption of this draft. > > There are several operational use cases for this form of load balancing in > our networks. > > Thanks, > > Dave > > > From: opsawg-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:opsawg-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf > Of Melinda Shore > Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2013 6:16 AM > To: opsawg@ietf.org > Subject: [OPSAWG] Call for adoption, > draft-krishnan-opsawg-large-flow-load-balancing/ > > This is a call for working group adoption of > http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-krishnan-opsawg-large-flow-load-balan > cing/. > > The authors report that they've incorporated feedback given at the IETF 86 > meeting, in particular > . information model for flow rebalancing > . operational considerations > > We'll be assessing consensus on 24 April 2013. > > Thanks, > > Melinda > _______________________________________________ > OPSAWG mailing list > OPSAWG@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg > > > _______________________________________________ > OPSAWG mailing list > OPSAWG@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg > --089e01294752d7756704dafde77a Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
+1.=C2=A0

In addition to this typ= e of solution being applicable to traditional networks, I believe it is par= ticularly important to research and education networks that frequently carr= y large flows.

Thanks.
pete

On Fri,= Apr 19, 2013 at 10:06 AM, Mcdysan, David E <dave.mcdysan@verizon= .com> wrote:
I support adoption of this draft.

There are several operational use cases for this form of load balancing in<= br> our networks.

Thanks,

Dave


From: opsawg-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:opsawg-bounces@ietf.or= g] On Behalf
Of Melinda Shore
Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2013 6:16 AM
To: opsawg@ietf.org
Subject: [OPSAWG] Call for adoption,
draft-krishnan-opsawg-large-flow-load-balancing/

This is a call for working group adoption of
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-krishnan-ops= awg-large-flow-load-balan
cing/.

The authors report that they've incorporated feedback given at the IETF= 86
meeting, in particular
=C2=A0 . information model for flow rebalancing
=C2=A0 . operational considerations

We'll be assessing consensus on 24 April 2013.

Thanks,

Melinda
_______________________________________________
OPSAWG mailing list
OPSAWG@ietf.org
= https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg


_______________________________________________
OPSAWG mailing list
OPSAWG@ietf.org
= https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg

--089e01294752d7756704dafde77a-- From zehn.cao@gmail.com Wed Apr 24 01:50:26 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7933E21F8F08 for ; Wed, 24 Apr 2013 01:50:26 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, NO_RELAYS=-0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id mb8p17d6NB5s for ; Wed, 24 Apr 2013 01:50:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-wi0-x229.google.com (mail-wi0-x229.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c05::229]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7CDA621F8F07 for ; Wed, 24 Apr 2013 01:50:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-wi0-f169.google.com with SMTP id h11so7592454wiv.4 for ; Wed, 24 Apr 2013 01:50:24 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=P8Y+MpL3s9zHbnXBeoUIUYYwzbDD37Mu2CddbsZxgcI=; b=Z9ExszjnPULzC31NDZ0uZqptXNBRh9YrEgSebhutMiOWrg9Er1blx51f89MAkUmw8X eWb+Zej5/ZE2rOZphkB0I9+V8eIhEfp/ZD4Bx2VyyVmxydx+4qTZt97QnYTG7+UmElne fKuWlG5Mma5wvWgL/P88PMjwX/aDHC+lDNjlKyV7gxSqcI6zoPjzSC3Ndz8KGZuZF60d NwVZkXcCHE6PED95FroKntHcJ/AmXTi3U4/CvVmIqoCq87KC1B7v/iMD+AkiXqHWrO+5 3rxGb6lcyLDoNRw4o0V86DQz01sKCH03WnvV3fROOKHwDzOesaKXaMVSKMt1ca3RlU5V Fz8g== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.194.143.50 with SMTP id sb18mr66616326wjb.44.1366793424599; Wed, 24 Apr 2013 01:50:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.216.212.65 with HTTP; Wed, 24 Apr 2013 01:50:24 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <5166CA78.1070504@gmail.com> References: <5166CA78.1070504@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2013 16:50:24 +0800 Message-ID: From: "Cao,Zhen" To: Melinda Shore Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e0115f79a8e025c04db17648c Cc: opsawg@ietf.org Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] Call for adoption, two capwap-related documents X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2013 08:50:26 -0000 --089e0115f79a8e025c04db17648c Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Hi, I read the drafts and support both, based on the need of collecting capwap experience and defining new wireless features. Best regards, zhen On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 10:36 PM, Melinda Shore wrote: > This is a call for working group adoption of two drafts > related to capwap use for 802.11n. > > http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-shao-opsawg-capwap-hybridmac-00.txt > http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-chen-opsawg-capwap-extension-00.txt > > Since the IETF 86 meeting the authors have gotten expert review > of their documents and feel that the documents are ready for > working group adoption. > > We'll be assessing consensus on 25 April 2013. Please indicate > which draft or drafts you're supporting or not supporting. > > Thanks, > > Melinda, Scott, and Chris > _______________________________________________ > OPSAWG mailing list > OPSAWG@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg > --089e0115f79a8e025c04db17648c Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi,=A0

I read the drafts and supp= ort both, based on the need of collecting capwap experience and defining ne= w wireless features.=A0

Best regards,<= /div>
zhen


On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 10:36 PM, Melinda Shore <melin= da.shore@gmail.com> wrote:
This is a call for working group adoption of= two drafts
related to capwap use for 802.11n.

http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-shao-opsawg-capwap-hybridm= ac-00.txt
http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-chen-opsawg-capwap-extensi= on-00.txt

Since the IETF 86 meeting the authors have gotten expert review
of their documents and feel that the documents are ready for
working group adoption.

We'll be assessing consensus on 25 April 2013. =A0Please indicate
which draft or drafts you're supporting or not supporting.

Thanks,

Melinda, Scott, and Chris
_______________________________________________
OPSAWG mailing list
OPSAWG@ietf.org
= https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg

--089e0115f79a8e025c04db17648c-- From melinda.shore@gmail.com Wed Apr 24 09:38:00 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 748DA21F93E3 for ; Wed, 24 Apr 2013 09:38:00 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.284 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.284 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.315, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id nG2HKnE0IbJU for ; Wed, 24 Apr 2013 09:37:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-da0-x22a.google.com (mail-da0-x22a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c00::22a]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C91F721F914C for ; Wed, 24 Apr 2013 09:37:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-da0-f42.google.com with SMTP id n15so971233dad.1 for ; Wed, 24 Apr 2013 09:37:59 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=x-received:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject :references:in-reply-to:x-forwarded-message-id:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=Z10+MjY1eCmEBO6XPeXSmPILb9q22Hn/F14337vtBUo=; b=EWeDRBVgX/KGidF8WVumJiiL786wq/dQNkh/xgE7MFJMvFDIHN3/WvEt+3x9ozHlba 6mWTV5FneVUWYyRmF2FvWQKG2vgFPO1J/DchDg2RO76xW20Eq7a2xGiJVf8eWv6i/ag0 dZtdj1DZE+lBSqUUr2y4oW5OMKs2zBSw2Kxvd4qeKnfiR95ocSyCvjrUh44ksikX43Er MK00zG7iCXPv3y7ojt3fqHOB1W0xc29h6jDTRBfKsj9qp5+5R6Q/z+ktjksCCXWYuW7h fgTRh6ZiU/bzNaJUiyFdOoUFJrCFJUSB9lgm4IzFBh49mnJ8mJ2QqiTEiwzBdZf6w2vo Hl9w== X-Received: by 10.66.157.36 with SMTP id wj4mr20554137pab.88.1366821479345; Wed, 24 Apr 2013 09:37:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from spandex.local (66-230-87-94-rb1.fai.dsl.dynamic.acsalaska.net. [66.230.87.94]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id be7sm4252987pad.20.2013.04.24.09.37.56 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Wed, 24 Apr 2013 09:37:58 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <51780A63.2090008@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2013 08:37:55 -0800 From: Melinda Shore User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130328 Thunderbird/17.0.5 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "opsawg@ietf.org" References: <5166CA78.1070504@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <5166CA78.1070504@gmail.com> X-Forwarded-Message-Id: <5166CA78.1070504@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [OPSAWG] Fwd: Call for adoption, two capwap-related documents X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2013 16:38:00 -0000 This is a reminder that working group last call for these documents closes tomorrow. Please have a look at them if you haven't already done so. Melinda -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Call for adoption, two capwap-related documents Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2013 06:36:40 -0800 From: Melinda Shore To: opsawg@ietf.org This is a call for working group adoption of two drafts related to capwap use for 802.11n. http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-shao-opsawg-capwap-hybridmac-00.txt http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-chen-opsawg-capwap-extension-00.txt Since the IETF 86 meeting the authors have gotten expert review of their documents and feel that the documents are ready for working group adoption. We'll be assessing consensus on 25 April 2013. Please indicate which draft or drafts you're supporting or not supporting. Thanks, Melinda, Scott, and Chris From joelja@bogus.com Wed Apr 24 10:44:26 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E71E621F846C for ; Wed, 24 Apr 2013 10:44:26 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.349 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.349 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.250, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id V3U0LFdwcQMb for ; Wed, 24 Apr 2013 10:44:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nagasaki.bogus.com (nagasaki.bogus.com [IPv6:2001:418:1::81]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7BD0F21F845D for ; Wed, 24 Apr 2013 10:44:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from joels-MacBook-Air.local (host-64-47-153-50.masergy.com [64.47.153.50]) (authenticated bits=0) by nagasaki.bogus.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r3OHiOUJ087716 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 24 Apr 2013 17:44:24 GMT (envelope-from joelja@bogus.com) Message-ID: <517819F3.4050309@bogus.com> Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2013 10:44:19 -0700 From: joel jaeggli User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:21.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/21.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Melinda Shore , "opsawg@ietf.org" References: <5166CA78.1070504@gmail.com> <51780A63.2090008@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <51780A63.2090008@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (nagasaki.bogus.com [147.28.0.81]); Wed, 24 Apr 2013 17:44:25 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] Fwd: Call for adoption, two capwap-related documents X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2013 17:44:27 -0000 On 4/24/13 9:37 AM, Melinda Shore wrote: > This is a reminder that working group last call for these documents > closes tomorrow. Please have a look at them if you haven't already > done so. I don't think this is a WGLC so we should correct the record on that. > Melinda > > > -------- Original Message -------- > Subject: Call for adoption, two capwap-related documents > Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2013 06:36:40 -0800 > From: Melinda Shore > To: opsawg@ietf.org > > This is a call for working group adoption of two drafts > related to capwap use for 802.11n. > > http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-shao-opsawg-capwap-hybridmac-00.txt > http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-chen-opsawg-capwap-extension-00.txt > > Since the IETF 86 meeting the authors have gotten expert review > of their documents and feel that the documents are ready for > working group adoption. > > We'll be assessing consensus on 25 April 2013. Please indicate > which draft or drafts you're supporting or not supporting. > > Thanks, > > Melinda, Scott, and Chris > > > _______________________________________________ > OPSAWG mailing list > OPSAWG@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg > From joelja@bogus.com Wed Apr 24 10:57:36 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0537121F8AA6 for ; Wed, 24 Apr 2013 10:57:36 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.385 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.385 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.214, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Pl4cwBnooEoF for ; Wed, 24 Apr 2013 10:57:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nagasaki.bogus.com (nagasaki.bogus.com [IPv6:2001:418:1::81]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 81DAF21F8A6B for ; Wed, 24 Apr 2013 10:57:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from joels-MacBook-Air.local (host-64-47-153-50.masergy.com [64.47.153.50]) (authenticated bits=0) by nagasaki.bogus.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r3OHvWSL087859 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 24 Apr 2013 17:57:33 GMT (envelope-from joelja@bogus.com) Message-ID: <51781D07.1040308@bogus.com> Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2013 10:57:27 -0700 From: joel jaeggli User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:21.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/21.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Melinda Shore , opsawg@ietf.org, "Benoit Claise (bclaise)" References: <51656616.4070003@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <51656616.4070003@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (nagasaki.bogus.com [147.28.0.81]); Wed, 24 Apr 2013 17:57:33 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] Call for adoption, draft-krishnan-opsawg-large-flow-load-balancing/ X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2013 17:57:36 -0000 Folks, I came to the attention of the Chairs and the ADs during the call for adoption that an IPR disclosure was likely pending on this draft. It has since transpired. The disclosure can be reviewed here. http://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/search/?option=document_search&id_document_tag=draft-krishnan-opsawg-large-flow-load-balancing. In my opinion this is bit late frankly but short of 6701 remedy territory. I have asked the chairs to extend the current call for additional time (which they should chime in on), and I would ask that if the disclosure alters you opinion of the document that you please make your concerns known. I'd like to thank the authors for their candor, and the chairs for bringing this to our attention. Joel On 4/10/13 6:16 AM, Melinda Shore wrote: > This is a call for working group adoption of > http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-krishnan-opsawg-large-flow-load-balancing/. > > The authors report that they've incorporated feedback given at > the IETF 86 meeting, in particular > . information model for flow rebalancing > . operational considerations > > We'll be assessing consensus on 24 April 2013. > > Thanks, > > Melinda > _______________________________________________ > OPSAWG mailing list > OPSAWG@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg > From randy@psg.com Wed Apr 24 15:09:05 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 063DA21F91A0 for ; Wed, 24 Apr 2013 15:09:05 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.475 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.475 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.124, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id tSnGgfEYKrRo for ; Wed, 24 Apr 2013 15:09:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ran.psg.com (ran.psg.com [IPv6:2001:418:1::36]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8CC6521F9164 for ; Wed, 24 Apr 2013 15:09:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=ryuu.psg.com.psg.com) by ran.psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.80.1 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1UV7s7-0005Q3-G7; Wed, 24 Apr 2013 22:09:03 +0000 Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2013 07:09:01 +0900 Message-ID: From: Randy Bush To: Joel Jaeggli In-Reply-To: <51781D07.1040308@bogus.com> References: <51656616.4070003@gmail.com> <51781D07.1040308@bogus.com> User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) Emacs/22.3 Mule/5.0 (SAKAKI) MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI 1.14.7 - "Harue") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Cc: opsawg@ietf.org Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] Call for adoption, draft-krishnan-opsawg-large-flow-load-balancing/ X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2013 22:09:05 -0000 > I came to the attention of the Chairs and the ADs during the call for > adoption that an IPR disclosure was likely pending on this draft. It > has since transpired. > > The disclosure can be reviewed here. > > http://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/search/?option=document_search&id_document_tag=draft-krishnan-opsawg-large-flow-load-balancing. > > In my opinion this is bit late frankly but short of 6701 remedy > territory. I have asked the chairs to extend the current call for > additional time (which they should chime in on), and I would ask that > if the disclosure alters you opinion of the document that you please > make your concerns known. > > I'd like to thank the authors for their candor, and the chairs for > bringing this to our attention. i sent a concerned private email to some folk. one replied The authors have indicated that the stuff on which they've filed the patent application is not the only mechanism that can be used for large flow detection - i.e. this can be implemented without using their to-be-encumbered technology. if this is the case, why not simply remove the to-be-encumbered technology from the document? otherwise, we potentially will waste a lot of time over this ipr claim. randy From brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com Wed Apr 24 16:35:17 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C19321F8CEE for ; Wed, 24 Apr 2013 16:35:17 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -103.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 2iyswxJcWLX5 for ; Wed, 24 Apr 2013 16:35:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pa0-f54.google.com (mail-pa0-f54.google.com [209.85.220.54]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C46E521F8BE4 for ; Wed, 24 Apr 2013 16:35:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pa0-f54.google.com with SMTP id fa11so1487650pad.27 for ; Wed, 24 Apr 2013 16:35:15 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=x-received:message-id:date:from:organization:user-agent :mime-version:to:cc:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=DW/HOrZT+QW9mG34/JX4Lepx2R2q9Hbn2B9SbFAIFY8=; b=aNMNFJCHLQUWGTapRWlcP5PjDBJJe7vvCY1vUNtKHnamXKJnNLU5CV4AsknXTYjlrL sqRTgeKZ5dmPVVBpuFnxzmVFnxcR9Z6KbgCDEGUsHSfV/tuQlfm3FxopZhlRdVldMZFx 43z0mjcnhHFpdfq+CRlEFRb+6SBBla9Qw9gsqYfo26fwUysOmB4nm5Chu5HU7dNQ+lk/ k2FqiymjJBGLed0mTQW7nKkOCShiHMRJsh8VYwszMoj8IASikFo2P3jTYwDJ/0gDdgjd 9hYK4wmqMwGNPMhlEmopk1j+CH75NpMCd9D+VxUM+Z8uiKcHfCn9NRVpKbaWVIRJHnAk F0XQ== X-Received: by 10.66.251.133 with SMTP id zk5mr25550026pac.26.1366846515558; Wed, 24 Apr 2013 16:35:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.64] (122-60-170-151.jetstream.xtra.co.nz. [122.60.170.151]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id wi6sm4736468pbc.22.2013.04.24.16.35.12 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Wed, 24 Apr 2013 16:35:14 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <51786C36.2060308@gmail.com> Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2013 11:35:18 +1200 From: Brian E Carpenter Organization: University of Auckland User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Windows/20070728) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Randy Bush References: <51656616.4070003@gmail.com> <51781D07.1040308@bogus.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: opsawg@ietf.org Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] Call for adoption, draft-krishnan-opsawg-large-flow-load-balancing/ X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2013 23:35:17 -0000 On 25/04/2013 10:09, Randy Bush wrote: >> I came to the attention of the Chairs and the ADs during the call for >> adoption that an IPR disclosure was likely pending on this draft. It >> has since transpired. >> >> The disclosure can be reviewed here. >> >> http://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/search/?option=document_search&id_document_tag=draft-krishnan-opsawg-large-flow-load-balancing. >> >> In my opinion this is bit late frankly but short of 6701 remedy >> territory. I have asked the chairs to extend the current call for >> additional time (which they should chime in on), and I would ask that >> if the disclosure alters you opinion of the document that you please >> make your concerns known. >> >> I'd like to thank the authors for their candor, and the chairs for >> bringing this to our attention. > > i sent a concerned private email to some folk. one replied > > The authors have indicated that the stuff on which they've filed the > patent application is not the only mechanism that can be used for > large flow detection - i.e. this can be implemented without using > their to-be-encumbered technology. > > if this is the case, why not simply remove the to-be-encumbered > technology from the document? I agree; it's not worth the pain, for an example algorithm in an Informational document. (The same goes for draft-krishnan-ipfix-flow-aware-packet-sampling.) Brian > > otherwise, we potentially will waste a lot of time over this ipr claim. > > randy > _______________________________________________ > OPSAWG mailing list > OPSAWG@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg > From ramk@Brocade.com Wed Apr 24 16:40:38 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F331D21F8DCF for ; Wed, 24 Apr 2013 16:40:37 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.265 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.265 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, IP_NOT_FRIENDLY=0.334, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id fd-lbZkqpIb7 for ; Wed, 24 Apr 2013 16:40:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx0a-000f0801.pphosted.com (mx0a-000f0801.pphosted.com [67.231.144.122]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7817521F8A6B for ; Wed, 24 Apr 2013 16:40:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pps.filterd (m0000542 [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-000f0801.pphosted.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with SMTP id r3ONb5DI012433; Wed, 24 Apr 2013 16:40:36 -0700 Received: from hq1wp-exchub01.corp.brocade.com ([144.49.131.13]) by mx0a-000f0801.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 1bx4w6gnpx-1 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT); Wed, 24 Apr 2013 16:40:36 -0700 Received: from HQ1WP-EXHUB02.corp.brocade.com (10.70.38.14) by HQ1WP-EXCHUB01.corp.brocade.com (10.70.36.99) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.2.309.2; Wed, 24 Apr 2013 16:40:36 -0700 Received: from HQ1-EXCH01.corp.brocade.com ([fe80::8c73:93bf:41b4:1443]) by HQ1WP-EXHUB02.corp.brocade.com ([fe80::e1f4:a4c8:696b:3780%10]) with mapi; Wed, 24 Apr 2013 16:40:34 -0700 From: ramki Krishnan To: Brian E Carpenter , Randy Bush Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2013 16:40:29 -0700 Thread-Topic: [OPSAWG] Call for adoption, draft-krishnan-opsawg-large-flow-load-balancing/ Thread-Index: Ac5BRG+tH5tuj+AET4GRklqm4l2x8QAAJDzQ Message-ID: References: <51656616.4070003@gmail.com> <51781D07.1040308@bogus.com> <51786C36.2060308@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <51786C36.2060308@gmail.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:5.10.8626, 1.0.431, 0.0.0000 definitions=2013-04-24_08:2013-04-24, 2013-04-24, 1970-01-01 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 spamscore=0 suspectscore=2 phishscore=0 adultscore=0 bulkscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=7.0.1-1211240000 definitions=main-1304240227 Cc: "opsawg@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] Call for adoption, draft-krishnan-opsawg-large-flow-load-balancing/ X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2013 23:40:38 -0000 Thanks Brian, agreed. Thanks, Ramki -----Original Message----- From: opsawg-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:opsawg-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of= Brian E Carpenter Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2013 4:35 PM To: Randy Bush Cc: opsawg@ietf.org Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] Call for adoption, draft-krishnan-opsawg-large-flow-l= oad-balancing/ On 25/04/2013 10:09, Randy Bush wrote: >> I came to the attention of the Chairs and the ADs during the call for=20 >> adoption that an IPR disclosure was likely pending on this draft. It=20 >> has since transpired. >> >> The disclosure can be reviewed here. >> >> http://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/search/?option=3Ddocument_search&id_docu= ment_tag=3Ddraft-krishnan-opsawg-large-flow-load-balancing. >> >> In my opinion this is bit late frankly but short of 6701 remedy=20 >> territory. I have asked the chairs to extend the current call for=20 >> additional time (which they should chime in on), and I would ask that=20 >> if the disclosure alters you opinion of the document that you please=20 >> make your concerns known. >> >> I'd like to thank the authors for their candor, and the chairs for=20 >> bringing this to our attention. >=20 > i sent a concerned private email to some folk. one replied >=20 > The authors have indicated that the stuff on which they've filed the > patent application is not the only mechanism that can be used for > large flow detection - i.e. this can be implemented without using > their to-be-encumbered technology. >=20 > if this is the case, why not simply remove the to-be-encumbered=20 > technology from the document? I agree; it's not worth the pain, for an example algorithm in an Informatio= nal document. (The same goes for draft-krishnan-ipfix-flow-aware-packet-sampling.) Brian >=20 > otherwise, we potentially will waste a lot of time over this ipr claim. >=20 > randy > _______________________________________________ > OPSAWG mailing list > OPSAWG@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg >=20 _______________________________________________ OPSAWG mailing list OPSAWG@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg From maxpassion@gmail.com Wed Apr 24 19:54:48 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 980F721F8A41 for ; Wed, 24 Apr 2013 19:54:48 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.598 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id amY2BaBQglCY for ; Wed, 24 Apr 2013 19:54:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-vc0-f182.google.com (mail-vc0-f182.google.com [209.85.220.182]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 84EF921F86F4 for ; Wed, 24 Apr 2013 19:54:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-vc0-f182.google.com with SMTP id ht11so2435388vcb.13 for ; Wed, 24 Apr 2013 19:54:42 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=gajM4Z6J2dZujlZlLWzXApa+t6aid5pJWfr+7+afIFk=; b=LHZcVnBfvSd7ZlUUjfGtz7aNzu+YRytBKkAx3WfnwQYun6oWDZRsg5bIeJJZF3yAg/ yQ922CxbZT6isQehtAWjQscCv8mREN9fpDWzv1HXPfnVqfq3CZo/NafG5XnSG9f1XOWp vLyPzo3qFza6ES80tdMsOi2k7xHvTkDidMlIr1koUtA/3a3bdJnXli88HVqW4tbeF6mm +yt8XVA0BEliefiNCNq8ccXrm9KcdKiodyryzxd3UYKs2AW/elAoj6mezHI5rzuBBMc6 Y1+32Dfj7sLYDfVlqld95CMP8t3Mi1GkzHEVb1zxJY1CvVW4+NB9D5oumOJsyZckBedt xN5Q== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.220.8.75 with SMTP id g11mr26228067vcg.60.1366858482599; Wed, 24 Apr 2013 19:54:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.220.13.201 with HTTP; Wed, 24 Apr 2013 19:54:42 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <5166CA78.1070504@gmail.com> References: <5166CA78.1070504@gmail.com> Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2013 10:54:42 +0800 Message-ID: From: liu dapeng To: Melinda Shore Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=bcaec54b456850536504db268aab Cc: opsawg@ietf.org Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] Call for adoption, two capwap-related documents X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2013 02:54:48 -0000 --bcaec54b456850536504db268aab Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 I support the adoption of those two drafts. There are some comments that intent to improve the quality of the drafts, I think the authors can update it after the adoption. Thanks, Dapeng Liu 2013/4/11 Melinda Shore > This is a call for working group adoption of two drafts > related to capwap use for 802.11n. > > http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-shao-opsawg-capwap-hybridmac-00.txt > http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-chen-opsawg-capwap-extension-00.txt > > Since the IETF 86 meeting the authors have gotten expert review > of their documents and feel that the documents are ready for > working group adoption. > > We'll be assessing consensus on 25 April 2013. Please indicate > which draft or drafts you're supporting or not supporting. > > Thanks, > > Melinda, Scott, and Chris > _______________________________________________ > OPSAWG mailing list > OPSAWG@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg > -- ------ Best Regards, Dapeng Liu --bcaec54b456850536504db268aab Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I support the adoption of those two drafts. There are some= comments that intent to improve the quality of the drafts, I think the aut= hors can update it after the adoption.

Thanks,=
Dapeng Liu


2013/4/11 Melinda Shore <melinda.shore@gmail.c= om>
This is a call for working group adoption of= two drafts
related to capwap use for 802.11n.

http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-shao-opsawg-capwap-hybridm= ac-00.txt
http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-chen-opsawg-capwap-extensi= on-00.txt

Since the IETF 86 meeting the authors have gotten expert review
of their documents and feel that the documents are ready for
working group adoption.

We'll be assessing consensus on 25 April 2013. =A0Please indicate
which draft or drafts you're supporting or not supporting.

Thanks,

Melinda, Scott, and Chris
_______________________________________________
OPSAWG mailing list
OPSAWG@ietf.org
= https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg



--

------Best Regards,
Dapeng Liu
--bcaec54b456850536504db268aab-- From bclaise@cisco.com Thu Apr 25 06:43:30 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD72621F961F for ; Thu, 25 Apr 2013 06:43:30 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -10.529 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.529 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.070, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id oaGZHgFWo9BT for ; Thu, 25 Apr 2013 06:43:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from av-tac-bru.cisco.com (weird-brew.cisco.com [144.254.15.118]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E4F6421F9627 for ; Thu, 25 Apr 2013 06:43:29 -0700 (PDT) X-TACSUNS: Virus Scanned Received: from strange-brew.cisco.com (localhost.cisco.com [127.0.0.1]) by av-tac-bru.cisco.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id r3PDhOCd009992; Thu, 25 Apr 2013 15:43:24 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [10.60.67.84] (ams-bclaise-8913.cisco.com [10.60.67.84]) by strange-brew.cisco.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id r3PDgmrB018941; Thu, 25 Apr 2013 15:42:58 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <517932D8.2000809@cisco.com> Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2013 15:42:48 +0200 From: Benoit Claise User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130328 Thunderbird/17.0.5 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Randy Bush References: <51656616.4070003@gmail.com> <51781D07.1040308@bogus.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: opsawg@ietf.org Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] Call for adoption, draft-krishnan-opsawg-large-flow-load-balancing/ X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2013 13:43:30 -0000 On 25/04/2013 00:09, Randy Bush wrote: >> I came to the attention of the Chairs and the ADs during the call for >> adoption that an IPR disclosure was likely pending on this draft. It >> has since transpired. >> >> The disclosure can be reviewed here. >> >> http://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/search/?option=document_search&id_document_tag=draft-krishnan-opsawg-large-flow-load-balancing. >> >> In my opinion this is bit late frankly but short of 6701 remedy >> territory. I have asked the chairs to extend the current call for >> additional time (which they should chime in on), and I would ask that >> if the disclosure alters you opinion of the document that you please >> make your concerns known. >> >> I'd like to thank the authors for their candor, and the chairs for >> bringing this to our attention. > i sent a concerned private email to some folk. one replied > > The authors have indicated that the stuff on which they've filed the > patent application is not the only mechanism that can be used for > large flow detection - i.e. this can be implemented without using > their to-be-encumbered technology. > > if this is the case, why not simply remove the to-be-encumbered > technology from the document? While it's not the IETF business to validate IPRs, let me stress one line from the IPR page Reasonable and Non-Discriminatory License to All Implementers with Possible Royalty/Fee. Regards, Benoit > > otherwise, we potentially will waste a lot of time over this ipr claim. From rzhang.ietf@gmail.com Fri Apr 26 05:42:30 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A2DF21F9919 for ; Fri, 26 Apr 2013 05:42:30 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.598 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id AObGOz3rxiA2 for ; Fri, 26 Apr 2013 05:42:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-oa0-f67.google.com (mail-oa0-f67.google.com [209.85.219.67]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A0EA21F9918 for ; Fri, 26 Apr 2013 05:42:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-oa0-f67.google.com with SMTP id o17so913928oag.6 for ; Fri, 26 Apr 2013 05:42:26 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=gKVxOU/iLCkXXnllpo+a46auK5EYPqUE63wkQ+Q8/tc=; b=dO44rpLaAdaLQpvgRu4cxPwiDPi+wbiBk8Qe034Sgq7qHLtxJRC2rOc7MB2jKSx+lr fMUbsh3CNnqy3BqhrHbSq2SdJZdIXwT6MkcW5gUVqV0vMa7zzypIZgYToU6Uy2TBwJlv TMJ67HJoQjIr5XfNTnoFrPLp9ksqTg4SwGLjCUqKSMb0tinRwad/64jttPEFdYtTOn6C DmtQqWS0k2boZIA91+dGDX+kLeo4f+fFDZ+BUCxI5cuTaav72iJEZj7ITlbzPp/dqdqX F+D404r+gg9FagLOA8xSPXDYka9fMToJOrQLSo+PbcvleJ6kY2QGbwdL/6vaGNhUgFel RomQ== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.60.136.129 with SMTP id qa1mr17839403oeb.47.1366980146730; Fri, 26 Apr 2013 05:42:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.76.153.200 with HTTP; Fri, 26 Apr 2013 05:42:26 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2013 20:42:26 +0800 Message-ID: From: Rong Zhang To: OPSAWG@ietf.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b339f1f0f9d8a04db42de05 Subject: [OPSAWG] Fw: Call for adoption, two capwap-related documents X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2013 12:48:58 -0000 --047d7b339f1f0f9d8a04db42de05 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Hello all, I think these two drafts need a revision such as IANA, but that could be done after adoped as the working group document or during the submission the 00 version. I support the adoption. -Rong. GSTA, China Telecom >This is a call for working group adoption of two drafts >related to capwap use for 802.11n. > >http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-shao-opsawg-capwap-hybridmac-00.txt >http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-chen-opsawg-capwap-extension-00.txt > >Since the IETF 86 meeting the authors have gotten expert review >of their documents and feel that the documents are ready for >working group adoption. > >We'll be assessing consensus on 25 April 2013. Please indicate >which draft or drafts you're supporting or not supporting. > >Thanks, > >Melinda, Scott, and Chris --047d7b339f1f0f9d8a04db42de05 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hello all,
=A0
I think these two = drafts need a revision such as IANA, but that could be done after adoped as= the working group document or during the submission the 00 version.
=
=A0
I support the adoption.
=A0
-Rong.
<= div>GSTA, China Telecom
=A0
=A0
>This is a= call for working group adoption of two drafts
>related to capwap us= e for 802.11n.
>
>http://www.ietf.org/= id/draft-shao-opsawg-capwap-hybridmac-00.txt
>http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-chen-opsawg-cap= wap-extension-00.txt
>
>Since the IETF 86 meeting the authors have gotten expert review=
>of their documents and feel that the documents are ready for
>= ;working group adoption.
>
>We'll be assessing consensus on= 25 April 2013.=A0 Please indicate
>which draft or drafts you're supporting or not supporting.
><= br>>Thanks,
>
>Melinda, Scott, and Chris
--047d7b339f1f0f9d8a04db42de05-- From rzhang.ietf@gmail.com Sat Apr 27 01:14:55 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD0FC21F9DB0 for ; Sat, 27 Apr 2013 01:14:54 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.522 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.522 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.076, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id mkO-32cmpxTx for ; Sat, 27 Apr 2013 01:14:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-ob0-f195.google.com (mail-ob0-f195.google.com [209.85.214.195]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6189D21F9DB2 for ; Sat, 27 Apr 2013 01:14:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ob0-f195.google.com with SMTP id tb18so1051771obb.2 for ; Sat, 27 Apr 2013 01:14:43 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=WkccK0W9AeVRFF0wx43oPNtgJIoHr0YX1zYrJggjdOE=; b=Yg8V62rST/sBDiibiXShGhEBGsOgRwin9haCZoAZXuXe75KhQCbc+yw6n6IEo08Qns GhVh7QYlKKCwPAJaqJXiSYd8MhUtJEYI4i0LXEhdf6SO3ZPoPA/xHAtin/FOW2FKhRrv o9SMUkq50XeoGRVfG78KlRKSPUJmAJt0zPFaG4raFA0GxIjaQJGj9nKC5GEinhHszDNl T2bBUQXmTK/VKmDqlTo96bAOKMQOWP5mdOFrHKB2ZcxIdrQ9KxC+7QlUt5eiQf5/XNNH J/IQX3Jx6WMje8LUA7CcCuEi2NrKAcLMednkEEqOG8uATPnA5gJMhOO4o2JwQC1GiSyJ AHXw== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.60.59.74 with SMTP id x10mr19603871oeq.48.1367050483482; Sat, 27 Apr 2013 01:14:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.76.153.200 with HTTP; Sat, 27 Apr 2013 01:14:43 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 27 Apr 2013 16:14:43 +0800 Message-ID: From: Rong Zhang To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e0116143675456704db533e16 Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] Call for adoption, two capwap-related documents X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 27 Apr 2013 08:14:55 -0000 --089e0116143675456704db533e16 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Hi, I support both drafts. Thanks Rong --089e0116143675456704db533e16 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi, I =A0support both drafts.

Thanks
Rong
--089e0116143675456704db533e16-- From rzhang.ietf@gmail.com Sat Apr 27 03:31:58 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3193021F9801 for ; Sat, 27 Apr 2013 03:31:58 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.548 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.548 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.050, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 88ill6n7yz+A for ; Sat, 27 Apr 2013 03:31:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-oa0-f65.google.com (mail-oa0-f65.google.com [209.85.219.65]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7522021F97FE for ; Sat, 27 Apr 2013 03:31:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-oa0-f65.google.com with SMTP id l20so1140461oag.8 for ; Sat, 27 Apr 2013 03:31:57 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :subject:from:to:content-type; bh=eN4dRJVi3EEqx+3hy6zmWHHE01allFQEM0uGFNvbzFs=; b=0Ai60WTH+LipVM6aN9CrL9GSiIIAzSGUtbxBrVipfxLKUPeYUGzmziJP52HwB+2Sxf UZ4hc8Xz6ihvHZhKEfwdjs86QIeWG44DYboaZD2N7pjXkFBJ5bbffIdn3eGnllPLNiAv MKDjyKDg30wVcjLHtvV3XfoCOtUl3LYit1c+P+s9JMF23uoVc/IWISQ0cDTtGSEmlSda zDk/BZMGETuVgff7ZXRvGFewG8mR84r2HK36UhMhh9IOayBrQ9gCcBpB/ZwbKrkXyW61 Ce5fPCaJFsnLDSvJPhQcW9nF04EVUpXQSVZmDewtVXZ95yRJg87uJN+YVr1RfzjS2nLd C7zg== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.182.64.74 with SMTP id m10mr19214496obs.61.1367058717040; Sat, 27 Apr 2013 03:31:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.76.153.200 with HTTP; Sat, 27 Apr 2013 03:31:56 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Sat, 27 Apr 2013 18:31:56 +0800 Message-ID: From: Rong Zhang To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=14dae93b5e3637676b04db5529f5 Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] Call for adoption, two capwap-related documents X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 27 Apr 2013 10:31:58 -0000 --14dae93b5e3637676b04db5529f5 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sorry, in my company GSTA email, my previous post didn't showing well, so I try to post it again. I contact with OPSAWG email administrator before, he even can't solve my GSTA email issue. Hope no disturb. Thanks -Rong On Sat, Apr 27, 2013 at 4:14 PM, Rong Zhang wrote: > Hi, I support both drafts. > > Thanks > Rong > --14dae93b5e3637676b04db5529f5 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Sorry, in my company GSTA email, my previous post did= n't showing well, so I try to post it again.
I contact with O= PSAWG email administrator before, he even can't solve my=A0GSTA=A0email= issue.
=A0
Hope no disturb. Thanks
=A0
-Rong


On S= at, Apr 27, 2013 at 4:14 PM, Rong Zhang <rzhang.ietf@gmail.com>= wrote:
Hi, I =A0support both draft= s.

Thanks
Rong

--14dae93b5e3637676b04db5529f5-- From johnsonhammond1@hushmail.com Sat Apr 27 16:37:44 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E239C21F9957 for ; Sat, 27 Apr 2013 16:37:44 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.475 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.475 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.124, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id VGE8cWLvZ5XO for ; Sat, 27 Apr 2013 16:37:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp5.hushmail.com (smtp5a.hushmail.com [65.39.178.235]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D947F21F9965 for ; Sat, 27 Apr 2013 16:37:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp5.hushmail.com (smtp5a.hushmail.com [65.39.178.235]) by smtp5.hushmail.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 7FCFC580AC for ; Sat, 27 Apr 2013 17:32:24 +0000 (UTC) X-hush-relay-time: 213 X-hush-relay-id: b1bd903faba185ee07e5a0ed3a1fde37 Received: from smtp.hushmail.com (w5.hushmail.com [65.39.178.80]) by smtp5.hushmail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP for ; Sat, 27 Apr 2013 17:32:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.hushmail.com (Postfix, from userid 99) id 16262E6736; Sat, 27 Apr 2013 17:32:23 +0000 (UTC) MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Sat, 27 Apr 2013 13:32:22 -0400 To: opsawg@ietf.org From: johnsonhammond1@hushmail.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Message-Id: <20130427173223.16262E6736@smtp.hushmail.com> Subject: [OPSAWG] Biggest Fake Conference in Computer Science X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 27 Apr 2013 23:37:45 -0000 Biggest Fake Conference in Computer Science We are researchers from different parts of the world and conducted a study on the world’s biggest bogus computer science conference WORLDCOMP ( http://sites.google.com/site/worlddump1 ) organized by Prof. Hamid Arabnia from University of Georgia, USA. We submitted a fake paper to WORLDCOMP 2011 and again (the same paper with a modified title) to WORLDCOMP 2012. This paper had numerous fundamental mistakes. Sample statements from that paper include: (1). Binary logic is fuzzy logic and vice versa (2). Pascal developed fuzzy logic (3). Object oriented languages do not exhibit any polymorphism or inheritance (4). TCP and IP are synonyms and are part of OSI model (5). Distributed systems deal with only one computer (6). Laptop is an example for a super computer (7). Operating system is an example for computer hardware Also, our paper did not express any conceptual meaning. However, it was accepted both the times without any modifications (and without any reviews) and we were invited to submit the final paper and a payment of $500+ fee to present the paper. We decided to use the fee for better purposes than making Prof. Hamid Arabnia (Chairman of WORLDCOMP) rich. After that, we received few reminders from WORLDCOMP to pay the fee but we never responded. We MUST say that you should look at the above website if you have any thoughts to submit a paper to WORLDCOMP. DBLP and other indexing agencies have stopped indexing WORLDCOMP’s proceedings since 2011 due to its fakeness. See http://www.informatik.uni-trier.de/~ley/db/conf/icai/index.html for of one of the conferences of WORLDCOMP and notice that there is no listing after 2010. See Section 2 of http://sites.google.com/site/dumpconf for comments from well-known researchers about WORLDCOMP. The status of your WORLDCOMP papers can be changed from scientific to other (i.e., junk or non-technical) at any time. Better not to have a paper than having it in WORLDCOMP and spoil the resume and peace of mind forever! Our study revealed that WORLDCOMP is a money making business, using University of Georgia mask, for Prof. Hamid Arabnia. He is throwing out a small chunk of that money (around 20 dollars per paper published in WORLDCOMP’s proceedings) to his puppet (Mr. Ashu Solo or A.M.G. Solo) who publicizes WORLDCOMP and also defends it at various forums, using fake/anonymous names. The puppet uses fake names and defames other conferences to divert traffic to WORLDCOMP. He also makes anonymous phone calls and tries to threaten the critiques of WORLDCOMP (See Item 7 of Section 5 of above website). That is, the puppet does all his best to get a maximum number of papers published at WORLDCOMP to get more money into his (and Prof. Hamid Arabnia’s) pockets. Monte Carlo Resort (the venue of WORLDCOMP for more than 10 years, until 2012) has refused to provide the venue for WORLDCOMP’13 because of the fears of their image being tarnished due to WORLDCOMP’s fraudulent activities. That is why WORLDCOMP’13 is taking place at a different resort. WORLDCOMP will not be held after 2013. The draft paper submission deadline is over but still there are no committee members, no reviewers, and there is no conference Chairman. The only contact details available on WORLDCOMP’s website is just an email address! Let us make a direct request to Prof. Hamid arabnia: publish all reviews for all the papers (after blocking identifiable details) since 2000 conference. Reveal the names and affiliations of all the reviewers (for each year) and how many papers each reviewer had reviewed on average. We also request him to look at the Open Challenge (Section 6) at https://sites.google.com/site/moneycomp1 Sorry for posting to multiple lists. Spreading the word is the only way to stop this bogus conference. Please forward this message to other mailing lists and people. We are shocked with Prof. Hamid Arabnia and his puppet’s activities http://worldcomp-fake-bogus.blogspot.com Search Google using the keyword worldcomp fake for additional links. From wesley.george@twcable.com Mon Apr 29 08:24:38 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0CF7321F9D98 for ; Mon, 29 Apr 2013 08:24:38 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.463 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.463 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_MODEMCABLE=0.768, HOST_EQ_MODEMCABLE=1.368, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id T2JiRXCllpP2 for ; Mon, 29 Apr 2013 08:24:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cdpipgw01.twcable.com (cdpipgw01.twcable.com [165.237.59.22]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7956521F9D42 for ; Mon, 29 Apr 2013 08:24:37 -0700 (PDT) X-SENDER-IP: 10.136.163.12 X-SENDER-REPUTATION: None X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.87,574,1363147200"; d="scan'208";a="66433020" Received: from unknown (HELO PRVPEXHUB03.corp.twcable.com) ([10.136.163.12]) by cdpipgw01.twcable.com with ESMTP/TLS/RC4-MD5; 29 Apr 2013 11:24:16 -0400 Received: from PRVPEXVS15.corp.twcable.com ([10.136.163.79]) by PRVPEXHUB03.corp.twcable.com ([10.136.163.12]) with mapi; Mon, 29 Apr 2013 11:24:07 -0400 From: "George, Wes" To: Melinda Shore , "opsawg@ietf.org" Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2013 11:24:06 -0400 Thread-Topic: [OPSAWG] Call for adoption, two capwap-related documents Thread-Index: Ac42wgClGAxf9e6zTqyUk0L41CB/zQOKb33A Message-ID: <2671C6CDFBB59E47B64C10B3E0BD59230430C292B2@PRVPEXVS15.corp.twcable.com> References: <5166CA78.1070504@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <5166CA78.1070504@gmail.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] Call for adoption, two capwap-related documents X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2013 15:24:38 -0000 Apologies on being a few days late... In scanning through these documents, I'm left wondering why capwap-extensio= n doesn't formally replace (-bis) 5416 or at least update it, and why it's = an informational document. This seems more like a proposed standard update,= making me wonder if it perhaps belongs elsewhere (i.e. not an ops group). Similarly, capwap-hybrid-mac seems like an update to 5415 to correct the la= ck of clear distinction between AP and AC that has been proven necessary fo= r interoperability. This also seems like a proposed standard since it is ap= parently necessary to implement this to improve interoperability. I think we need to sort out the intent of these documents before we determi= ne if OpsAWG is the right fit. Thanks, Wes George > -----Original Message----- > From: opsawg-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:opsawg-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf > Of Melinda Shore > Sent: Thursday, April 11, 2013 10:37 AM > To: opsawg@ietf.org > Subject: [OPSAWG] Call for adoption, two capwap-related documents > > This is a call for working group adoption of two drafts > related to capwap use for 802.11n. > > http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-shao-opsawg-capwap-hybridmac-00.txt > http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-chen-opsawg-capwap-extension-00.txt > > Since the IETF 86 meeting the authors have gotten expert review > of their documents and feel that the documents are ready for > working group adoption. > > We'll be assessing consensus on 25 April 2013. Please indicate > which draft or drafts you're supporting or not supporting. > > Thanks, > > Melinda, Scott, and Chris > _______________________________________________ > OPSAWG mailing list > OPSAWG@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg This E-mail and any of its attachments may contain Time Warner Cable propri= etary information, which is privileged, confidential, or subject to copyrig= ht belonging to Time Warner Cable. This E-mail is intended solely for the u= se of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you are not the= intended recipient of this E-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissem= ination, distribution, copying, or action taken in relation to the contents= of and attachments to this E-mail is strictly prohibited and may be unlawf= ul. If you have received this E-mail in error, please notify the sender imm= ediately and permanently delete the original and any copy of this E-mail an= d any printout. From skhanna@brocade.com Wed Apr 24 17:33:54 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 64F9C21F905B for ; Wed, 24 Apr 2013 17:33:54 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.265 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.265 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, IP_NOT_FRIENDLY=0.334, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Grdly0BKLXXy for ; Wed, 24 Apr 2013 17:33:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx0a-000f0801.pphosted.com (mx0a-000f0801.pphosted.com [67.231.144.122]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EDDD421F8B60 for ; Wed, 24 Apr 2013 17:33:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pps.filterd (m0000542 [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-000f0801.pphosted.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with SMTP id r3P0VxWh028986 for ; Wed, 24 Apr 2013 17:33:53 -0700 Received: from hq1wp-exchub01.corp.brocade.com ([144.49.131.13]) by mx0a-000f0801.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 1bx4w6gpe1-1 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT) for ; Wed, 24 Apr 2013 17:33:53 -0700 Received: from HQ1WP-EXHUB02.corp.brocade.com (10.70.38.14) by HQ1WP-EXCHUB01.corp.brocade.com (10.70.36.99) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.2.309.2; Wed, 24 Apr 2013 17:33:52 -0700 Received: from HQ1-EXCH03.corp.brocade.com ([fe80::411c:2971:c59e:5e4a]) by HQ1WP-EXHUB02.corp.brocade.com ([fe80::e1f4:a4c8:696b:3780%10]) with mapi; Wed, 24 Apr 2013 17:33:51 -0700 From: Sanjay Khanna To: "opsawg@ietf.org" Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2013 17:33:47 -0700 Thread-Topic: [OPSAWG] Call for adoption, draft-krishnan-opsawg-large-flow-load-balancing/ Thread-Index: Ac417apip45aKsUHR1qclkHuvoSelgAQ6LEQAAAvQ4AAA33EgAAEvvQwATShwtABiYfPYA== Message-ID: <01BBBD108B29DC41B5F97F1B7F458E08280FE90A32@HQ1-EXCH03.corp.brocade.com> References: <51656616.4070003@gmail.com> <01BBBD108B29DC41B5F97F1B7F458E08280FD4D184@HQ1-EXCH03.corp.brocade.com> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:5.10.8626, 1.0.431, 0.0.0000 definitions=2013-04-24_08:2013-04-24, 2013-04-24, 1970-01-01 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 spamscore=0 suspectscore=2 phishscore=0 adultscore=0 bulkscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=7.0.1-1211240000 definitions=main-1304240244 X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 29 Apr 2013 17:05:04 -0700 Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] Call for adoption, draft-krishnan-opsawg-large-flow-load-balancing/ X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2013 00:33:54 -0000 Folks, I am supporting the draft as a co-author. We have seen problems in carrier = networks where large flows can trump small flows. This draft is presenting = some solutions to the problem which will be beneficial in solving this prob= lem in provider networks.=20 Regards, Sanjay -----Original Message----- From: opsawg-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:opsawg-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of= Melinda Shore Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2013 6:16 AM To: opsawg@ietf.org Subject: [OPSAWG] Call for adoption, draft-krishnan-opsawg-large-flow-load-= balancing/ This is a call for working group adoption of http://datatracker.ietf.org/do= c/draft-krishnan-opsawg-large-flow-load-balancing/. The authors report that they've incorporated feedback given at the IETF 86 = meeting, in particular . information model for flow rebalancing . operational considerations We'll be assessing consensus on 24 April 2013. Thanks, Melinda _______________________________________________ OPSAWG mailing list OPSAWG@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg From rzhang.ietf@gmail.com Tue Apr 30 01:51:33 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 47D4A21F9904 for ; Tue, 30 Apr 2013 01:51:33 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.598 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id qNjxJEDBLOoN for ; Tue, 30 Apr 2013 01:51:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-oa0-f68.google.com (mail-oa0-f68.google.com [209.85.219.68]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 022DA21F98B9 for ; Tue, 30 Apr 2013 01:51:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-oa0-f68.google.com with SMTP id k14so88764oag.7 for ; Tue, 30 Apr 2013 01:51:20 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :subject:from:to:content-type; bh=8SPahF7+VEH8FKHcjzHoYT4tA/SGsgiSsCdrkBiGjrE=; b=cOhHaS0z5iu2J4D06m7Ng42Flu3uyTwk4ta1EpQMkcB/TQJIKErmyK1szA1UOpoYGp 7pquLdbho5hGS+uLYjBmkKoEVE8IeBVR6/r2ZkCjKYFyOAfZx0aMS0p1XJcxz1oytKYU C5Zoub15zxDK5JJ2QP83Br3Ef0iEg4P2Y8ts5MR7H3qvfDgmGqVoDLn4eBHy7hOR84z8 phYwZchgao3QaGJ8x4wu6NwBnKdeFDdcvVQl8OJZ4avsHoZGKhaK9AfUNPzS9AlJ3BRk vBbi+taUyedM1NTUSnuLY1pbSxfZitLBHlx6e2dOKBmVQlRGzEO40ab/ok7mVa7dI1Ae vuqw== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.182.119.161 with SMTP id kv1mr10221412obb.19.1367311880694; Tue, 30 Apr 2013 01:51:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.76.153.200 with HTTP; Tue, 30 Apr 2013 01:51:20 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <2671C6CDFBB59E47B64C10B3E0BD59230430C292B2@PRVPEXVS15.corp.twcable.com> References: <5166CA78.1070504@gmail.com> <2671C6CDFBB59E47B64C10B3E0BD59230430C292B2@PRVPEXVS15.corp.twcable.com> Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2013 16:51:20 +0800 Message-ID: From: Rong Zhang To: "George, Wes" , opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com, melinda.shore@gmail.com Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c2f448f231f504db901a1e Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] Call for adoption, two capwap-related documents X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2013 08:51:33 -0000 --001a11c2f448f231f504db901a1e Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Hello Wes George, Thanks for your kind comments, for 1) your comments is right, same as other comment as well, we will update capwap-extension to standard track other than informational document once submit to 00 WG document if it is adopted. Since it is only about 11n part other than update original 5416document, so we didn't use "bis". for 2) RFC 5415 has recommended Split and Local, capwap-hybrid-mac is not trying to obsolete them, but define a new model in the middle, it does not write the normaltive text, so it won't belongs to the scope of standard. Anyway, we appreciate your comments. Best regards, -Rong On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 11:24 PM, George, Wes wrote: > Apologies on being a few days late... > > In scanning through these documents, I'm left wondering why > capwap-extension doesn't formally replace (-bis) 5416 or at least update > it, and why it's an informational document. This seems more like a proposed > standard update, making me wonder if it perhaps belongs elsewhere (i.e. not > an ops group). > > Similarly, capwap-hybrid-mac seems like an update to 5415 to correct the > lack of clear distinction between AP and AC that has been proven necessary > for interoperability. This also seems like a proposed standard since it is > apparently necessary to implement this to improve interoperability. > > I think we need to sort out the intent of these documents before we > determine if OpsAWG is the right fit. > > Thanks, > > Wes George > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: opsawg-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:opsawg-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf > > Of Melinda Shore > > Sent: Thursday, April 11, 2013 10:37 AM > > To: opsawg@ietf.org > > Subject: [OPSAWG] Call for adoption, two capwap-related documents > > > > This is a call for working group adoption of two drafts > > related to capwap use for 802.11n. > > > > http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-shao-opsawg-capwap-hybridmac-00.txt > > http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-chen-opsawg-capwap-extension-00.txt > > > > Since the IETF 86 meeting the authors have gotten expert review > > of their documents and feel that the documents are ready for > > working group adoption. > > > > We'll be assessing consensus on 25 April 2013. Please indicate > > which draft or drafts you're supporting or not supporting. > > > > Thanks, > > > > Melinda, Scott, and Chris > > _______________________________________________ > > OPSAWG mailing list > > OPSAWG@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg > > This E-mail and any of its attachments may contain Time Warner Cable > proprietary information, which is privileged, confidential, or subject to > copyright belonging to Time Warner Cable. This E-mail is intended solely > for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you > are not the intended recipient of this E-mail, you are hereby notified that > any dissemination, distribution, copying, or action taken in relation to > the contents of and attachments to this E-mail is strictly prohibited and > may be unlawful. If you have received this E-mail in error, please notify > the sender immediately and permanently delete the original and any copy of > this E-mail and any printout. > _______________________________________________ > OPSAWG mailing list > OPSAWG@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg > --001a11c2f448f231f504db901a1e Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hello Wes George,
=A0
Thanks for your kind= comments,
for 1) your comments is right, s= ame as other comment=A0as well, we will update=A0capwap-extension to standa= rd track=A0other than informational document once=A0submit to 00 WG documen= t if it is adopted. Since it=A0is only about 11n part other than update=A0o= riginal 5416document, so we didn't use "bis".=A0
for 2)=A0 RFC 5415=A0has recommended Split= and Local, capwap-hybrid-mac is not trying to obsolete them, but define a = new model in the middle, it does not=A0write the normaltive text, so it=A0w= on't=A0belongs to the scope of=A0standard.
=A0
Anyway,=A0 w= e appreciate your comments.
=A0
Best regards,
=A0
-Rong
On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 11:24 PM,= George, Wes <wesley.george@twcable.com> wrote:
<= blockquote style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;padding-left:1ex;border-left-c= olor:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid" class= =3D"gmail_quote"> Apologies on being a few days late...

In scanning through these documents, I'm left wondering why capwap-exte= nsion doesn't formally replace (-bis) 5416 or at least update it, and w= hy it's an informational document. This seems more like a proposed stan= dard update, making me wonder if it perhaps belongs elsewhere (i.e. not an = ops group).

Similarly, capwap-hybrid-mac seems like an update to 5415 to correct the la= ck of clear distinction between AP and AC that has been proven necessary fo= r interoperability. This also seems like a proposed standard since it is ap= parently necessary to implement this to improve interoperability.

I think we need to sort out the intent of these documents before we determi= ne if OpsAWG is the right fit.

Thanks,

Wes George

> -----Original Message-----
> From: opsawg-bounces@ietf.o= rg [mailto:opsawg-bounces@ie= tf.org] On Behalf
> Of Melinda Shore
> Sent: Thursday, April 11, 2013 10:37 AM
> To: opsawg@ietf.org
> Subject: [OPSAWG] Call for adoption, two capwap-related documents
>
> This is a call for working group adoption of two drafts
> related to capwap use for 802.11n.
>
> http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-shao-opsawg-capwap-hy= bridmac-00.txt
> http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-chen-opsawg-capwap-ex= tension-00.txt
>
> Since the IETF 86 meeting the authors have gotten expert review
> of their documents and feel that the documents are ready for
> working group adoption.
>
> We'll be assessing consensus on 25 April 2013. =A0Please indicate<= br> > which draft or drafts you're supporting or not supporting.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Melinda, Scott, and Chris
> _______________________________________________
> OPSAWG mailing list
> OPSAWG@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg

This E-mail and any of its attachments may contain Time Warner Cable propri= etary information, which is privileged, confidential, or subject to copyrig= ht belonging to Time Warner Cable. This E-mail is intended solely for the u= se of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you are not the= intended recipient of this E-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissem= ination, distribution, copying, or action taken in relation to the contents= of and attachments to this E-mail is strictly prohibited and may be unlawf= ul. If you have received this E-mail in error, please notify the sender imm= ediately and permanently delete the original and any copy of this E-mail an= d any printout.
_______________________________________________
OPSAWG mailing list
OPSAWG@ietf.org
= https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg

--001a11c2f448f231f504db901a1e-- From melinda.shore@gmail.com Tue Apr 30 10:16:18 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3317F21F9C56 for ; Tue, 30 Apr 2013 10:16:18 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.953 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.953 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.646, BAYES_00=-2.599, MISSING_HEADERS=1.292] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id HDz2d13BXggk for ; Tue, 30 Apr 2013 10:16:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pd0-f176.google.com (mail-pd0-f176.google.com [209.85.192.176]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4651421F9C09 for ; Tue, 30 Apr 2013 10:16:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pd0-f176.google.com with SMTP id r10so415255pdi.7 for ; Tue, 30 Apr 2013 10:16:05 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=x-received:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=TNsEeUlXioJ0l9ixciE/9+L4HTqWQTY6jhaN1yo4+7E=; b=Tfa7uyU4ebl8hFYhdJQ4vSfcGvgNIEfUCqurcnKXOHiMLtXb5YiHGpcfPSl95OGoed pCstRIbC7JwSFs5drjJ8eQrC+0pHZ6V1zMe00ydT8Li2agJl55qzX4FrIobePP5UEN4o GpweWSiiOQsGfBHXR/i+QscTtX+eRoloPqZ/gAeBRZF4NOhopsdq+H3KzqQJ7XAjCe4n fYtl6dSrVjWqoGico1w5/Wzqi5JyKlviBMhEUh9FxkCDUQMvTYNhLfrwPsmnSeF1M20Z teSVQgaaag5UZB12HTXuK42lOsczYjoE0qhe7t+bsWnEbPfS//kRxppe8gsvVXLivm/X id7w== X-Received: by 10.68.160.162 with SMTP id xl2mr7914482pbb.84.1367342164716; Tue, 30 Apr 2013 10:16:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from spandex.local (66-230-87-94-rb1.fai.dsl.dynamic.acsalaska.net. [66.230.87.94]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id ya4sm29225595pbb.24.2013.04.30.10.16.02 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 30 Apr 2013 10:16:03 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <517FFC51.1030704@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2013 09:16:01 -0800 From: Melinda Shore User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130328 Thunderbird/17.0.5 MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <5166CA78.1070504@gmail.com> <2671C6CDFBB59E47B64C10B3E0BD59230430C292B2@PRVPEXVS15.corp.twcable.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] Call for adoption, two capwap-related documents X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2013 17:16:18 -0000 On 4/30/13 12:51 AM, Rong Zhang wrote: > Hello Wes George, > > Thanks for your kind comments, > for 1) your comments is right, same as other comment as well, we will > update capwap-extension to standard track other than informational > document once submit to 00 WG document if it is adopted. Since it is > only about 11n part other than update original 5416document, so we > didn't use "bis". > for 2) RFC 5415 has recommended Split and Local, capwap-hybrid-mac is > not trying to obsolete them, but define a new model in the middle, it > does not write the normaltive text, so it won't belongs to the scope > of standard. Wes: Can you live with this? Melinda From wesley.george@twcable.com Tue Apr 30 11:07:06 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E708F21F97F3 for ; Tue, 30 Apr 2013 11:07:06 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.463 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.463 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_MODEMCABLE=0.768, HOST_EQ_MODEMCABLE=1.368, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id K5qpYyzMl9I9 for ; Tue, 30 Apr 2013 11:07:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cdpipgw01.twcable.com (cdpipgw01.twcable.com [165.237.59.22]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 94F4721F984B for ; Tue, 30 Apr 2013 11:07:01 -0700 (PDT) X-SENDER-IP: 10.136.163.15 X-SENDER-REPUTATION: None X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.87,582,1363147200"; d="scan'208";a="67213050" Received: from unknown (HELO PRVPEXHUB06.corp.twcable.com) ([10.136.163.15]) by cdpipgw01.twcable.com with ESMTP/TLS/RC4-MD5; 30 Apr 2013 14:06:42 -0400 Received: from PRVPEXVS15.corp.twcable.com ([10.136.163.79]) by PRVPEXHUB06.corp.twcable.com ([10.136.163.15]) with mapi; Tue, 30 Apr 2013 14:07:01 -0400 From: "George, Wes" To: Melinda Shore Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2013 14:07:00 -0400 Thread-Topic: [OPSAWG] Call for adoption, two capwap-related documents Thread-Index: Ac5FxmhPdAuMHlqnQZayVVzEDV3XHwAAXM/A Message-ID: <2671C6CDFBB59E47B64C10B3E0BD59230430C29F4E@PRVPEXVS15.corp.twcable.com> References: <5166CA78.1070504@gmail.com> <2671C6CDFBB59E47B64C10B3E0BD59230430C292B2@PRVPEXVS15.corp.twcable.com> <517FFC51.1030704@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <517FFC51.1030704@gmail.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: "opsawg@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] Call for adoption, two capwap-related documents X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2013 18:07:07 -0000 > From: Melinda Shore [mailto:melinda.shore@gmail.com] > Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2013 1:16 PM > > > > Thanks for your kind comments, > > for 1) your comments is right, same as other comment as well, we will > > update capwap-extension to standard track other than informational > > document once submit to 00 WG document if it is adopted. Since it is > > only about 11n part other than update original 5416document, so we > > didn't use "bis". [WEG] Initially I was under the impression that as an ops group, OpsAWG was= like many others in that it wasn't chartered to do protocol work. As a res= ult, I wasn't sure how this fit into the charter of OpsAWG other than being= home for orphaned work from concluded WGs (since CAPWAP was an OpsArea WG)= . So I looked at the charter, and found "Maintenance and small scale extens= ions of documents that were developed in working groups that have concluded= (e.g. MIB modules)." I guess someone needs to decide if this is truly considered a small-scale e= xtension and enough of the former CAPWAP participants are involved in OpsAW= G such that we get the right level of review. If the answer to those questi= ons is yes, I'd be fine with adopting this one. > > for 2) RFC 5415 has recommended Split and Local, capwap-hybrid-mac is > > not trying to obsolete them, but define a new model in the middle, it > > does not write the normaltive text, so it won't belongs to the scope > > of standard. [WEG] I don't really see the lack of normative text as a particularly convi= ncing argument on this one. The draft asserts that a lack of definition in = the standard is leading to interoperability problems due to differences in = vendor-specific implementation choices, and proposes a solution. It doesn't= have to obsolete the old one, but I think that it is still an update to th= e standard, and requires normative text to define what behaviors MUST or SH= OULD be followed to improve interoperability over the current standard, and= possibly to define how backwards compatibility might work. Otherwise, the same comments apply here as to whether this is the correct W= G for this draft. Hope that helps to clarify Wes George This E-mail and any of its attachments may contain Time Warner Cable propri= etary information, which is privileged, confidential, or subject to copyrig= ht belonging to Time Warner Cable. This E-mail is intended solely for the u= se of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you are not the= intended recipient of this E-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissem= ination, distribution, copying, or action taken in relation to the contents= of and attachments to this E-mail is strictly prohibited and may be unlawf= ul. If you have received this E-mail in error, please notify the sender imm= ediately and permanently delete the original and any copy of this E-mail an= d any printout. From melinda.shore@gmail.com Tue Apr 30 13:01:18 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 90C0921F9ADD for ; Tue, 30 Apr 2013 13:01:18 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.276 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.276 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.323, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id H4OzKoxwtTDw for ; Tue, 30 Apr 2013 13:01:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pd0-f169.google.com (mail-pd0-f169.google.com [209.85.192.169]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ABC7B21F9820 for ; Tue, 30 Apr 2013 13:01:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pd0-f169.google.com with SMTP id 10so492272pdc.28 for ; Tue, 30 Apr 2013 13:01:10 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=x-received:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc :subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=KL0kQ7cR118OVsp5rvHrjA7Lne0scxBdNQ6lGuE9TPs=; b=yYd+7ih4ihYMCDT1XFZhRTFkjChwRjIuxiB/XrMbJgLp+uEu8TkrJIubP1I4eSLQL7 ax/RbXVNiZUs8KuvYJyuB8n33rbFZn8gqBT9PwS+33JnC2uLINwfWJl4rtDuSfsdGgwE kI86O9wojoS4EC/r4zH9vIr8Cct94n6/1Ss/s2FIJ++Taj8b5RRXZFa+g0zZxy3EewFL q4TZZd4k1bwe9vdfPqLXvFd1Ze8ISdWFTedWcWXdgtHyWb1SueXVa2Hb5xH4Qby4NtgP 3O0XCsMiMZ9fripff0Nt48yzh+euhDsRsJTcGxIlH9A86hvFCYPCAn+gS7pxeneU90H7 TfPw== X-Received: by 10.68.164.130 with SMTP id yq2mr13893406pbb.106.1367352069060; Tue, 30 Apr 2013 13:01:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from spandex.local (66-230-87-94-rb1.fai.dsl.dynamic.acsalaska.net. [66.230.87.94]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id zy5sm21036043pbb.43.2013.04.30.13.01.06 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 30 Apr 2013 13:01:07 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <51802301.2080208@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2013 12:01:05 -0800 From: Melinda Shore User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130328 Thunderbird/17.0.5 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "George, Wes" References: <5166CA78.1070504@gmail.com> <2671C6CDFBB59E47B64C10B3E0BD59230430C292B2@PRVPEXVS15.corp.twcable.com> <517FFC51.1030704@gmail.com> <2671C6CDFBB59E47B64C10B3E0BD59230430C29F4E@PRVPEXVS15.corp.twcable.com> In-Reply-To: <2671C6CDFBB59E47B64C10B3E0BD59230430C29F4E@PRVPEXVS15.corp.twcable.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "opsawg@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] Call for adoption, two capwap-related documents X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2013 20:01:18 -0000 On 4/30/13 10:07 AM, George, Wes wrote: > I guess someone needs to decide if this is truly > considered a small-scale extension and enough of the former CAPWAP > participants are involved in OpsAWG such that we get the right level > of review. If the answer to those questions is yes, I'd be fine with > adopting this one. Well, I think the "someone" is us as a group. Taking off my chair hat, I think that this is pretty clearly not a major revision of capwap and would not merit a 'bis' document. There's also been a considerable amount of outreach to former capwap participants and to the IEEE 802.11n community, which may have not been visible to working group participants. Melinda From denghui02@gmail.com Tue Apr 30 17:45:29 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 921F321F85DC for ; Tue, 30 Apr 2013 17:45:29 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -103.598 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 8wBLyoT8xUsi for ; Tue, 30 Apr 2013 17:45:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-qe0-f44.google.com (mail-qe0-f44.google.com [209.85.128.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4EA8721F87B7 for ; Tue, 30 Apr 2013 17:45:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-qe0-f44.google.com with SMTP id w7so673694qeb.31 for ; Tue, 30 Apr 2013 17:45:24 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=86XjgGYYUdsTx4tDN90JVSWDKT/NUfFq/zE6ln34yIA=; b=Eyk3Yohe9XrFVSMHdV3bCvbvGPG0LyJOv5UqBnYXW3ChXBU83EbfzGY9vFqzUKI2sg vOTAkQnDAixgAMhKSat0MMH+fjKfc+ggxibABXGkeKhKsnsO6+XC0IJko2n6ESsF/Xj4 GO0qewX/E0kX7pEBVMMBK2fQqbODBOT7Ls2/2sZy+qZ8Tm0QKrOZx1AgHvF+RaDsYG/B g3LkeVAstaIzXOXR0j9duhIsdQ/OX0VzoqR6bMPfqN9KFasiZscUqVm2Sh+z/Ml/ZnhS jWNhhj0UpKQc7qvbKOzcyXw3VsRzgnH8XTxazjDUwrPBHb9RZT1zR8qIScxA1Iax875s hf8A== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.224.92.81 with SMTP id q17mr1334332qam.61.1367369124692; Tue, 30 Apr 2013 17:45:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.49.103.134 with HTTP; Tue, 30 Apr 2013 17:45:24 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <51802301.2080208@gmail.com> References: <5166CA78.1070504@gmail.com> <2671C6CDFBB59E47B64C10B3E0BD59230430C292B2@PRVPEXVS15.corp.twcable.com> <517FFC51.1030704@gmail.com> <2671C6CDFBB59E47B64C10B3E0BD59230430C29F4E@PRVPEXVS15.corp.twcable.com> <51802301.2080208@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 1 May 2013 08:45:24 +0800 Message-ID: From: Hui Deng To: Melinda Shore Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e0153867cf4653204db9d6ef6 Cc: "opsawg@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] Call for adoption, two capwap-related documents X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 01 May 2013 00:45:29 -0000 --089e0153867cf4653204db9d6ef6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Hi Wes, Yes, as we presented during the last two times IETF meeting, WG and AD recommended that this is a small revision, we need not to reopen the capwap working group, OPSAWG is the right place to document here. If we look at two models in previous RFC, it doesn't say "Must" and "Should", I think we also don't need to add this two words in this document in order to align with previous RFC for the readers, if people are really recommending standard track, then probably we can check it again during the WG LC. thanks a lot -Hui 2013/5/1 Melinda Shore > On 4/30/13 10:07 AM, George, Wes wrote: > > I guess someone needs to decide if this is truly > > considered a small-scale extension and enough of the former CAPWAP > > participants are involved in OpsAWG such that we get the right level > > of review. If the answer to those questions is yes, I'd be fine with > > adopting this one. > > Well, I think the "someone" is us as a group. Taking off > my chair hat, I think that this is pretty clearly not a > major revision of capwap and would not merit a 'bis' > document. There's also been a considerable amount of > outreach to former capwap participants and to the IEEE > 802.11n community, which may have not been visible to > working group participants. > > Melinda > > _______________________________________________ > OPSAWG mailing list > OPSAWG@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg > --089e0153867cf4653204db9d6ef6 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi Wes,
=A0
Yes, as we presented = during the last two times IETF meeting, WG and AD recommended that this is = a small revision, we need not to reopen the capwap working group, OPSAWG is= the right place to document here.
=A0
If we look at two models in previous RFC, it doesn't= say "Must" and "Should", I think we=A0also don't n= eed=A0to add this two words in this document in order to align with previou= s RFC for the readers, if people are really recommending standard track, th= en probably we can check it again during the WG LC.
=A0
thanks a lot
=A0
-Hui


2013/5/1 Melinda= Shore <melinda.shore@gmail.com>
On 4/30/13 10:07 AM, Georg= e, Wes wrote:
> I guess someone needs to decide if this is truly
> considered a small-scale extension and enough of the former CAPWAP
> participants are involved in OpsAWG such that we get the right level > of review. If the answer to those questions is yes, I'd be fine wi= th
> adopting this one.

Well, I think the "someone" is us as a group. =A0Taking off=
my chair hat, I think that this is pretty clearly not a
major revision of capwap and would not merit a 'bis'
document. =A0There's also been a considerable amount of
outreach to former capwap participants and to the IEEE
802.11n community, which may have not been visible to
working group participants.

Melinda

_______________________________________________
OPSAWG mailing list
OPSAWG@ietf.org
= https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg

--089e0153867cf4653204db9d6ef6--