From internet-drafts@ietf.org Fri Dec 2 13:07:05 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: l3vpn@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: l3vpn@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 13B7F21F8BCD; Fri, 2 Dec 2011 13:07:05 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.582 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.582 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.017, 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 9gOLre2Z5fJJ; Fri, 2 Dec 2011 13:07:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A07AD21F8BBB; Fri, 2 Dec 2011 13:07:04 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: i-d-announce@ietf.org Subject: I-D Action: draft-ietf-l3vpn-ospfv3-pece-10.txt X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 3.64 Message-ID: <20111202210704.8113.898.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Fri, 02 Dec 2011 13:07:04 -0800 Cc: l3vpn@ietf.org X-BeenThere: l3vpn@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 02 Dec 2011 21:07:05 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts director= ies. This draft is a work item of the Layer 3 Virtual Private Networks Work= ing Group of the IETF. Title : OSPFv3 as a PE-CE routing protocol Author(s) : Padma Pillay-Esnault Peter Moyer Jeff Doyle Emre Ertekin Michael Lundberg Filename : draft-ietf-l3vpn-ospfv3-pece-10.txt Pages : 20 Date : 2011-12-02 Many Service Providers (SPs) offer Virtual Private Network (VPN) services to their customers using a technique in which Customer Edge (CE) routers are routing peers of Provider Edge (PE) routers. The Border Gateway Protocol (BGP) is used to distribute the customer's routes across the provider's IP backbone network, and Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) is used to tunnel customer packets across the provider's backbone. This is known as a "BGP/MPLS IP VPN". Originally only IPv4 was supported and it was later extended to support IPv6 VPNs as well. Extensions were later added for the support of the Open Shortest Path First protocol version 2 (OSPFv2) as a PE-CE routing protocol for the IPv4 VPNs. This document extends those specifications to support OSPF version 3 (OSPFv3) as a PE-CE routing protocol. The OSPFv3 PE-CE functionality is identical to that of OSPFv2 except for the differences described in this document. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-l3vpn-ospfv3-pece-10.txt Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ This Internet-Draft can be retrieved at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-l3vpn-ospfv3-pece-10.txt From ppe@cisco.com Fri Dec 2 13:10:56 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: l3vpn@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: l3vpn@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 89EFB11E80AD for ; Fri, 2 Dec 2011 13:10:56 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id S+bHBlk8T9K2 for ; Fri, 2 Dec 2011 13:10:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from mtv-iport-3.cisco.com (mtv-iport-3.cisco.com [173.36.130.14]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A4AA21F8C00 for ; Fri, 2 Dec 2011 13:10:11 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=ppe@cisco.com; l=7107; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1322860211; x=1324069811; h=message-id:date:from:mime-version:to:cc:subject: references:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=42uoHfXvxuk9Dx01lL3JL7sRLS2va4ZpfxwXd1VwqRg=; b=SeIQteXgS8HFJMPW/Vk6O6ymtZsjl7ie3Co0XFT9Z+r0WHnYgXF3NFAc ont4X8PEightrI4eGiBXp2S0Rfq/BF8ESe8aifEOgoNYivyn+pYI3Zu7J Gi/jQ7fM9sWRltSbB/m1J5ndhbA90rZZ6tv9dioEOofZ1FcGhbrVuTyfy E=; X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.71,286,1320624000"; d="scan'208";a="17459595" Received: from mtv-core-3.cisco.com ([171.68.58.8]) by mtv-iport-3.cisco.com with ESMTP; 02 Dec 2011 21:10:11 +0000 Received: from Padma-Pillay-Esnaults-MacBook-Pro-3.local ([10.154.209.92]) by mtv-core-3.cisco.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id pB2LABVn027725; Fri, 2 Dec 2011 21:10:11 GMT Message-ID: <4ED93EB3.2000500@cisco.com> Date: Fri, 02 Dec 2011 13:10:11 -0800 From: Padma Pillay-Esnault User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; en-US; rv:1.9.2.24) Gecko/20111103 Thunderbird/3.1.16 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Daniel Cohn Subject: Re: Last Call: (OSPFv3 as aPE-CErouting protocol) to Proposed Standard References: <20111112234223.20827.13913.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com><44F4E579A764584EA9BDFD07D0CA081307304A3D@tlvmail1><28D36026-7B5E-4ECB-8394-9679B9A66AE4@ericsson.com><44F4E579A764584EA9BDFD07D0CA081307304B91@tlvmail1> <44F4E579A764584EA9BDFD07D0CA081307304D6C@tlvmail1> In-Reply-To: <44F4E579A764584EA9BDFD07D0CA081307304D6C@tlvmail1> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1255; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Cc: l3vpn@ietf.org X-BeenThere: l3vpn@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 02 Dec 2011 21:10:56 -0000 Daniel, Acee Thanks for review and comment. The draft is updated and posted. Padma On 11/19/11 11:50 PM, Daniel Cohn wrote: > That’s fine with me, thanks, > > DC > > -----Original Message----- > From: Michael Lundberg [mailto:michaellundberg.ietf@gmail.com] > Sent: Thursday, November 17, 2011 5:27 PM > To: Acee Lindem; Daniel Cohn > Cc: l3vpn@ietf.org > Subject: Re: Last Call: (OSPFv3 as aPE-CErouting protocol) to Proposed Standard > > Daniel, > > Thanks for the comment, and Acee thanks for providing your input as > well! Given that there are implementations that allow selection of > the VRF based on IP address, I agree we need to add and/or modify the > text Dan pointed out below. > > I am ok with adding the suggested text, and also removing the words > "However, since" to the beginning of the sentence, so it reads... > > "A PE interface can be associated with only one VRF, and all OSPFv3 > instances running on the same interface MUST be associated with the > same VRF. Configurations where a PE interface is associated with > multiple VRFs are out of scope for this document" > > Let us know if this works. > > Regards, > Michael > > On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 6:09 AM, Acee Lindem wrote: >> Hi Daniel, >> >> On Nov 17, 2011, at 2:29 AM, Daniel Cohn wrote: >> >>> Hi Acee, thanks for your reply. >>> I don't agree with your comment regarding lack of implementations >>> associating a single interface to multiple VRFs. By way of example, the >>> following links show major vendor implementation of this feature: >>> >>> http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/ios/12_0s/feature/guide/vrfselec.html >>> http://www.juniper.net/techpubs/software/junos/junos95/swconfig-vpns/id- >>> 11185557.html >> This is interesting - I didn't know this capability existed. I see the two approaches have some differences and both are limited to static routing. >> >> >>> But this is not of the essence - the main issue IMO is that RFC 4364 >>> framework does allow this configuration, so the draft statement is >>> factually incorrect. >>> >>> Now, I do agree that we lack clear definitions on how OSPF (or any other >>> PE-CE protocol) should be used in this scenario. That's why I wrote that >>> the statement should be qualified, not deleted. Something like >>> "Configurations where a PE interface is associated with multiple VRFs >>> are out of the scope of this document". >>> >>> What do you think? >> I'd be fine with this statement. >> >> Thanks, >> Acee >> >> >> >>> Regards, >>> >>> Daniel >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Acee Lindem [mailto:acee.lindem@ericsson.com] >>> Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2011 4:59 PM >>> To: Daniel Cohn >>> Cc: l3vpn@ietf.org >>> Subject: Re: Last Call: (OSPFv3 as >>> aPE-CErouting protocol) to Proposed Standard >>> >>> Hi Daniel, >>> I'm not an author but I'll comment. >>> >>> On Nov 16, 2011, at 5:38 AM, Daniel Cohn wrote: >>> >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> (Belated) question to the authors: >>>> >>>> Doesn't the following statement in the draft: >>>> >>>> "However, since a PE interface can be associated with only one VRF, >>> all >>>> OSPFv3 instances running on the same interface MUST be associated with >>>> the same VRF." >>>> >>>> contradict the following statement in RFC 4364, section 3.2? >>>> >>>> " In some cases, a particular site may be divided by the customer into >>>> several "virtual sites"... Another way to accomplish this is to use IP >>>> source addresses. In this case, the PE uses the IP source address in >>> a >>>> packet received from the CE, along with the interface over which the >>>> packet is received, to assign the packet to a particular VRF" >>> To the best of my knowledge, nobody has implemented the ability to put >>> different subnets on the same interface in different VRFs. The way this >>> problem is typically solved is with some layer 2 encapsulation, e.g., >>> different VLANs in different VRFs. >>> To complicate things, OSPFv3 runs on a link as opposed to a subnet. >>> Hence the demuxing described in RFC 4364 would not work. Conceivably, >>> one could use the OSPFv3 interface instance ID for this demuxing but I >>> don't think it makes any sense to try and solve this problem when no one >>> is putting a single interface in multiple VRFs. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Acee >>> >>> >>>> In other words, RFC 4364 allows assigning a single PE interface to >>>> several VRFs. So shouldn't the statement in the draft at least be >>>> qualified? >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> >>>> Daniel >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: l3vpn-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:l3vpn-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf >>>> Of The IESG >>>> Sent: Sunday, November 13, 2011 1:42 AM >>>> To: IETF-Announce >>>> Cc: l3vpn@ietf.org >>>> Subject: Last Call: (OSPFv3 as a >>>> PE-CErouting protocol) to Proposed Standard >>>> >>>> >>>> The IESG has received a request from the Layer 3 Virtual Private >>>> Networks WG (l3vpn) to consider the following document: >>>> - 'OSPFv3 as a PE-CE routing protocol' >>>> as a Proposed Standard >>>> >>>> The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits >>>> final comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the >>>> ietf@ietf.org mailing lists by 2011-12-04. Exceptionally, comments may >>>> be sent to iesg@ietf.org instead. In either case, please retain the >>>> beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting. >>>> >>>> Abstract >>>> >>>> >>>> Many Service Providers (SPs) offer Virtual Private Network (VPN) >>>> services to their customers using a technique in which Customer Edge >>>> (CE) routers are routing peers of Provider Edge (PE) routers. The >>>> Border Gateway Protocol (BGP) is used to distribute the customer's >>>> routes across the provider's IP backbone network, and Multiprotocol >>>> Label Switching (MPLS) is used to tunnel customer packets across the >>>> provider's backbone. This is known as a "BGP/MPLS IP VPN". >>>> Originally only IPv4 was supported and it was later extended to >>>> support IPv6 VPNs as well. Extensions were later added for the >>>> support of the Open Shortest Path First protocol version 2 (OSPFv2) >>>> as a PE-CE routing protocol for the IPv4 VPNs. This document >>> extends >>>> those specifications to support OSPF version 3 (OSPFv3) as a PE-CE >>>> routing protocol. The OSPFv3 PE-CE functionality is identical to >>>> that of OSPFv2 except for the differences described in this >>> document. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> The file can be obtained via >>>> http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-l3vpn-ospfv3-pece/ >>>> >>>> IESG discussion can be tracked via >>>> http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-l3vpn-ospfv3-pece/ >>>> >>>> >>>> No IPR declarations have been submitted directly on this I-D. >>>> >>>> >> From acee.lindem@ericsson.com Fri Dec 2 13:17:21 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: l3vpn@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: l3vpn@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C961611E80F3 for ; Fri, 2 Dec 2011 13:17:21 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.579 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.579 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.020, 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 HytCNafwo+TU for ; Fri, 2 Dec 2011 13:17:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from imr3.ericy.com (imr3.ericy.com [198.24.6.13]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C329211E80D0 for ; Fri, 2 Dec 2011 13:17:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from eusaamw0712.eamcs.ericsson.se ([147.117.20.181]) by imr3.ericy.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id pB2LHHY3002017 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Fri, 2 Dec 2011 15:17:17 -0600 Received: from EUSAACMS0702.eamcs.ericsson.se ([169.254.1.25]) by eusaamw0712.eamcs.ericsson.se ([147.117.20.181]) with mapi; Fri, 2 Dec 2011 16:17:15 -0500 From: Acee Lindem To: Padma Pillay-Esnault Date: Fri, 2 Dec 2011 16:17:15 -0500 Subject: Re: Last Call: (OSPFv3 as aPE-CErouting protocol) to Proposed Standard Thread-Topic: Last Call: (OSPFv3 as aPE-CErouting protocol) to Proposed Standard Thread-Index: AcyxN8Qf5cfX5o75StmFW+P7qjCerQ== Message-ID: <25EA7068-6FF1-4A09-B0F0-9519378049B1@ericsson.com> References: <20111112234223.20827.13913.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com><44F4E579A764584EA9BDFD07D0CA081307304A3D@tlvmail1><28D36026-7B5E-4ECB-8394-9679B9A66AE4@ericsson.com><44F4E579A764584EA9BDFD07D0CA081307304B91@tlvmail1> <44F4E579A764584EA9BDFD07D0CA081307304D6C@tlvmail1> <4ED93EB3.2000500@cisco.com> In-Reply-To: <4ED93EB3.2000500@cisco.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: yes X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail-70-956051669"; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg=sha1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: "l3vpn@ietf.org" X-BeenThere: l3vpn@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 02 Dec 2011 21:17:21 -0000 --Apple-Mail-70-956051669 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Hi Padma,=20 The modified text in section 4.1 is fine with me. I see from the Diff1 = on http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-l3vpn-ospfv3-pece-10 that this = is the only change.=20 Thanks, Acee On Dec 2, 2011, at 4:10 PM, Padma Pillay-Esnault wrote: > Daniel, Acee >=20 > Thanks for review and comment. > The draft is updated and posted. >=20 > Padma >=20 > On 11/19/11 11:50 PM, Daniel Cohn wrote: >> That=92s fine with me, thanks, >>=20 >> DC >>=20 >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Michael Lundberg [mailto:michaellundberg.ietf@gmail.com] >> Sent: Thursday, November 17, 2011 5:27 PM >> To: Acee Lindem; Daniel Cohn >> Cc: l3vpn@ietf.org >> Subject: Re: Last Call: (OSPFv3 = as aPE-CErouting protocol) to Proposed Standard >>=20 >> Daniel, >>=20 >> Thanks for the comment, and Acee thanks for providing your input as >> well! Given that there are implementations that allow selection of >> the VRF based on IP address, I agree we need to add and/or modify the >> text Dan pointed out below. >>=20 >> I am ok with adding the suggested text, and also removing the words >> "However, since" to the beginning of the sentence, so it reads... >>=20 >> "A PE interface can be associated with only one VRF, and all OSPFv3 >> instances running on the same interface MUST be associated with the >> same VRF. Configurations where a PE interface is associated with >> multiple VRFs are out of scope for this document" >>=20 >> Let us know if this works. >>=20 >> Regards, >> Michael >>=20 >> On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 6:09 AM, Acee = Lindem wrote: >>> Hi Daniel, >>>=20 >>> On Nov 17, 2011, at 2:29 AM, Daniel Cohn wrote: >>>=20 >>>> Hi Acee, thanks for your reply. >>>> I don't agree with your comment regarding lack of implementations >>>> associating a single interface to multiple VRFs. By way of example, = the >>>> following links show major vendor implementation of this feature: >>>>=20 >>>> = http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/ios/12_0s/feature/guide/vrfselec.html >>>> = http://www.juniper.net/techpubs/software/junos/junos95/swconfig-vpns/id- >>>> 11185557.html >>> This is interesting - I didn't know this capability existed. I see = the two approaches have some differences and both are limited to static = routing. >>>=20 >>>=20 >>>> But this is not of the essence - the main issue IMO is that RFC = 4364 >>>> framework does allow this configuration, so the draft statement is >>>> factually incorrect. >>>>=20 >>>> Now, I do agree that we lack clear definitions on how OSPF (or any = other >>>> PE-CE protocol) should be used in this scenario. That's why I wrote = that >>>> the statement should be qualified, not deleted. Something like >>>> "Configurations where a PE interface is associated with multiple = VRFs >>>> are out of the scope of this document". >>>>=20 >>>> What do you think? >>> I'd be fine with this statement. >>>=20 >>> Thanks, >>> Acee >>>=20 >>>=20 >>>=20 >>>> Regards, >>>>=20 >>>> Daniel >>>>=20 >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: Acee Lindem [mailto:acee.lindem@ericsson.com] >>>> Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2011 4:59 PM >>>> To: Daniel Cohn >>>> Cc: l3vpn@ietf.org >>>> Subject: Re: Last Call: = (OSPFv3 as >>>> aPE-CErouting protocol) to Proposed Standard >>>>=20 >>>> Hi Daniel, >>>> I'm not an author but I'll comment. >>>>=20 >>>> On Nov 16, 2011, at 5:38 AM, Daniel Cohn wrote: >>>>=20 >>>>> Hi, >>>>>=20 >>>>> (Belated) question to the authors: >>>>>=20 >>>>> Doesn't the following statement in the draft: >>>>>=20 >>>>> "However, since a PE interface can be associated with only one = VRF, >>>> all >>>>> OSPFv3 instances running on the same interface MUST be associated = with >>>>> the same VRF." >>>>>=20 >>>>> contradict the following statement in RFC 4364, section 3.2? >>>>>=20 >>>>> " In some cases, a particular site may be divided by the customer = into >>>>> several "virtual sites"... Another way to accomplish this is to = use IP >>>>> source addresses. In this case, the PE uses the IP source address = in >>>> a >>>>> packet received from the CE, along with the interface over which = the >>>>> packet is received, to assign the packet to a particular VRF" >>>> To the best of my knowledge, nobody has implemented the ability to = put >>>> different subnets on the same interface in different VRFs. The way = this >>>> problem is typically solved is with some layer 2 encapsulation, = e.g., >>>> different VLANs in different VRFs. >>>> To complicate things, OSPFv3 runs on a link as opposed to a subnet. >>>> Hence the demuxing described in RFC 4364 would not work. = Conceivably, >>>> one could use the OSPFv3 interface instance ID for this demuxing = but I >>>> don't think it makes any sense to try and solve this problem when = no one >>>> is putting a single interface in multiple VRFs. >>>>=20 >>>> Thanks, >>>> Acee >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>>> In other words, RFC 4364 allows assigning a single PE interface to >>>>> several VRFs. So shouldn't the statement in the draft at least be >>>>> qualified? >>>>>=20 >>>>> Regards, >>>>>=20 >>>>> Daniel >>>>>=20 >>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>> From: l3vpn-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:l3vpn-bounces@ietf.org] On = Behalf >>>>> Of The IESG >>>>> Sent: Sunday, November 13, 2011 1:42 AM >>>>> To: IETF-Announce >>>>> Cc: l3vpn@ietf.org >>>>> Subject: Last Call: (OSPFv3 = as a >>>>> PE-CErouting protocol) to Proposed Standard >>>>>=20 >>>>>=20 >>>>> The IESG has received a request from the Layer 3 Virtual Private >>>>> Networks WG (l3vpn) to consider the following document: >>>>> - 'OSPFv3 as a PE-CE routing protocol' >>>>> as a Proposed Standard >>>>>=20 >>>>> The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and = solicits >>>>> final comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to = the >>>>> ietf@ietf.org mailing lists by 2011-12-04. Exceptionally, comments = may >>>>> be sent to iesg@ietf.org instead. In either case, please retain = the >>>>> beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting. >>>>>=20 >>>>> Abstract >>>>>=20 >>>>>=20 >>>>> Many Service Providers (SPs) offer Virtual Private Network (VPN) >>>>> services to their customers using a technique in which Customer = Edge >>>>> (CE) routers are routing peers of Provider Edge (PE) routers. = The >>>>> Border Gateway Protocol (BGP) is used to distribute the = customer's >>>>> routes across the provider's IP backbone network, and = Multiprotocol >>>>> Label Switching (MPLS) is used to tunnel customer packets across = the >>>>> provider's backbone. This is known as a "BGP/MPLS IP VPN". >>>>> Originally only IPv4 was supported and it was later extended to >>>>> support IPv6 VPNs as well. Extensions were later added for the >>>>> support of the Open Shortest Path First protocol version 2 = (OSPFv2) >>>>> as a PE-CE routing protocol for the IPv4 VPNs. This document >>>> extends >>>>> those specifications to support OSPF version 3 (OSPFv3) as a = PE-CE >>>>> routing protocol. The OSPFv3 PE-CE functionality is identical to >>>>> that of OSPFv2 except for the differences described in this >>>> document. >>>>>=20 >>>>>=20 >>>>>=20 >>>>> The file can be obtained via >>>>> http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-l3vpn-ospfv3-pece/ >>>>>=20 >>>>> IESG discussion can be tracked via >>>>> http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-l3vpn-ospfv3-pece/ >>>>>=20 >>>>>=20 >>>>> No IPR declarations have been submitted directly on this I-D. >>>>>=20 >>>>>=20 >>>=20 >=20 --Apple-Mail-70-956051669 Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="smime.p7s" Content-Type: application/pkcs7-signature; name="smime.p7s" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIAGCSqGSIb3DQEHAqCAMIACAQExCzAJBgUrDgMCGgUAMIAGCSqGSIb3DQEHAQAAoIIM8jCCBDQw ggMcoAMCAQICECFWwVQHDV12M/Sr0yNv0sYwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEFBQAwOTERMA8GA1UECgwIRXJp Y3Nzb24xJDAiBgNVBAMMG0VyaWNzc29uIE5MIEluZGl2aWR1YWwgQ0EwMTAeFw0xMDEwMDEyMDA0 NTlaFw0xMzEwMDEyMDA0NDhaMG8xETAPBgNVBAoMCEVyaWNzc29uMR8wHQYDVQQDDBZBY2VlIExp bmRlbSBMaW5kZW0gSUlJMRAwDgYDVQQFEwdlYWxmbGluMScwJQYJKoZIhvcNAQkBFhhhY2VlLmxp bmRlbUBlcmljc3Nvbi5jb20wgZ8wDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEBBQADgY0AMIGJAoGBAI/Dc9ALiZuBMyuv bsc3eBxjXZpMi45Z0vzsUQZTJGTBeY7p9JsdzXC9J1uMisBxYVi39R3KJo6I4hXVp9wrA1rxh4AE bnP1+Gxfpj33uWEFYbBnVAJkIWYWF7CYTn8Zm/yd13vPXtuGA6ESeLnnJafwC9Y0YwUQ+4HX7PNv uauVAgMBAAGjggGEMIIBgDCBwAYDVR0fBIG4MIG1MIGyoIGvoIGshjdodHRwOi8vY3JsLnRydXN0 LnRlbGlhLmNvbS9Fcmljc3Nvbk5MSW5kaXZpZHVhbENBMDEuY3JshnFsZGFwOi8vbGRhcC50cnVz dC50ZWxpYS5jb20vY249RXJpY3Nzb24lMjBOTCUyMEluZGl2aWR1YWwlMjBDQTAxLG89RXJpY3Nz b24/Y2VydGlmaWNhdGVyZXZvY2F0aW9ubGlzdDtiaW5hcnk/YmFzZTAjBgNVHREEHDAagRhhY2Vl LmxpbmRlbUBlcmljc3Nvbi5jb20wRgYDVR0gBD8wPTA7BgYqhXBrAQEwMTAvBggrBgEFBQcCARYj aHR0cDovL3d3dy5lcmljc3Nvbi5jb20vbGVnYWwuc2h0bWwwHQYDVR0OBBYEFAgOzAPuplmPr7C1 BTqV94OyqUdhMB8GA1UdIwQYMBaAFJYnw7jepV9dRD45UuVFsXZfYzCbMA4GA1UdDwEB/wQEAwIF oDANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQUFAAOCAQEAE1gyNW6c2t/YsLxW5sm67+gVGK0Lnge4ub+k8dgGrK7Mj7em nkOIFkjdv/tqdJ/SoUy/WEkBXba2TfpZ+lfluMgLYux1vSvqBUxYBsUHeNth2Q/Y6A9sCaDTBPlK vZ2jLz814NavrVfgTCLdxX6zNtGdwzhviz+FyqyxYF43Q86RP8Gd/Npaz1W8pmYAHm0+lezuTx5k F3Av3+SaZ/MR6s+RWuXEIdED36ajeQz+OG8Mh3nplofzdrOeoWGDz53YlfRhgj+TXo+H1lclZAvD WVaMMXPdb27h9Hngsq87dkCW9uAyv8DI993rdhqzlEgUyQIL32icAXfTmTYgoGPOwjCCBEUwggMt oAMCAQICEBPJ6v/eJq2p3KTKI4GDR+MwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEFBQAwRDEaMBgGA1UECgwRVGVsaWFT b25lcmEgR3JvdXAxJjAkBgNVBAMMHVRlbGlhU29uZXJhIFB1YmxpYyBSb290IENBIHYxMB4XDTA2 MTAwNjEwMDA1M1oXDTE2MTAwMjA1MDQxN1owOTERMA8GA1UECgwIRXJpY3Nzb24xJDAiBgNVBAMM G0VyaWNzc29uIE5MIEluZGl2aWR1YWwgQ0EwMTCCASIwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEBBQADggEPADCCAQoC ggEBALYQd+Q1HuuHxDyNGFlEPzCxuPPFO5W2xyr+nqCVnNJ4QYFe1HACqavqNLwUGIqIEyHv1rLn fub9LBc7dQpRHjl/dggin0ONOFJ36nbGEbfHjLJz2BzOWvwl84Sc+Fx09IrDU/SZSWFSfhqTu3TT 39h79brHdRkdPBUgBYgsiFKriHI0TjP5G8628H27BDzqUpzGLSYWgt6/tpwuOH5lcfNfHWMcCYXR lobv0Klu8lxG5amWqAnqrH6ECOyYJTRbHTsaTIZOHy9Qw/0eXPujKT7tU5xxSI2SdceJqzUbAz2o FRQ6Px7/GydpM/Rl+qYoGPcauHUL1aSeVJZqDFqcIF0CAwEAAaOCATwwggE4MBIGA1UdEwEB/wQI MAYBAf8CAQAwRgYDVR0gBD8wPTA7BgcqhXAjAgEBMDAwLgYIKwYBBQUHAgEWImh0dHBzOi8vcmVw b3NpdG9yeS50cnVzdC50ZWxpYS5jb20wgYkGA1UdHwSBgTB/MH2ge6B5hndsZGFwOi8vbGRhcC50 cnVzdC50ZWxpYS5jb20vY249VGVsaWFTb25lcmElMjBQdWJsaWMlMjBSb290JTIwQ0ElMjB2MSxv PVRlbGlhU29uZXJhJTIwR3JvdXA/YXV0aG9yaXR5cmV2b2NhdGlvbmxpc3Q/YmFzZTAOBgNVHQ8B Af8EBAMCAQYwHQYDVR0OBBYEFJYnw7jepV9dRD45UuVFsXZfYzCbMB8GA1UdIwQYMBaAFEXb8I+4 GmKhqCMbY4g4o9vgGmLxMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBBQUAA4IBAQB2AEoqQz+M3Ra9alkpn/YnwhXIv6tP jhUvSuNs00Nhd0T9XhlIU3a65CaB/UKSqnayE0t7Q0Qq3r+x/GK3in/mik8i/PK2/q8HutzYFSzz 6Npztpo2JG7AEKOJPVaeebjng45m6vNC7RIfzU9sG2LBR/hewS8s6dFFn70w795xUwJBWZ67OzIK XrIVVvHTOYpbWA+MESKAXwFhnVONrOTWlVwrMUi4HbiPWpOk+xQbgehCEi7mu3cXsaU1Xq3kMXui NuC7VKoob8mFO9o9RT+dlirD2uRXwNpvCu3but6Kyhu0+nvy2iXGKjdlxlWTsdDyulXYz+OYCMZ9 lFWRzMIPMIIEbTCCA1WgAwIBAgIRAJywjASay5cieGNithuGWj0wDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEFBQAwOjEZ MBcGA1UEChMQUlNBIFNlY3VyaXR5IEluYzEdMBsGA1UECxMUUlNBIFNlY3VyaXR5IDIwNDggVjMw HhcNMDYxMDMxMjA0MjI3WhcNMTYxMTAxMTU0MjI1WjBEMRowGAYDVQQKDBFUZWxpYVNvbmVyYSBH cm91cDEmMCQGA1UEAwwdVGVsaWFTb25lcmEgUHVibGljIFJvb3QgQ0EgdjEwggEiMA0GCSqGSIb3 DQEBAQUAA4IBDwAwggEKAoIBAQDKTxADapCAq3mplX4R4gNt+WZe5QKGnaVEQSyY7lICKF5DuVdW PMLHDjzhw5IzDd860ZZx/0VrhGB3DmP4SDIWCKo2PxvY5NckdBWPWp/T2uaQdOAwgqHpN0pe1X7/ jel59WsWYXKGg/81Wth73ZK/geE7Gz9Pvj1LU6N4YhLMgooxKnCS+ZjB5icWAg+Qd1QpQhF46H1i bp6LsBWDp56MPpg8F5X6y7MGVcKYLdnLOPs84uxRW9qs1kBopzQBj6s5SyVh8A+j5liDBjghXYpw /+paGEdqHPeSFYxZKeJatmjEKLYlxcZWRKf436KvQA9jBhMEmytMNbGicR1mRH6tAgMBAAGjggFi MIIBXjAfBgNVHSMEGDAWgBQHw1EwpKrpRa41JPr/JCwz0LGdjDAdBgNVHQ4EFgQURdvwj7gaYqGo IxtjiDij2+AaYvEwEgYDVR0TAQH/BAgwBgEB/wIBBDCBhQYDVR0gBH4wfDA9BgkqhkiG9w0FBgEw MDAuBggrBgEFBQcCARYiaHR0cHM6Ly9yZXBvc2l0b3J5LnRydXN0LnRlbGlhLmNvbTA7BgcqhXAj AgEBMDAwLgYIKwYBBQUHAgEWImh0dHBzOi8vcmVwb3NpdG9yeS50cnVzdC50ZWxpYS5jb20wcAYD VR0fBGkwZzBloGOgYYZfaHR0cDovL3d3dy5yc2FzZWN1cml0eS5jb20vcHJvZHVjdHMva2Vvbi9y ZXBvc2l0b3J5L2NlcnRpZmljYXRlX3N0YXR1cy9SU0FfU2VjdXJpdHlfMjA0OF92My5DUkwwDgYD VR0PAQH/BAQDAgEGMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBBQUAA4IBAQAEXpos2CnIm7/872ytSrEHWZgvhOUEkUm2 5PWf/XkWko41TaL9vIS1S6AdWChNqWmnYiS7GfaIiDM9s1D6K7hidWBDOm46bNdM3ZwhMyDCfkDJ SgeJ0w+7YmjvChu7gWqDZCsbtZ5gA1ixCTdDnuZB67JGSPGW6r73coraDP8diOpiQouMvM6bKuTP BH/1poLccsUxsKgrQ23JC9LWCRb8cYHkZjXFH1K44TsIl5Lne2oT0JI3pwdA2v6jO4p/OLHntP+n pjwPbedMPUZkDYCkd3LSxj8c3JTxtA8SlPCtIHE1hh65xihg1JRIliSphrqr9kbfwHdeVxPdOI5G tDYPMYICEjCCAg4CAQEwTTA5MREwDwYDVQQKDAhFcmljc3NvbjEkMCIGA1UEAwwbRXJpY3Nzb24g TkwgSW5kaXZpZHVhbCBDQTAxAhAhVsFUBw1ddjP0q9Mjb9LGMAkGBSsOAwIaBQCgggEbMBgGCSqG SIb3DQEJAzELBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHAYJKoZIhvcNAQkFMQ8XDTExMTIwMjIxMTcxNVowIwYJKoZI hvcNAQkEMRYEFP0X0zBSiWxu60hyFqcKXysZJbXXMFwGCSsGAQQBgjcQBDFPME0wOTERMA8GA1UE CgwIRXJpY3Nzb24xJDAiBgNVBAMMG0VyaWNzc29uIE5MIEluZGl2aWR1YWwgQ0EwMQIQIVbBVAcN XXYz9KvTI2/SxjBeBgsqhkiG9w0BCRACCzFPoE0wOTERMA8GA1UECgwIRXJpY3Nzb24xJDAiBgNV BAMMG0VyaWNzc29uIE5MIEluZGl2aWR1YWwgQ0EwMQIQIVbBVAcNXXYz9KvTI2/SxjANBgkqhkiG 9w0BAQEFAASBgD61dCGX2PMN6ticcf1ucx+UM51XBG4MN2BtBJAC9mhEVqUGQm6kmY4qg2w7+ZvP HNE8pJaVulHb1IqbD0QTlf03SHxPEZuHEOLDefQP0eeR+Hdve/FI1882MU8Po67mY9FNB+2XpD+D GqOD4kb6w1A0tJFeyN5h1QNp7mpo6S24AAAAAAAA --Apple-Mail-70-956051669-- From DanielC@orckit.com Sat Dec 3 12:30:10 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: l3vpn@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: l3vpn@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 84A4E21F9296 for ; Sat, 3 Dec 2011 12:30:10 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 1.376 X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.376 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_ILLEGAL_IP=1.908, RCVD_NUMERIC_HELO=2.067] 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 VbYJn-iOxSRe for ; Sat, 3 Dec 2011 12:30:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from tlvmail1.orckit.com (tlvmail1.orckit.com [109.226.33.14]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 55F7121F9354 for ; Sat, 3 Dec 2011 12:30:01 -0800 (PST) Received: from 1.1.40.5 ([1.1.40.5]) by tlvmail1.corrigent.com ([1.1.40.5]) with Microsoft Exchange Server HTTP-DAV ; Sat, 3 Dec 2011 20:33:04 +0000 Date: Sat, 03 Dec 2011 22:29:54 +0200 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: Last Call: (OSPFv3 asaPE-CErouting protocol) to Proposed Standard Message-ID: <37c801ccb1fa$c250d53c$05280101@corrigent.com> thread-topic: Last Call: (OSPFv3 asaPE-CErouting protocol) to Proposed Standard thread-index: Acyx+sJQLQcm01V/QrC/l5ZRFQ5jdg== X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Importance: normal From: "Daniel Cohn" To: "Padma Pillay-Esnault" MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: l3vpn@ietf.org X-BeenThere: l3vpn@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 03 Dec 2011 20:30:10 -0000 Thank you for incorporating the feedback!=0A= =0A= Thumb typed - please be tolerant=0A= =0A= Padma Pillay-Esnault wrote:=0A= =0A= Daniel, Acee Thanks for review and comment. The draft is updated and posted. Padma On 11/19/11 11:50 PM, Daniel Cohn wrote: > That=E2=80=99s fine with me, thanks, > > DC > > -----Original Message----- > From: Michael Lundberg [mailto:michaellundberg.ietf@gmail.com] > Sent: Thursday, November 17, 2011 5:27 PM > To: Acee Lindem; Daniel Cohn > Cc: l3vpn@ietf.org > Subject: Re: Last Call: (OSPFv3 = as aPE-CErouting protocol) to Proposed Standard > > Daniel, > > Thanks for the comment, and Acee thanks for providing your input as > well! Given that there are implementations that allow selection of > the VRF based on IP address, I agree we need to add and/or modify the > text Dan pointed out below. > > I am ok with adding the suggested text, and also removing the words > "However, since" to the beginning of the sentence, so it reads... > > "A PE interface can be associated with only one VRF, and all OSPFv3 > instances running on the same interface MUST be associated with the > same VRF. Configurations where a PE interface is associated with > multiple VRFs are out of scope for this document" > > Let us know if this works. > > Regards, > Michael > > On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 6:09 AM, Acee Lindem = wrote: >> Hi Daniel, >> >> On Nov 17, 2011, at 2:29 AM, Daniel Cohn wrote: >> >>> Hi Acee, thanks for your reply. >>> I don't agree with your comment regarding lack of implementations >>> associating a single interface to multiple VRFs. By way of example, = the >>> following links show major vendor implementation of this feature: >>> >>> = http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/ios/12_0s/feature/guide/vrfselec.html >>> = http://www.juniper.net/techpubs/software/junos/junos95/swconfig-vpns/id- >>> 11185557.html >> This is interesting - I didn't know this capability existed. I see = the two approaches have some differences and both are limited to static = routing. >> >> >>> But this is not of the essence - the main issue IMO is that RFC 4364 >>> framework does allow this configuration, so the draft statement is >>> factually incorrect. >>> >>> Now, I do agree that we lack clear definitions on how OSPF (or any = other >>> PE-CE protocol) should be used in this scenario. That's why I wrote = that >>> the statement should be qualified, not deleted. Something like >>> "Configurations where a PE interface is associated with multiple = VRFs >>> are out of the scope of this document". >>> >>> What do you think? >> I'd be fine with this statement. >> >> Thanks, >> Acee >> >> >> >>> Regards, >>> >>> Daniel >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Acee Lindem [mailto:acee.lindem@ericsson.com] >>> Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2011 4:59 PM >>> To: Daniel Cohn >>> Cc: l3vpn@ietf.org >>> Subject: Re: Last Call: = (OSPFv3 as >>> aPE-CErouting protocol) to Proposed Standard >>> >>> Hi Daniel, >>> I'm not an author but I'll comment. >>> >>> On Nov 16, 2011, at 5:38 AM, Daniel Cohn wrote: >>> >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> (Belated) question to the authors: >>>> >>>> Doesn't the following statement in the draft: >>>> >>>> "However, since a PE interface can be associated with only one VRF, >>> all >>>> OSPFv3 instances running on the same interface MUST be associated = with >>>> the same VRF." >>>> >>>> contradict the following statement in RFC 4364, section 3.2? >>>> >>>> " In some cases, a particular site may be divided by the customer = into >>>> several "virtual sites"... Another way to accomplish this is to use = IP >>>> source addresses. In this case, the PE uses the IP source address = in >>> a >>>> packet received from the CE, along with the interface over which = the >>>> packet is received, to assign the packet to a particular VRF" >>> To the best of my knowledge, nobody has implemented the ability to = put >>> different subnets on the same interface in different VRFs. The way = this >>> problem is typically solved is with some layer 2 encapsulation, = e.g., >>> different VLANs in different VRFs. >>> To complicate things, OSPFv3 runs on a link as opposed to a subnet. >>> Hence the demuxing described in RFC 4364 would not work. = Conceivably, >>> one could use the OSPFv3 interface instance ID for this demuxing but = I >>> don't think it makes any sense to try and solve this problem when no = one >>> is putting a single interface in multiple VRFs. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Acee >>> >>> >>>> In other words, RFC 4364 allows assigning a single PE interface to >>>> several VRFs. So shouldn't the statement in the draft at least be >>>> qualified? >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> >>>> Daniel >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: l3vpn-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:l3vpn-bounces@ietf.org] On = Behalf >>>> Of The IESG >>>> Sent: Sunday, November 13, 2011 1:42 AM >>>> To: IETF-Announce >>>> Cc: l3vpn@ietf.org >>>> Subject: Last Call: (OSPFv3 = as a >>>> PE-CErouting protocol) to Proposed Standard >>>> >>>> >>>> The IESG has received a request from the Layer 3 Virtual Private >>>> Networks WG (l3vpn) to consider the following document: >>>> - 'OSPFv3 as a PE-CE routing protocol' >>>> as a Proposed Standard >>>> >>>> The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and = solicits >>>> final comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to = the >>>> ietf@ietf.org mailing lists by 2011-12-04. Exceptionally, comments = may >>>> be sent to iesg@ietf.org instead. In either case, please retain the >>>> beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting. >>>> >>>> Abstract >>>> >>>> >>>> Many Service Providers (SPs) offer Virtual Private Network (VPN) >>>> services to their customers using a technique in which Customer = Edge >>>> (CE) routers are routing peers of Provider Edge (PE) routers. = The >>>> Border Gateway Protocol (BGP) is used to distribute the = customer's >>>> routes across the provider's IP backbone network, and = Multiprotocol >>>> Label Switching (MPLS) is used to tunnel customer packets across = the >>>> provider's backbone. This is known as a "BGP/MPLS IP VPN". >>>> Originally only IPv4 was supported and it was later extended to >>>> support IPv6 VPNs as well. Extensions were later added for the >>>> support of the Open Shortest Path First protocol version 2 = (OSPFv2) >>>> as a PE-CE routing protocol for the IPv4 VPNs. This document >>> extends >>>> those specifications to support OSPF version 3 (OSPFv3) as a = PE-CE >>>> routing protocol. The OSPFv3 PE-CE functionality is identical to >>>> that of OSPFv2 except for the differences described in this >>> document. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> The file can be obtained via >>>> http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-l3vpn-ospfv3-pece/ >>>> >>>> IESG discussion can be tracked via >>>> http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-l3vpn-ospfv3-pece/ >>>> >>>> >>>> No IPR declarations have been submitted directly on this I-D. >>>> >>>> >> From ben@niven-jenkins.co.uk Tue Dec 6 15:54:04 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: l3vpn@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: l3vpn@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 133591F0C5B for ; Tue, 6 Dec 2011 15:54:04 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -100.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-100.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=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 bbsd+y0B+wTw for ; Tue, 6 Dec 2011 15:54:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from mailex.mailcore.me (mailex.mailcore.me [94.136.40.62]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8BD221F0C35 for ; Tue, 6 Dec 2011 15:54:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from cpc10-cmbg15-2-0-cust121.5-4.cable.virginmedia.com ([86.30.246.122] helo=[192.168.0.3]) by mail5.atlas.pipex.net with esmtpa (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RY4pm-0004Or-Od for l3vpn@ietf.org; Tue, 06 Dec 2011 23:54:02 +0000 From: Ben Niven-Jenkins Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: WG Last Call: draft-ietf-l3vpn-mvpn-wildcards-00 Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2011 23:54:02 +0000 Message-Id: <1BFE7EAB-8CB7-4AC3-87EC-74F3EC54AC15@niven-jenkins.co.uk> To: "l3vpn@ietf.org mailing list" Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084) X-Mailcore-Auth: 9600544 X-Mailcore-Domain: 172912 X-BeenThere: l3vpn@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 06 Dec 2011 23:54:04 -0000 Colleagues, This e-mail is the start of a 2 week WG Last Call for = draft-ietf-l3vpn-mvpn-wildcards-00. Please read the draft and provide any comments you may have. Feedback should be provided to the mailing list and/or the authors. Last Call ends at midnight PST on the 20th December. Thanks Ben= From robert@raszuk.net Tue Dec 6 16:13:45 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: l3vpn@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: l3vpn@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0AB5811E8081 for ; Tue, 6 Dec 2011 16:13:45 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id t86cb4lNbd9M for ; Tue, 6 Dec 2011 16:13:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail1310.opentransfer.com (mail1310.opentransfer.com [76.162.254.103]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 22FA81F0C35 for ; Tue, 6 Dec 2011 16:13:29 -0800 (PST) Received: (qmail 4715 invoked by uid 399); 7 Dec 2011 00:13:28 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ?192.168.135.66?) (189.61.212.94) by mail1310.opentransfer.com with ESMTP; 7 Dec 2011 00:13:28 -0000 X-Originating-IP: 189.61.212.94 Message-ID: <4EDEAFA7.9080803@raszuk.net> Date: Wed, 07 Dec 2011 01:13:27 +0100 From: Robert Raszuk User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:8.0) Gecko/20111105 Thunderbird/8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ben Niven-Jenkins , "l3vpn@ietf.org mailing list" Subject: Re: WG Last Call: draft-ietf-l3vpn-mvpn-wildcards-00 References: <1BFE7EAB-8CB7-4AC3-87EC-74F3EC54AC15@niven-jenkins.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <1BFE7EAB-8CB7-4AC3-87EC-74F3EC54AC15@niven-jenkins.co.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: l3vpn@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: robert@raszuk.net List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 07 Dec 2011 00:13:45 -0000 Support. However for clarity and future reference perhaps it would be good to document the process of removing 4 authors from the header of the draft and only leaving them in section 8. In particular Yiqun and IJsbrand being original co-authors and contributors to the idea. Even if this is a result of merge with draft-rekhter-mvpn-wildcard-spmsi-04.txt removing original authors of the idea seems odd. Thx, R. > Colleagues, > > This e-mail is the start of a 2 week WG Last Call for draft-ietf-l3vpn-mvpn-wildcards-00. > > Please read the draft and provide any comments you may have. > > Feedback should be provided to the mailing list and/or the authors. > > Last Call ends at midnight PST on the 20th December. > > Thanks > Ben > From ben@niven-jenkins.co.uk Tue Dec 6 16:54:21 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: l3vpn@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: l3vpn@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A04811E8082 for ; Tue, 6 Dec 2011 16:54:21 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.949 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.949 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.650, 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 SEsS-eV2jIoW for ; Tue, 6 Dec 2011 16:54:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from mailex.mailcore.me (mailex.mailcore.me [94.136.40.61]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 465D811E8096 for ; Tue, 6 Dec 2011 16:54:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from cpc10-cmbg15-2-0-cust121.5-4.cable.virginmedia.com ([86.30.246.122] helo=[192.168.0.3]) by mail10.atlas.pipex.net with esmtpa (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RY5m7-0003bD-De; Wed, 07 Dec 2011 00:54:19 +0000 Subject: Re: WG Last Call: draft-ietf-l3vpn-mvpn-wildcards-00 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Ben Niven-Jenkins In-Reply-To: <4EDEAFA7.9080803@raszuk.net> Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2011 00:54:19 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <1BFE7EAB-8CB7-4AC3-87EC-74F3EC54AC15@niven-jenkins.co.uk> <4EDEAFA7.9080803@raszuk.net> To: robert@raszuk.net X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084) X-Mailcore-Auth: 9600544 X-Mailcore-Domain: 172912 Cc: "l3vpn@ietf.org mailing list" X-BeenThere: l3vpn@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 07 Dec 2011 00:54:21 -0000 Robert, On 7 Dec 2011, at 00:13, Robert Raszuk wrote: > Support. >=20 > However for clarity and future reference perhaps it would be good to = document the process of removing 4 authors from the header of the draft = and only leaving them in section 8. In particular Yiqun and IJsbrand = being original co-authors and contributors to the idea. >=20 > Even if this is a result of merge with = draft-rekhter-mvpn-wildcard-spmsi-04.txt removing original authors of = the idea seems odd. I don't know the specifics for this particular draft as I wasn't = involved in writing it or any of the drafts that were merged together to = form it but as I'm sure you know=20 http://www.rfc-editor.org/policy.html#policy.authlist states the policy of no more than 5 authors on the front page and that = they "should be the lead author(s) who are most responsible for the = actual text" so my assumption is that the authors listed on the front = page of draft-ietf-l3vpn-mvpn-wildcards-00 are those "most responsible" = for the text of the combined draft rather than necessarily those "most = responsible" for the original idea(s). If anyone feels strongly about only being credited in the "Authors" = section and not on the front page itself they should bring it up with me = privately offline. Regards Ben >=20 > Thx, > R. >=20 >> Colleagues, >>=20 >> This e-mail is the start of a 2 week WG Last Call for = draft-ietf-l3vpn-mvpn-wildcards-00. >>=20 >> Please read the draft and provide any comments you may have. >>=20 >> Feedback should be provided to the mailing list and/or the authors. >>=20 >> Last Call ends at midnight PST on the 20th December. >>=20 >> Thanks >> Ben >>=20 >=20 From robert@raszuk.net Tue Dec 6 17:04:00 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: l3vpn@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: l3vpn@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 48DF521F8558 for ; Tue, 6 Dec 2011 17:04:00 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id VMJoDY4ygo9E for ; Tue, 6 Dec 2011 17:03:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail1310.opentransfer.com (mail1310.opentransfer.com [76.162.254.103]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6350B21F8509 for ; Tue, 6 Dec 2011 17:03:59 -0800 (PST) Received: (qmail 18350 invoked by uid 399); 7 Dec 2011 01:03:58 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ?192.168.135.66?) (189.61.212.94) by mail1310.opentransfer.com with ESMTP; 7 Dec 2011 01:03:58 -0000 X-Originating-IP: 189.61.212.94 Message-ID: <4EDEBB7E.6090007@raszuk.net> Date: Wed, 07 Dec 2011 02:03:58 +0100 From: Robert Raszuk User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:8.0) Gecko/20111105 Thunderbird/8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ben Niven-Jenkins Subject: Re: WG Last Call: draft-ietf-l3vpn-mvpn-wildcards-00 References: <1BFE7EAB-8CB7-4AC3-87EC-74F3EC54AC15@niven-jenkins.co.uk> <4EDEAFA7.9080803@raszuk.net> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "l3vpn@ietf.org mailing list" X-BeenThere: l3vpn@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: robert@raszuk.net List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 07 Dec 2011 01:04:00 -0000 Hello Ben, I am not aware about any former draft/rfc where there are "zombie authors". In most documents I have authored section 8 is directly populated from the xml header. So even technically I am keen on better understanding how xml2rfc conversion tool can list 4 authors in the header and 8 in the section 8. And that is very different from contributors section or separate section listing the authors or co-authors of the document. Best regards, R. PS. The common convention during the merge if sigma of authors is greater then 5 is to just leave editors of the documents undergoing merge - here we are observing a bit different phenomenon. > Robert, > > On 7 Dec 2011, at 00:13, Robert Raszuk wrote: > >> Support. >> >> However for clarity and future reference perhaps it would be good >> to document the process of removing 4 authors from the header of >> the draft and only leaving them in section 8. In particular Yiqun >> and IJsbrand being original co-authors and contributors to the >> idea. >> >> Even if this is a result of merge with >> draft-rekhter-mvpn-wildcard-spmsi-04.txt removing original authors >> of the idea seems odd. > > I don't know the specifics for this particular draft as I wasn't > involved in writing it or any of the drafts that were merged together > to form it but as I'm sure you know > > http://www.rfc-editor.org/policy.html#policy.authlist > > states the policy of no more than 5 authors on the front page and > that they "should be the lead author(s) who are most responsible for > the actual text" so my assumption is that the authors listed on the > front page of draft-ietf-l3vpn-mvpn-wildcards-00 are those "most > responsible" for the text of the combined draft rather than > necessarily those "most responsible" for the original idea(s). > > If anyone feels strongly about only being credited in the "Authors" > section and not on the front page itself they should bring it up with > me privately offline. > > Regards Ben > > >> >> Thx, R. >> >>> Colleagues, >>> >>> This e-mail is the start of a 2 week WG Last Call for >>> draft-ietf-l3vpn-mvpn-wildcards-00. >>> >>> Please read the draft and provide any comments you may have. >>> >>> Feedback should be provided to the mailing list and/or the >>> authors. >>> >>> Last Call ends at midnight PST on the 20th December. >>> >>> Thanks Ben >>> >> > > > From ben@niven-jenkins.co.uk Tue Dec 6 17:26:34 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: l3vpn@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: l3vpn@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0A0B811E8082 for ; Tue, 6 Dec 2011 17:26:34 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -103.166 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.166 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.433, 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 pcFAqbDi02GB for ; Tue, 6 Dec 2011 17:26:33 -0800 (PST) Received: from mailex.mailcore.me (mailex.mailcore.me [94.136.40.61]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3D45611E8080 for ; Tue, 6 Dec 2011 17:26:33 -0800 (PST) Received: from cpc10-cmbg15-2-0-cust121.5-4.cable.virginmedia.com ([86.30.246.122] helo=[192.168.0.3]) by mail6.atlas.pipex.net with esmtpa (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RY6HI-0002jE-2G; Wed, 07 Dec 2011 01:26:32 +0000 Subject: Restricting front page authors with xml2rfc Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Ben Niven-Jenkins In-Reply-To: <4EDEBB7E.6090007@raszuk.net> Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2011 01:26:30 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <1BFE7EAB-8CB7-4AC3-87EC-74F3EC54AC15@niven-jenkins.co.uk> <4EDEAFA7.9080803@raszuk.net> <4EDEBB7E.6090007@raszuk.net> To: robert@raszuk.net X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084) X-Mailcore-Auth: 9600544 X-Mailcore-Domain: 172912 Cc: "l3vpn@ietf.org mailing list" X-BeenThere: l3vpn@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 07 Dec 2011 01:26:34 -0000 Robert, On 7 Dec 2011, at 01:03, Robert Raszuk wrote: > Hello Ben, >=20 > I am not aware about any former draft/rfc where there are "zombie = authors". >=20 > In most documents I have authored section 8 is directly populated from = the xml header. So even technically I am keen on better understanding = how xml2rfc conversion tool can list 4 authors in the header and 8 in = the section 8. There is no way to do it with the standard xml2rfc package. The = following e-mail contains a patch to xml2rfc which adds a new role of = "notfirstpage" to achieve the effect. http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/xml2rfc/current/msg02994.html Ben >=20 > And that is very different from contributors section or separate = section listing the authors or co-authors of the document. >=20 > Best regards, > R. >=20 > PS. The common convention during the merge if sigma of authors is = greater then 5 is to just leave editors of the documents undergoing = merge - here we are observing a bit different phenomenon. >=20 >=20 >> Robert, >>=20 >> On 7 Dec 2011, at 00:13, Robert Raszuk wrote: >>=20 >>> Support. >>>=20 >>> However for clarity and future reference perhaps it would be good >>> to document the process of removing 4 authors from the header of >>> the draft and only leaving them in section 8. In particular Yiqun >>> and IJsbrand being original co-authors and contributors to the >>> idea. >>>=20 >>> Even if this is a result of merge with >>> draft-rekhter-mvpn-wildcard-spmsi-04.txt removing original authors >>> of the idea seems odd. >>=20 >> I don't know the specifics for this particular draft as I wasn't >> involved in writing it or any of the drafts that were merged together >> to form it but as I'm sure you know >>=20 >> http://www.rfc-editor.org/policy.html#policy.authlist >>=20 >> states the policy of no more than 5 authors on the front page and >> that they "should be the lead author(s) who are most responsible for >> the actual text" so my assumption is that the authors listed on the >> front page of draft-ietf-l3vpn-mvpn-wildcards-00 are those "most >> responsible" for the text of the combined draft rather than >> necessarily those "most responsible" for the original idea(s). >>=20 >> If anyone feels strongly about only being credited in the "Authors" >> section and not on the front page itself they should bring it up with >> me privately offline. >>=20 >> Regards Ben >>=20 >>=20 >>>=20 >>> Thx, R. >>>=20 >>>> Colleagues, >>>>=20 >>>> This e-mail is the start of a 2 week WG Last Call for >>>> draft-ietf-l3vpn-mvpn-wildcards-00. >>>>=20 >>>> Please read the draft and provide any comments you may have. >>>>=20 >>>> Feedback should be provided to the mailing list and/or the >>>> authors. >>>>=20 >>>> Last Call ends at midnight PST on the 20th December. >>>>=20 >>>> Thanks Ben >>>>=20 >>>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >=20 From jeff.tantsura@ericsson.com Tue Dec 6 19:29:28 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: l3vpn@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: l3vpn@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 475091F0C47 for ; Tue, 6 Dec 2011 19:29:28 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, 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 DlkQYKn8H35J for ; Tue, 6 Dec 2011 19:29:27 -0800 (PST) Received: from imr4.ericy.com (imr4.ericy.com [198.24.6.9]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4FD8E1F0C34 for ; Tue, 6 Dec 2011 19:29:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from eusaamw0707.eamcs.ericsson.se ([147.117.20.32]) by imr4.ericy.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/Debian-9.1ubuntu1) with ESMTP id pB73TKD9006516; Tue, 6 Dec 2011 21:29:21 -0600 Received: from EUSAACMS0701.eamcs.ericsson.se ([169.254.1.20]) by eusaamw0707.eamcs.ericsson.se ([147.117.20.32]) with mapi; Tue, 6 Dec 2011 22:29:14 -0500 From: Jeff Tantsura To: Ben Niven-Jenkins Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2011 22:29:11 -0500 Subject: Re: WG Last Call: draft-ietf-l3vpn-mvpn-wildcards-00 Thread-Topic: WG Last Call: draft-ietf-l3vpn-mvpn-wildcards-00 Thread-Index: Acy0kGPsoWG9HvcVTWiMYGFzCd3jRQ== Message-ID: <7F60210F-A89B-409E-A22A-F4AE505C55A5@ericsson.com> References: <1BFE7EAB-8CB7-4AC3-87EC-74F3EC54AC15@niven-jenkins.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <1BFE7EAB-8CB7-4AC3-87EC-74F3EC54AC15@niven-jenkins.co.uk> 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: "l3vpn@ietf.org mailing list" X-BeenThere: l3vpn@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 07 Dec 2011 03:29:28 -0000 Yes/support Regards, Jeff On Dec 6, 2011, at 15:54, "Ben Niven-Jenkins" wro= te: > Colleagues, >=20 > This e-mail is the start of a 2 week WG Last Call for draft-ietf-l3vpn-mv= pn-wildcards-00. >=20 > Please read the draft and provide any comments you may have. >=20 > Feedback should be provided to the mailing list and/or the authors. >=20 > Last Call ends at midnight PST on the 20th December. >=20 > Thanks > Ben From ben@niven-jenkins.co.uk Fri Dec 9 03:50:59 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: l3vpn@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: l3vpn@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D894821F8753 for ; Fri, 9 Dec 2011 03:50:58 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_32=0.6, 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 f4EAno+JR3Do for ; Fri, 9 Dec 2011 03:50:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from mailex.mailcore.me (mailex.mailcore.me [94.136.40.61]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1320E21F8770 for ; Fri, 9 Dec 2011 03:50:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from host1.cachelogic.com ([212.44.43.80] helo=dhcp-133-devlan.cachelogic.com) by mail10.atlas.pipex.net with esmtpa (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RYyyY-000386-56 for l3vpn@ietf.org; Fri, 09 Dec 2011 11:50:50 +0000 From: Ben Niven-Jenkins Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Fwd: New Non-WG Mailing List: dc -- IETF Data Center Mailing List Date: Fri, 9 Dec 2011 11:50:49 +0000 References: <20111208231423.F1BE921F8507@ietfa.amsl.com> To: "l3vpn@ietf.org mailing list" Message-Id: <1C460833-CA75-48BB-BE83-607D8DEC8AFC@niven-jenkins.co.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084) X-Mailcore-Auth: 9600544 X-Mailcore-Domain: 172912 X-BeenThere: l3vpn@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 09 Dec 2011 11:50:59 -0000 FYI. I believe this is the right list to discuss VPN4DC (and other = related DC topics) from now onwards. Ben Begin forwarded message: > From: IETF Secretariat > Date: 8 December 2011 23:14:23 GMT > To: IETF Announcement list > Cc: rbonica@juniper.net, dc@ietf.org, stbryant@cisco.com > Subject: New Non-WG Mailing List: dc -- IETF Data Center Mailing List=20= >=20 > A new IETF non-working group email list has been created. >=20 > IETF Data Center Mailing List > List address: dc@ietf.org > Archive: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dc/ > To subscribe: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dc >=20 > Purpose: This mailing list is for the discussion of networking issues=20= > related to data centers (DC). These issues include both issues that=20 > relate to connectivity within a single DC and issue that relate to=20 > connectivity between two or more DCs. Topics discussed on this mailing=20= > list include: >=20 > - Services provided by the DC, and the networking requirements that=20 > those services generate > - Network architectures commonly deployed in DC > - Network architectures commonly deployed to interconnect DCs > - Scaling, management and security problems associated with each=20 > commonly deployed architecture > - Solutions to the above mentioned problems.=20 >=20 > For additional information, please contact the list administrators. >=20 > _______________________________________________ > IETF-Announce mailing list > IETF-Announce@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce From ning.so@verizon.com Fri Dec 9 12:36:13 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: l3vpn@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: l3vpn@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6519A21F8AD2 for ; Fri, 9 Dec 2011 12:36:13 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.600, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_13=0.6, J_CHICKENPOX_32=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 TMqagUS7Q-tW for ; Fri, 9 Dec 2011 12:36:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from fldsmtpe03.verizon.com (fldsmtpe03.verizon.com [140.108.26.142]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B6EBD21F8AD1 for ; Fri, 9 Dec 2011 12:36:12 -0800 (PST) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: false Received: from unknown (HELO fldsmtpi02.verizon.com) ([166.68.71.144]) by fldsmtpe03.verizon.com with ESMTP; 09 Dec 2011 20:36:11 +0000 From: "So, Ning" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.71,328,1320624000"; d="scan'208";a="191261278" Received: from fhdp1lumxc7hb01.verizon.com (HELO FHDP1LUMXC7HB01.us.one.verizon.com) ([166.68.59.188]) by fldsmtpi02.verizon.com with ESMTP; 09 Dec 2011 20:36:11 +0000 Received: from FHDP1LUMXC7V41.us.one.verizon.com ([169.254.1.21]) by FHDP1LUMXC7HB01.us.one.verizon.com ([166.68.59.188]) with mapi; Fri, 9 Dec 2011 15:36:11 -0500 To: "l3vpn@ietf.org" Date: Fri, 9 Dec 2011 15:36:10 -0500 Subject: RE: Fwd: New Non-WG Mailing List: dc -- IETF Data Center Mailing Thread-Topic: Fwd: New Non-WG Mailing List: dc -- IETF Data Center Mailing Thread-Index: Acy2scss7mdjJLBgRmSWkWW8hvjznw== Message-ID: <6665BC1FEA04AB47B1F75FA641C43BC0911ACF31@FHDP1LUMXC7V41.us.one.verizon.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="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: l3vpn@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 09 Dec 2011 20:36:13 -0000 Ben, Thanks for the lead. Are you suggesting all vpn4dc related discussion shou= ld move out of L3VPN mailing list onto DC mailing list? Do you know if the= new DC list meant to be for all DC related discussion, or just a sub-set o= f topics? For example, VPN4DC, NVO3, SDN, SAMI, and so on. =20 =A0 Best regards, =A0 Ning So Verizon Corporate Technology (office) 972-729-7905 (Cell) 972-955-0914 =A0 -----Original Message----- From: l3vpn-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:l3vpn-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of l= 3vpn-request@ietf.org Sent: Friday, December 09, 2011 2:00 PM To: l3vpn@ietf.org Subject: L3VPN Digest, Vol 90, Issue 4 If you have received this digest without all the individual message attachm= ents you will need to update your digest options in your list subscription.= To do so, go to=20 https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/l3vpn Click the 'Unsubscribe or edit options' button, log in, and set "Get MIME o= r Plain Text Digests?" to MIME. You can set this option globally for all t= he list digests you receive at this point. Send L3VPN mailing list submissions to l3vpn@ietf.org To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/l3vpn or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to l3vpn-request@ietf.org You can reach the person managing the list at l3vpn-owner@ietf.org When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "R= e: Contents of L3VPN digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Fwd: New Non-WG Mailing List: dc -- IETF Data Center Mailing List (Ben Niven-Jenkins) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Fri, 9 Dec 2011 11:50:49 +0000 From: Ben Niven-Jenkins To: "l3vpn@ietf.org mailing list" Subject: Fwd: New Non-WG Mailing List: dc -- IETF Data Center Mailing List Message-ID: <1C460833-CA75-48BB-BE83-607D8DEC8AFC@niven-jenkins.co.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3Dus-ascii FYI. I believe this is the right list to discuss VPN4DC (and other related = DC topics) from now onwards. Ben Begin forwarded message: > From: IETF Secretariat > Date: 8 December 2011 23:14:23 GMT > To: IETF Announcement list > Cc: rbonica@juniper.net, dc@ietf.org, stbryant@cisco.com > Subject: New Non-WG Mailing List: dc -- IETF Data Center Mailing List >=20 > A new IETF non-working group email list has been created. >=20 > IETF Data Center Mailing List > List address: dc@ietf.org > Archive: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dc/ > To subscribe: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dc >=20 > Purpose: This mailing list is for the discussion of networking issues=20 > related to data centers (DC). These issues include both issues that=20 > relate to connectivity within a single DC and issue that relate to=20 > connectivity between two or more DCs. Topics discussed on this mailing=20 > list include: >=20 > - Services provided by the DC, and the networking requirements that =20 > those services generate > - Network architectures commonly deployed in DC > - Network architectures commonly deployed to interconnect DCs > - Scaling, management and security problems associated with each =20 > commonly deployed architecture > - Solutions to the above mentioned problems.=20 >=20 > For additional information, please contact the list administrators. >=20 > _______________________________________________ > IETF-Announce mailing list > IETF-Announce@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce ------------------------------ _______________________________________________ L3VPN mailing list L3VPN@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/l3vpn End of L3VPN Digest, Vol 90, Issue 4 ************************************ From marshall.eubanks@gmail.com Fri Dec 9 12:48:07 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: l3vpn@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: l3vpn@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3683C21F8AE9 for ; Fri, 9 Dec 2011 12:48:07 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.928 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.928 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.529, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_13=0.6, J_CHICKENPOX_32=0.6, 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 Mex4aLcKn9MJ for ; Fri, 9 Dec 2011 12:48:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-gx0-f172.google.com (mail-gx0-f172.google.com [209.85.161.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2D48E21F8AE1 for ; Fri, 9 Dec 2011 12:48:06 -0800 (PST) Received: by ggnk5 with SMTP id k5so4263420ggn.31 for ; Fri, 09 Dec 2011 12:48:04 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=Xiq5HxFvUNZDkbrMQc+ormO7MnhdOWstrdAdUZ2S7xc=; b=ecEtaXcBS5zaIfVD3wMhHQncbpNPYHq8TA5xn8S+PbVbjTdROweweMSQvNflNsiuS6 hP3UhWCZxi7mjXamoez+YhAbOejrqXCynJwo2VPo8ojNhHtq2ktda/1ALVxYSZpfw4YF dpSmsKRZbkVXl0MVoY8hneJ4YJ8GaKjIHHLTo= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.182.88.99 with SMTP id bf3mr822612obb.73.1323463684678; Fri, 09 Dec 2011 12:48:04 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.182.227.67 with HTTP; Fri, 9 Dec 2011 12:48:04 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <6665BC1FEA04AB47B1F75FA641C43BC0911ACF31@FHDP1LUMXC7V41.us.one.verizon.com> References: <6665BC1FEA04AB47B1F75FA641C43BC0911ACF31@FHDP1LUMXC7V41.us.one.verizon.com> Date: Fri, 9 Dec 2011 15:48:04 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Fwd: New Non-WG Mailing List: dc -- IETF Data Center Mailing From: Marshall Eubanks To: "So, Ning" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: "l3vpn@ietf.org" X-BeenThere: l3vpn@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 09 Dec 2011 20:48:07 -0000 On Fri, Dec 9, 2011 at 3:36 PM, So, Ning wrote: > Ben, > > Thanks for the lead. =A0Are you suggesting all vpn4dc related discussion = should move out of L3VPN mailing list onto DC mailing list? Yes. >=A0Do you know if the new DC list meant to be for all DC related discussio= n, or just a sub-set of topics? =A0For example, VPN4DC, NVO3, SDN, SAMI, an= d so on. That (all discussions, for now) is my understanding. Regards Marshall > > > Best regards, > > Ning So > Verizon Corporate Technology > (office) 972-729-7905 > (Cell) 972-955-0914 > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: l3vpn-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:l3vpn-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of= l3vpn-request@ietf.org > Sent: Friday, December 09, 2011 2:00 PM > To: l3vpn@ietf.org > Subject: L3VPN Digest, Vol 90, Issue 4 > > If you have received this digest without all the individual message attac= hments you will need to update your digest options in your list subscriptio= n. =A0To do so, go to > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/l3vpn > > Click the 'Unsubscribe or edit options' button, log in, and set "Get MIME= or Plain Text Digests?" to MIME. =A0You can set this option globally for a= ll the list digests you receive at this point. > > > > Send L3VPN mailing list submissions to > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0l3vpn@ietf.org > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/l3vpn > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0l3vpn-request@ietf.org > > You can reach the person managing the list at > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0l3vpn-owner@ietf.org > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than = "Re: Contents of L3VPN digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > =A0 1. Fwd: New Non-WG Mailing List: dc -- IETF Data Center Mailing > =A0 =A0 =A0List =A0(Ben Niven-Jenkins) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Fri, 9 Dec 2011 11:50:49 +0000 > From: Ben Niven-Jenkins > To: "l3vpn@ietf.org mailing list" > Subject: Fwd: New Non-WG Mailing List: dc -- IETF Data Center Mailing > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0List > Message-ID: <1C460833-CA75-48BB-BE83-607D8DEC8AFC@niven-jenkins.co.uk> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3Dus-ascii > > FYI. I believe this is the right list to discuss VPN4DC (and other relate= d DC topics) from now onwards. > > Ben > > Begin forwarded message: > >> From: IETF Secretariat >> Date: 8 December 2011 23:14:23 GMT >> To: IETF Announcement list >> Cc: rbonica@juniper.net, dc@ietf.org, stbryant@cisco.com >> Subject: New Non-WG Mailing List: dc -- IETF Data Center Mailing List >> >> A new IETF non-working group email list has been created. >> >> IETF Data Center Mailing List >> List address: dc@ietf.org >> Archive: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dc/ >> To subscribe: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dc >> >> Purpose: This mailing list is for the discussion of networking issues >> related to data centers (DC). These issues include both issues that >> relate to connectivity within a single DC and issue that relate to >> connectivity between two or more DCs. Topics discussed on this mailing >> list include: >> >> - Services provided by the DC, and the networking requirements that >> those services generate >> - Network architectures commonly deployed in DC >> - Network architectures commonly deployed to interconnect DCs >> - Scaling, management and security problems associated with each >> commonly deployed architecture >> - Solutions to the above mentioned problems. >> >> For additional information, please contact the list administrators. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> IETF-Announce mailing list >> IETF-Announce@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce > > > > ------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > L3VPN mailing list > L3VPN@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/l3vpn > > > End of L3VPN Digest, Vol 90, Issue 4 > ************************************ From bschlies@cisco.com Fri Dec 9 12:59:32 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: l3vpn@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: l3vpn@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0EA1721F84BD; Fri, 9 Dec 2011 12:59:32 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.600, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_13=0.6, J_CHICKENPOX_32=0.6, 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 jM2ZHtRdRedO; Fri, 9 Dec 2011 12:59:31 -0800 (PST) Received: from mtv-iport-3.cisco.com (mtv-iport-3.cisco.com [173.36.130.14]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 660E921F84B8; Fri, 9 Dec 2011 12:59:31 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=bschlies@cisco.com; l=2157; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1323464371; x=1324673971; h=subject:mime-version:from:in-reply-to:date:cc: content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=roq4XWgkqaRGXWShkIk6S3ICqoXbpoFYs5YscsEWqk8=; b=U2DcMZTgVNIVaDeMXnlff1//vIiy3lZUaFt4TO9tRMWP2bJpVuv+RAEw /GGBO6dkKWlWUorQbsqSGtzJG6LtAIlK3Z4cIc841RJBEU+68EioVLm7W N2Ps3bn70WzEYvQaMldLDVMDMCHbbE27/J4MJOG3fecfFVypRKcQxRMuy 8=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Av8EADB24k6rRDoG/2dsb2JhbABDqniBBYFyAQEBAQIBAQEBDwEnNAsFCwsRAQIBAg0iJyIGCAYTCRIHh2UIl1cBng2LD2MEiDCMQJJG X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.71,328,1320624000"; d="scan'208";a="19118810" Received: from mtv-core-1.cisco.com ([171.68.58.6]) by mtv-iport-3.cisco.com with ESMTP; 09 Dec 2011 20:59:31 +0000 Received: from sjc-bschlies-8919.cisco.com (sjc-bschlies-8919.cisco.com [10.20.217.234]) by mtv-core-1.cisco.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id pB9KxU9f010779; Fri, 9 Dec 2011 20:59:30 GMT Subject: Re: New Non-WG Mailing List: dc -- IETF Data Center Mailing Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Benson Schliesser In-Reply-To: <6665BC1FEA04AB47B1F75FA641C43BC0911ACF31@FHDP1LUMXC7V41.us.one.verizon.com> Date: Fri, 9 Dec 2011 14:59:29 -0600 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <389BEA43-78EF-46DA-871E-10174F9F32FF@cisco.com> References: <6665BC1FEA04AB47B1F75FA641C43BC0911ACF31@FHDP1LUMXC7V41.us.one.verizon.com> To: "So, Ning" X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084) Cc: l2vpn@ietf.org, l3vpn@ietf.org, dc@ietf.org, armd@ietf.org X-BeenThere: l3vpn@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 09 Dec 2011 20:59:32 -0000 Hi, Ning. On Dec 9, 2011, at 2:36 PM, So, Ning wrote: > Thanks for the lead. Are you suggesting all vpn4dc related discussion = should move out of L3VPN mailing list onto DC mailing list? Do you know = if the new DC list meant to be for all DC related discussion, or just a = sub-set of topics? For example, VPN4DC, NVO3, SDN, SAMI, and so on. =20 If there is a more-specific forum for a given topic, I would suggest = using it. For instance, if one wishes to discuss ARMD issues, I suggest = using the armd@ietf.org mailing list. But there is much that is out of = ARMD's scope, which might be more appropriate for discussion on = dc@ietf.org instead. I will leave it to L3VPN and L2VPN chairs to comment on what is in scope = for those respective mailing lists. Cheers, -Benson Begin forwarded message: > From: IETF Secretariat > Date: 8 December 2011 23:14:23 GMT > To: IETF Announcement list > Cc: rbonica@juniper.net, dc@ietf.org, stbryant@cisco.com > Subject: New Non-WG Mailing List: dc -- IETF Data Center Mailing List >=20 > A new IETF non-working group email list has been created. >=20 > IETF Data Center Mailing List > List address: dc@ietf.org > Archive: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dc/ > To subscribe: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dc >=20 > Purpose: This mailing list is for the discussion of networking issues=20= > related to data centers (DC). These issues include both issues that=20 > relate to connectivity within a single DC and issue that relate to=20 > connectivity between two or more DCs. Topics discussed on this mailing=20= > list include: >=20 > - Services provided by the DC, and the networking requirements that =20= > those services generate > - Network architectures commonly deployed in DC > - Network architectures commonly deployed to interconnect DCs > - Scaling, management and security problems associated with each =20 > commonly deployed architecture > - Solutions to the above mentioned problems.=20 >=20 > For additional information, please contact the list administrators. From ben@niven-jenkins.co.uk Mon Dec 12 10:49:42 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: l3vpn@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: l3vpn@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B238721F891D for ; Mon, 12 Dec 2011 10:49:42 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.699 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.699 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.300, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_13=0.6, J_CHICKENPOX_32=0.6, 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 03iLUnCmS2nm for ; Mon, 12 Dec 2011 10:49:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from mailex.mailcore.me (mailex.mailcore.me [94.136.40.62]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 04F7C21F87C5 for ; Mon, 12 Dec 2011 10:49:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from host1.cachelogic.com ([212.44.43.80] helo=dhcp-133-devlan.cachelogic.com) by mail11.atlas.pipex.net with esmtpa (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RaAwW-00041W-S6; Mon, 12 Dec 2011 18:49:41 +0000 Subject: Re: New Non-WG Mailing List: dc -- IETF Data Center Mailing Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Ben Niven-Jenkins In-Reply-To: <389BEA43-78EF-46DA-871E-10174F9F32FF@cisco.com> Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2011 18:49:39 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <6665BC1FEA04AB47B1F75FA641C43BC0911ACF31@FHDP1LUMXC7V41.us.one.verizon.com> <389BEA43-78EF-46DA-871E-10174F9F32FF@cisco.com> To: Benson Schliesser X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084) X-Mailcore-Auth: 9600544 X-Mailcore-Domain: 172912 Cc: Ning So , "l3vpn@ietf.org mailing list" X-BeenThere: l3vpn@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2011 18:49:42 -0000 Colleagues, On 9 Dec 2011, at 20:59, Benson Schliesser wrote: > Hi, Ning. >=20 > On Dec 9, 2011, at 2:36 PM, So, Ning wrote: >=20 >> Thanks for the lead. Are you suggesting all vpn4dc related = discussion should move out of L3VPN mailing list onto DC mailing list? = Do you know if the new DC list meant to be for all DC related = discussion, or just a sub-set of topics? For example, VPN4DC, NVO3, = SDN, SAMI, and so on. =20 >=20 > If there is a more-specific forum for a given topic, I would suggest = using it. For instance, if one wishes to discuss ARMD issues, I suggest = using the armd@ietf.org mailing list. But there is much that is out of = ARMD's scope, which might be more appropriate for discussion on = dc@ietf.org instead. +1. It is up to individuals to use their judgement (or take advice from = colleagues/chairs/ADs) as to which list may be most appropriate for a = given topic or whether to cross-post across lists. > I will leave it to L3VPN and L2VPN chairs to comment on what is in = scope for those respective mailing lists. The generic advice I would give is if the topic fits the L3VPN charter = and is self-contained (i.e. does not rely on other DC-related work that = is out of charter for L3VPN) bring it to L3VPN. If it's scope is wider = than pure L3VPN and it touches on DC aspects use dc@ietf.org as a = starting point. HTH Ben >=20 > Cheers, > -Benson >=20 >=20 > Begin forwarded message: >=20 >> From: IETF Secretariat >> Date: 8 December 2011 23:14:23 GMT >> To: IETF Announcement list >> Cc: rbonica@juniper.net, dc@ietf.org, stbryant@cisco.com >> Subject: New Non-WG Mailing List: dc -- IETF Data Center Mailing List >>=20 >> A new IETF non-working group email list has been created. >>=20 >> IETF Data Center Mailing List >> List address: dc@ietf.org >> Archive: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dc/ >> To subscribe: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dc >>=20 >> Purpose: This mailing list is for the discussion of networking issues=20= >> related to data centers (DC). These issues include both issues that=20= >> relate to connectivity within a single DC and issue that relate to=20 >> connectivity between two or more DCs. Topics discussed on this = mailing=20 >> list include: >>=20 >> - Services provided by the DC, and the networking requirements that =20= >> those services generate >> - Network architectures commonly deployed in DC >> - Network architectures commonly deployed to interconnect DCs >> - Scaling, management and security problems associated with each =20 >> commonly deployed architecture >> - Solutions to the above mentioned problems.=20 >>=20 >> For additional information, please contact the list administrators. >=20 From vumip1@gmail.com Tue Dec 13 14:19:51 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: l3vpn@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: l3vpn@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC75321F86DD; Tue, 13 Dec 2011 14:19:51 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.226 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.226 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.372, 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 NQdCL1V1gNG0; Tue, 13 Dec 2011 14:19:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-iy0-f172.google.com (mail-iy0-f172.google.com [209.85.210.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F0A0421F844F; Tue, 13 Dec 2011 14:19:50 -0800 (PST) Received: by iaek3 with SMTP id k3so221331iae.31 for ; Tue, 13 Dec 2011 14:19:50 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=7CltsZj4p+Ct7LnJxz4yrTbjkZNQ7rfoyO7z0Y8xrr0=; b=w3geuNt052iY4RR+8YQotSAUqnmQ4TP3N6a3KNDWHRb3+gXseioC7IXLuiK36E09HI qMs1NIOa8eR//u9AHBejVAxane9SD8qEJjukelT9IU4MlTulzloVaaLjVpDULcfvLZEa ZVTtrwlQLVvpC2Frl2bGuVAHOB5Z3oV23s9I4= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.50.202.65 with SMTP id kg1mr21309099igc.1.1323814790648; Tue, 13 Dec 2011 14:19:50 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.50.170.105 with HTTP; Tue, 13 Dec 2011 14:19:50 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2011 17:19:50 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: slides from Dr. Chu's lunch time talk on Smart Cloud Computing Network Architecture and Services during IETF-82 From: Bhumip Khasnabish To: dc@ietf.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f46d0447851558549604b400a699 Cc: vnrg@irtf.org, opsawg@ietf.org, l3vpn@ietf.org, apps-discuss@ietf.org X-BeenThere: l3vpn@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2011 22:19:52 -0000 --f46d0447851558549604b400a699 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable For the Cloud and Data center enthusiasts, the slides from Dr. Chu's lunch time talk on Smart Cloud Computing Network Architecture and Services during IETF-82 ( (on Thu-17-Nov.-2011, Taipei, Taiwan) can be found at the following website: http://trac.tools.ietf.org/area/app/trac/attachment/wiki/Clouds/ The file names are part1-IETF-82-LunchTalk-Smart-Cloud-Computing-Network-Architecture-and-Serv= ices_v3-Public-Thu17Nov2011.pdf (990.4 KB) part2-IETF-82-LunchTalk-Smart-Cloud-Computing-Network-Architecture-and-Serv= ices_v3-Public-Thu17Nov2011.pdf (742.0 KB) part3-IETF-82-LunchTalk-Smart-Cloud-Computing-Network-Architecture-and-Serv= ices_v3-Public-Thu17Nov2011.pdf (813.0 KB) Thanks. Best. Bhumip Khasnabish vumip1@gmail.com bhumip.khasnabish@zteusa.com +1-781-752-8003 (mobile) http://www.linkedin.com/in/bhumipkhasnabish __o _ `\ <, _ .......... ( =95 ) / ( =95 ) ...................... --f46d0447851558549604b400a699 Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
For the Cloud and Data center enthusiasts, the slides from
Dr. Chu's lunch time talk on
Smart Cloud Computing Network Architecture and Services
during IETF-82 ( (on Thu-17-Nov.-2011, Taipei, Taiwan) can
be found at the following=A0 website:
=A0
The file names are

part1-IETF-82-LunchTalk-Smart-Cloud-Computing-Network-Architecture-and-S= ervices_v3-Public-Thu17Nov2011.pdf (990.4 KB)

part2-IETF-82-LunchTalk-Smart-Cloud-Computing-Network-Architecture-and-S= ervices_v3-Public-Thu17Nov2011.pdf (742.0 KB)

part3-IETF-82-LunchTalk-Smart-Cloud-Computing-Network-Architecture-and-S= ervices_v3-Public-Thu17Nov2011.pdf (813.0 KB)

=A0
Thanks.
Best.

Bhumip Khasnabish

=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 __o
=A0= =A0=A0 =A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 _ `\ <, _
.......... ( =95 ) / ( =95 = ) ......................

--f46d0447851558549604b400a699-- From lufang@cisco.com Wed Dec 14 07:52:53 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: l3vpn@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: l3vpn@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 36C1221F8BA8; Wed, 14 Dec 2011 07:52:53 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.001, 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 LC1oSzC9s9wv; Wed, 14 Dec 2011 07:52:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from rcdn-iport-6.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-6.cisco.com [173.37.86.77]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BED7B21F8B87; Wed, 14 Dec 2011 07:52:51 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=lufang@cisco.com; l=12029; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1323877972; x=1325087572; h=mime-version:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to: references:from:to:cc; bh=PHttAAO0kBy22XaVoyuae51OMPOoClWImBh556ks2XA=; b=fRqegoBGxcwHD4NTEAzKmjEdbFBnCyVQ2W1epqBqXcQR0uRyE4S5iz7n AUygCrp2iWqh/NnVdelPMPjzK7lz+7LgBjINsC/mfPZlQjoDS1fy8XBXl 9DqZ2y3HijvjgCg0tWwMN3E/5zx5kC4/wgzlqC3GAXR6xtRtau+NWFM8M Q=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Ap8AANTF6E6tJXG//2dsb2JhbABDgk2YFIgTiDOBBYFyAQEBBBIBCQEQAzcBERACAQgRBAEBCwYXAQYBRQcBAQUDAQEEARIIGodgmF8Bnl2LJmMEgliFWp8L X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.71,352,1320624000"; d="scan'208,217";a="43885580" Received: from rcdn-core2-4.cisco.com ([173.37.113.191]) by rcdn-iport-6.cisco.com with ESMTP; 14 Dec 2011 15:52:51 +0000 Received: from xbh-rcd-101.cisco.com (xbh-rcd-101.cisco.com [72.163.62.138]) by rcdn-core2-4.cisco.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id pBEFqpQW031976; Wed, 14 Dec 2011 15:52:51 GMT Received: from xmb-rcd-201.cisco.com ([72.163.62.208]) by xbh-rcd-101.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Wed, 14 Dec 2011 09:52:51 -0600 X-Mimeole: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01CCBA78.6EF0D4F8" Subject: FW: [Sdnp] Carrier Cloud 2012: Call for Papers Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2011 09:52:48 -0600 Message-ID: <238542D917511A45B6B8AA806E875E25078503E5@XMB-RCD-201.cisco.com> In-Reply-To: <7CD4FCD7-9EBF-40BD-83A0-6E8F9FFE4902@wanadoo.fr> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: FW: [Sdnp] Carrier Cloud 2012: Call for Papers Thread-Index: Acy6d21QNNLKOd0CRh68334M9wjsCQAAFlFw References: <7CD4FCD7-9EBF-40BD-83A0-6E8F9FFE4902@wanadoo.fr> From: "Luyuan Fang (lufang)" To: "Remi Scavenius" , X-OriginalArrivalTime: 14 Dec 2011 15:52:51.0096 (UTC) FILETIME=[6F2CF180:01CCBA78] Cc: l2vpn@ietf.org, opsawg@ietf.org, l3vpn@ietf.org, dc@ietf.org, armd@ietf.org X-BeenThere: l3vpn@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2011 15:52:53 -0000 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------_=_NextPart_001_01CCBA78.6EF0D4F8 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable =20 =20 From: sdnp-bounces@lucidvision.com [mailto:sdnp-bounces@lucidvision.com] On Behalf Of Remi Scavenius Sent: Wednesday, December 14, 2011 10:38 AM To: sdnp@lucidvision.com Subject: [Sdnp] Carrier Cloud 2012: Call for Papers =20 If this email does not display correctly, please click here =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 Carrier Cloud 2012: Transforming Service Providers Business =20 =20 =20 SaaS and IaaS are one thing and networking is another. This is an argument carriers can definitely put on the table when investigating the cloud services market. During the Carrier Cloud Summit, to be held in Novotel Wellness & Convention Centre Paris Roissy CDG from 19 to 21 June, 2012, project leaders, manufacturers and service developers will address all technical issues through up-to-date contributions. A call for proposals is effective until January 31st, 2012. The proposals will be analyzed by a scientific committee.=20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 Organized by Upperside Conferences 54 rue du Faubourg Saint Antoine 75012 Paris - France =20 If you don't want to receive emails regarding our conferences and events, send us an email. =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 ------_=_NextPart_001_01CCBA78.6EF0D4F8 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

 

 

From:= = sdnp-bounces@lucidvision.com [mailto:sdnp-bounces@lucidvision.com] On Behalf Of Remi = Scavenius
Sent: Wednesday, December 14, 2011 10:38 AM
To: sdnp@lucidvision.com
Subject: [Sdnp] Carrier Cloud 2012: Call for = Papers

 

If this = email does not display correctly, please click here

 

 

 

 

Carrier Cloud 2012: Transforming Service Providers = Business

 

 

SaaS and IaaS are one thing and networking is = another. This is an argument carriers can definitely put on the table when investigating the cloud services market. During the Carrier Cloud = Summit, to be held in Novotel Wellness & Convention Centre Paris Roissy = CDG from 19 to 21 June, 2012, project leaders, manufacturers and service developers will address all technical = issues through up-to-date contributions.

A call for proposals is effective until January 31st, = 2012.

The proposals will be analyzed by a scientific = committee.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Organized = by Upperside Conferences 54 rue du = Faubourg Saint Antoine 75012 Paris - France

 

If you don't = want to receive emails regarding our conferences and events, send us an = email.

 

 

 

 

 

------_=_NextPart_001_01CCBA78.6EF0D4F8-- From adrian@olddog.co.uk Wed Dec 14 09:38:48 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: l3vpn@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: l3vpn@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 442EC21F85A1; Wed, 14 Dec 2011 09:38:48 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.574 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.574 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.025, 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 KQL+3QUAwobM; Wed, 14 Dec 2011 09:38:47 -0800 (PST) Received: from asmtp1.iomartmail.com (asmtp1.iomartmail.com [62.128.201.248]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C702E21F84FB; Wed, 14 Dec 2011 09:38:41 -0800 (PST) Received: from asmtp1.iomartmail.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by asmtp1.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id pBEHccBi007798; Wed, 14 Dec 2011 17:38:38 GMT Received: from 950129200 (217.114.116.8.networkplus.customer.ch.easynet.net [217.114.116.8] (may be forged)) (authenticated bits=0) by asmtp1.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id pBEHcYcB007781 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Wed, 14 Dec 2011 17:38:36 GMT From: "Adrian Farrel" To: , , , , Subject: FYI: Joint O&M / Routing Area Interim To Discuss Data Center Network Challenges Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2011 17:38:34 -0000 Message-ID: <009801ccba87$36863c60$a392b520$@olddog.co.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0 Thread-Index: Acy6hzHKHnVyuytBRK+ntRHEAC1QUw== Content-Language: en-gb X-BeenThere: l3vpn@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: adrian@olddog.co.uk List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2011 17:38:48 -0000 Please be aware. Thanks, Adrian > -----Original Message----- > From: ietf-announce-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:ietf-announce- > bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of IESG Secretary > Sent: 14 December 2011 17:26 > To: IETF Announcement list > Cc: dc@ietf.org > Subject: Joint O&M / Routing Area Interim To Discuss Data Center Network > Challenges > > The IETF Operations and Routing Areas will hold a two-day joint interim meeting > in late January or early February to discuss networking > challenges encountered in data centers. A doodle poll has been posted at > http://www.doodle.com/hiu9xgw7tg7pkrwg in order to gauge interest > and identify a convenient date. While a venue has not yet been chosen, the IETF > is considering sites in the eastern part of the United States > and Canada. An attendance fee may be charged to cover meeting costs. > > Those requesting time on the agenda are asked to submit Internet Drafts in the > following areas: > > - New services offered through data centers > - Networking requirements for the data center > - Network architectures for the data center > - Scaling, resiliency, security issues in the data center networks > > Internet Drafts considered by this meeting will specify motivation, requirements > and constraints for data center networking solutions > to be developed by the IETF. Presentations regarding solutions will be > entertained only if that discussion helps to describe the problem > space and time permits a balanced discussion of candidate technologies. > > All drafts presented at this meeting will be announced and discussed on the IETF > Data Center Mailing List (dc@ietf.org). Those submitting > drafts are asked to announce them to the mailing list upon submission. > _______________________________________________ > IETF-Announce mailing list > IETF-Announce@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce From radiatel2004@yahoo.fr Fri Dec 16 06:18:54 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: l3vpn@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: l3vpn@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7164721F8B66 for ; Fri, 16 Dec 2011 06:18:54 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 1.752 X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.752 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.750, BAYES_50=0.001, 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 1jP0Rw6DN9rM for ; Fri, 16 Dec 2011 06:18:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from nm17.bullet.mail.ukl.yahoo.com (nm17.bullet.mail.ukl.yahoo.com [217.146.183.191]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 4DAE321F8B57 for ; Fri, 16 Dec 2011 06:18:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from [217.146.183.182] by nm17.bullet.mail.ukl.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 16 Dec 2011 14:15:57 -0000 Received: from [217.146.183.165] by tm13.bullet.mail.ukl.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 16 Dec 2011 14:15:57 -0000 Received: from [127.0.0.1] by omp1006.mail.ukl.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 16 Dec 2011 14:15:57 -0000 X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 562546.72873.bm@omp1006.mail.ukl.yahoo.com Received: (qmail 59786 invoked by uid 60001); 16 Dec 2011 14:15:57 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoo.fr; s=s1024; t=1324044957; bh=YREDPnyEXZ7D/jf8g+C9YZvpwtldrBjpA+slV1KsXzs=; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:References:Message-ID:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=akw3xoVgSE6zxfB7zPsdK8H810QXT5H5OMOx/nNLk6fLJXF2gAQFGM5l1KnLpELhs40cZ3nd1cxyv4ev9+2gx2EoO7xgqS7HegeIADayUrhliEYbjLhe49v5iypOmIV8Ph7lvPdUMiKd7XeU5qQM9JRBTsvWNjgfa3EQruYlaxQ= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.fr; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:References:Message-ID:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=2blDAUekvU1Og0BAiZrvT1ZjlNSINfP7U/ot5KrTfC1vClTyCAozOQ19NPXf6UbktnO4ULnqbPVJQ9ldElar8KCHUuA/l/FbNtUmcJvKlbFWDLkK+HIPbrsNNnfjUT2eSlzPx9WNmGvGBau2P/Ay7zTOzoSwntsJV5wLF3oS3kk=; X-YMail-OSG: 6M_lhr4VM1kkJaB8kOKhLXCusyyMrD2R11btYhnTrqvGT_f m2fV.w_y5Q1KE.iBiu3uRQWI8aSKGJ6I7Rubn66eCqnsqOBjoDzA7iEu9PFO uXM3PpRLbefXJ_airpIHcWUMI8g.w8VvGRkS47d8WXfzHT6k23eHIv3vCHmN uCjX7LhJjSXrhm3TFDiosXOo4YhrfP6UxDn5jIYMBjNyLm8MMK17TXbn3G26 n6U172I8OWFbINvpB3jILL6bHDChQ4aquRynbI_J3gkgLphFr5ChRKDz0KLz 4AH6KdKpKg2i8TIfqbzpxkdB9OAZJeRbpwJMWjCRBv6Q8oUjHr5ioIX.kfpN GtPlkXlWPnKU5BcxjrbGocwBpwrxw9f7vW7jkGrJQLG8ivLrNBJx4yKjBzZE fH40M3nEwGOluNDCSrxzHU2pu2.H6Aknl8HdRZ270955TcA9dmk9q.b3IPDd hQT2toYaOvBKWTNHawVsjUNZVqxRqI24FsyEX Received: from [41.96.110.48] by web27101.mail.ukl.yahoo.com via HTTP; Fri, 16 Dec 2011 14:15:57 GMT X-Mailer: YahooMailWebService/0.8.115.331698 References: <20111216042303.59C5911E8093@ietfa.amsl.com> Message-ID: <1324044957.48017.YahooMailNeo@web27101.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2011 14:15:57 +0000 (GMT) From: radia boukari Subject: Re :ok To: "l3vpn@ietfa.amsl.com" In-Reply-To: <20111216042303.59C5911E8093@ietfa.amsl.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="-1967543159-1301344462-1324044957=:48017" X-BeenThere: l3vpn@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: radia boukari List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2011 14:18:54 -0000 ---1967543159-1301344462-1324044957=:48017 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable =0A=0A=0A=0A________________________________=0A De=A0: "l3vpn@ietfa.amsl.co= m" =0A=C0=A0: radiatel2004@yahoo.fr =0AEnvoy=E9 le : = Vendredi 16 D=E9cembre 2011 5h23=0AObjet=A0: Confirm: l3vpn@ietfa.amsl.com:= yaxDxcTurHpw:t_oxLBNbFWH0QzW_NQ2SjpEoDaiN3MQcr31aIg=0A =0A=0AConfirmation o= f list posting -- confirmation ID: yaxDxcTurHpw=0A=0AThe ietf.org mailing-l= ist server has received a list posting from =0Aradiatel2004@yahoo.fr to l3v= pn@ietfa.amsl.com with the subject =0A'New member'=0A=0AAs the sender addre= ss isn't subscribed to the list, and has not been=0Aconfirmed earlier, we h= ave to request a confirmation of the address.=0ATo confirm the address, sen= d a message to l3vpn@ietfa.amsl.com,=0Awith the same subject line as this m= essage.=0A=0A(Simply sending a 'reply' to this message should work from mos= t email=0Ainterfaces, since that usually leaves the subject line in the rig= ht=0Aform.=A0 The reply's additional "Re:" is ok.)=0A=0AIf you do not wish = your posting to the list to go through, simply=0Adisregard this message.=A0= Questions to postmaster@ietf.org. ---1967543159-1301344462-1324044957=:48017 Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

De := "l3vpn@ietfa.amsl.com" <l3vpn@ietfa.amsl.com>
=C0 : radiatel2004@yahoo.fr =
Envoy=E9 le : Vendred= i 16 D=E9cembre 2011 5h23
Objet&n= bsp;: Confirm: l3vpn@ietfa.amsl.com:yaxDxcTurHpw:t_oxLBNbFWH0QzW= _NQ2SjpEoDaiN3MQcr31aIg

Confirmation of list posting --= confirmation ID: yaxDxcTurHpw

The ietf.org mailing-list server has = received a list posting from
radiatel2004@yahoo.fr to l3vpn@ietfa.amsl= .com with the subject
'New member'

As the sender address isn= 't subscribed to the list, and has not been
confirmed earlier, we have t= o request a confirmation of the address.
To confirm the address, send a = message to l3vpn@ietfa.amsl.com,
with the same subject line as = this message.

(Simply sending a 'reply' to this message should work = from most email
interfaces, since that usually leaves the subject line i= n the right
form.  The reply's additional "Re:" is ok.)

If y= ou do not wish your posting to the list to go through, simply
disregard = this message.  Questions to postmaster@ietf.org.


---1967543159-1301344462-1324044957=:48017-- From adrian@olddog.co.uk Mon Dec 19 09:24:07 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: l3vpn@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: l3vpn@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AEC9A21F888A; Mon, 19 Dec 2011 09:24:07 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 9vbirbhatXVN; Mon, 19 Dec 2011 09:24:07 -0800 (PST) Received: from asmtp1.iomartmail.com (asmtp1.iomartmail.com [62.128.201.248]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C18AC21F851F; Mon, 19 Dec 2011 09:24:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from asmtp1.iomartmail.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by asmtp1.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id pBJHO5sr009114; Mon, 19 Dec 2011 17:24:05 GMT Received: from 950129200 (dsl-sp-81-140-15-32.in-addr.broadbandscope.com [81.140.15.32]) (authenticated bits=0) by asmtp1.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id pBJHO4D4009099 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Mon, 19 Dec 2011 17:24:04 GMT From: "Adrian Farrel" To: , References: <20111219170637.20167.36066.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> In-Reply-To: <20111219170637.20167.36066.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Subject: FW: Last Call: (Virtual Subnet Selection Options for DHCPv4 and DHCPv6) to Proposed Standard Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2011 17:24:04 -0000 Message-ID: <028301ccbe73$0273ed10$075bc730$@olddog.co.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0 Thread-Index: AQK1S9MT01vtlJXxc3iYhy7I9sdIppQSTb6A Content-Language: en-gb X-BeenThere: l3vpn@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: adrian@olddog.co.uk List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2011 17:24:07 -0000 Hi VPN fans, You may want to take a look at this I-D in IETF last call. Adrian > -----Original Message----- > From: ietf-announce-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:ietf-announce- > bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of The IESG > Sent: 19 December 2011 17:07 > To: IETF-Announce > Cc: dhcwg@ietf.org > Subject: Last Call: (Virtual Subnet Selection > Options for DHCPv4 and DHCPv6) to Proposed Standard > > > The IESG has received a request from the Dynamic Host Configuration WG > (dhc) to consider the following document: > - 'Virtual Subnet Selection Options for DHCPv4 and DHCPv6' > as a Proposed Standard > > The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits > final comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the > ietf@ietf.org mailing lists by 2012-01-04. Exceptionally, comments may be > sent to iesg@ietf.org instead. In either case, please retain the > beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting. > > Abstract > > > This memo defines a Virtual Subnet Selection (VSS) option for each of > DHCPv4 and DHCPv6, and a VSS sub-option carried in the DHCPv4 relay- > agent-information option. These are intended for use by DHCP > clients, relay agents, and proxy clients in situations where VSS > information needs to be passed to the DHCP server for proper address > or prefix allocation to take place. > > For the DHCPv4 option and relay-agent-information sub-option, this > memo documents existing usage as per RFC 3942 [RFC3942]. This memo > updates RFC 3046 [RFC3046] regarding details relating to copying of > sub-options (see Section 8). > > > > > The file can be obtained via > http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dhc-vpn-option/ > > IESG discussion can be tracked via > http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dhc-vpn-option/ > > > The following IPR Declarations may be related to this I-D: > > http://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/1245/ > > > > _______________________________________________ > IETF-Announce mailing list > IETF-Announce@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce From ben@niven-jenkins.co.uk Mon Dec 19 10:42:36 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: l3vpn@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: l3vpn@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B226C21F8488 for ; Mon, 19 Dec 2011 10:42:36 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -100.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-100.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=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 7KaswEf97Tye for ; Mon, 19 Dec 2011 10:42:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from mailex.mailcore.me (mailex.mailcore.me [94.136.40.62]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6AABF11E8080 for ; Mon, 19 Dec 2011 10:42:31 -0800 (PST) Received: from host1.cachelogic.com ([212.44.43.80] helo=xxx.dhcp.cachelogic.com) by mail11.atlas.pipex.net with esmtpa (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RciAP-0003h2-UA; Mon, 19 Dec 2011 18:42:30 +0000 Subject: Re: WG Last Call: draft-ietf-l3vpn-mvpn-wildcards-00 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Ben Niven-Jenkins In-Reply-To: <1BFE7EAB-8CB7-4AC3-87EC-74F3EC54AC15@niven-jenkins.co.uk> Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2011 18:42:29 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <7069E83C-CE21-4A7E-AE9B-1675704F93F7@niven-jenkins.co.uk> References: <1BFE7EAB-8CB7-4AC3-87EC-74F3EC54AC15@niven-jenkins.co.uk> To: Ben Niven-Jenkins X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084) X-Mailcore-Auth: 9600544 X-Mailcore-Domain: 172912 Cc: "l3vpn@ietf.org mailing list" X-BeenThere: l3vpn@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2011 18:42:36 -0000 Colleagues, Just a gentle reminder that this WG Last Call ends tomorrow and to date = there have been no technical comments made against the draft. Please read the draft and provide any comments you may have asap. Thanks Ben On 6 Dec 2011, at 23:54, Ben Niven-Jenkins wrote: > Colleagues, >=20 > This e-mail is the start of a 2 week WG Last Call for = draft-ietf-l3vpn-mvpn-wildcards-00. >=20 > Please read the draft and provide any comments you may have. >=20 > Feedback should be provided to the mailing list and/or the authors. >=20 > Last Call ends at midnight PST on the 20th December. >=20 > Thanks > Ben From johnleav@163.com Wed Dec 21 17:39:57 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: l3vpn@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: l3vpn@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A396711E80DA; Wed, 21 Dec 2011 17:39:57 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 4.908 X-Spam-Level: **** X-Spam-Status: No, score=4.908 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.001, CN_BODY_35=0.339, MIME_CHARSET_FARAWAY=2.45, RELAY_IS_220=2.118] 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 yFgFaeF+-2Wp; Wed, 21 Dec 2011 17:39:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from m12-14.163.com (m12-14.163.com [220.181.12.14]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A803B11E8096; Wed, 21 Dec 2011 17:39:55 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=163.com; s=s110527; h=Received:From:To:References:In-Reply-To:Subject: Date:Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Thread-Index:Content-Language; bh=RwRV wEZZDNlDAIZG1jiicNhb7okfPf3FecxC7oyL6aY=; b=SkjSAkJ3w8wUo1dZfXDq eqLf8d8C0GvKZvfcKgcPyRLUSQIyZRZemU2xYTh8arlM2TUP8JC+IGHuRUugY61l 79cVYjU0caMWe66oiwRx5QY5GUUD6PBYTM0I4VQIIV1hUP154zYput5tT7q++ASf TzIK9xIfsNCrggyyWZNLSlo= Received: from userTHINK (unknown [211.144.118.193]) by smtp10 (Coremail) with SMTP id DsCowLCbslFcivJOU0+tAg--.14398S2; Thu, 22 Dec 2011 09:39:40 +0800 (CST) X-Coremail-DSSMTP: 211.144.118.193 From: "John" To: , References: <20111219170637.20167.36066.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <028301ccbe73$0273ed10$075bc730$@olddog.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <028301ccbe73$0273ed10$075bc730$@olddog.co.uk> Subject: unsubscribe Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2011 09:39:40 +0800 Message-ID: <000c01ccc04a$92669110$b733b330$@com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="gb2312" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0 Thread-Index: AQK1S9MT01vtlJXxc3iYhy7I9sdIppQSTb6AgAOvp6A= Content-Language: zh-cn X-CM-TRANSID: DsCowLCbslFcivJOU0+tAg--.14398S2 X-Coremail-Antispam: 1Uf129KBjvJXoWxXF1UtFy8trWfCw1rCw4UArb_yoW5Jw18pr yfA3y7Gw4rJr4xAw4xJwn5CryFv39YvFW7Jw13Ka10vF90y3Wvqa10vw15AFy7Arn5Jr42 vr109r17Xwn3ZrJanT9S1TB71UUUUUUqnTZGkaVYY2UrUUUUjbIjqfuFe4nvWSU5nxnvy2 9KBjDUYxBIdaVFxhVjvjDU0xZFpf9x07jA_-PUUUUU= X-CM-SenderInfo: hmrk0zxhdyqiywtou0bp/1tbiRR4euUiSoFfieAAAsL X-BeenThere: l3vpn@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2011 01:39:57 -0000 unsubscribe -----=D3=CA=BC=FE=D4=AD=BC=FE----- =B7=A2=BC=FE=C8=CB: l3vpn-bounces@ietf.org = [mailto:l3vpn-bounces@ietf.org] =B4=FA=B1=ED Adrian Farrel =B7=A2=CB=CD=CA=B1=BC=E4: 2011=C4=EA12=D4=C220=C8=D5 1:24 =CA=D5=BC=FE=C8=CB: l2vpn@ietf.org; l3vpn@ietf.org =D6=F7=CC=E2: FW: Last Call: (Virtual = Subnet Selection Options for DHCPv4 and DHCPv6) to Proposed Standard Hi VPN fans, You may want to take a look at this I-D in IETF last call. Adrian > -----Original Message----- > From: ietf-announce-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:ietf-announce- > bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of The IESG > Sent: 19 December 2011 17:07 > To: IETF-Announce > Cc: dhcwg@ietf.org > Subject: Last Call: (Virtual Subnet Selection > Options for DHCPv4 and DHCPv6) to Proposed Standard >=20 >=20 > The IESG has received a request from the Dynamic Host Configuration WG > (dhc) to consider the following document: > - 'Virtual Subnet Selection Options for DHCPv4 and DHCPv6' > as a Proposed Standard >=20 > The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits > final comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the > ietf@ietf.org mailing lists by 2012-01-04. Exceptionally, comments may = be > sent to iesg@ietf.org instead. In either case, please retain the > beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting. >=20 > Abstract >=20 >=20 > This memo defines a Virtual Subnet Selection (VSS) option for each = of > DHCPv4 and DHCPv6, and a VSS sub-option carried in the DHCPv4 = relay- > agent-information option. These are intended for use by DHCP > clients, relay agents, and proxy clients in situations where VSS > information needs to be passed to the DHCP server for proper = address > or prefix allocation to take place. >=20 > For the DHCPv4 option and relay-agent-information sub-option, this > memo documents existing usage as per RFC 3942 [RFC3942]. This memo > updates RFC 3046 [RFC3046] regarding details relating to copying of > sub-options (see Section 8). >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 > The file can be obtained via > http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dhc-vpn-option/ >=20 > IESG discussion can be tracked via > http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dhc-vpn-option/ >=20 >=20 > The following IPR Declarations may be related to this I-D: >=20 > http://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/1245/ >=20 >=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > IETF-Announce mailing list > IETF-Announce@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce