Re: WG LC on draft-ietf-idr-eag-distribution-09.txt (10/30 to 11/13/2019)

Ketan:

 

Thank you for updating the report card.   2 implementation are enough to go to the IESG.  If the other ones come back, we can add them later.

 

Sue 

 

From: Ketan Talaulikar (ketant) [mailto:[email protected]] 
Sent: Saturday, November 2, 2019 9:39 AM
To: Susan Hares; 'idr wg'
Subject: RE: [Idr] WG LC on draft-ietf-idr-eag-distribution-09.txt (10/30 to 11/13/2019)

 

Hi Sue,

 

I see that there are only 2 Cisco implementations on the report now and I can confirm that they have interoperated. I am not sure about other implementations and I am not aware of their interoperability aspects.

 

Thanks,

Ketan

 

From: Idr <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Susan Hares
Sent: 30 October 2019 18:56
To: 'idr wg' <[email protected]>
Subject: [Idr] WG LC on draft-ietf-idr-eag-distribution-09.txt (10/30 to 11/13/2019)

 

This begins a 2 week WG last call for draft-ietf-idr-eag-distribution-09.txt. 

 

The first thing the authors need to do during the WG LC is to indicate whether the protocol implementation report  on this draft is accurate on the IDR Wiki:

 

 https://trac.ietf.org/trac/idr/wiki/draft-ietf-idr-eag-distribution%20implementations

 

The IDR WG needs to know whether the 4 implementations indicated (2 cisco and 2 Huawei) have interoperated using this TLV code point.   The current web page leaves some doubt. 

 

Cheerily, Susan Hares

_______________________________________________
Idr mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr