Al Morton | 3 Jun 21:59 2010
Picon

Fwd: IETF 78 - Meeting and Sponsorship Information


>From: IETF Secretariat <ietf-secretariat <at> ietf.org>
>To: Working Group Chairs <wgchairs <at> ietf.org>
>Subject: IETF 78 - Meeting and Sponsorship Information
>Date: Thu,  3 Jun 2010 12:51:40 -0700 (PDT)
>X-BeenThere: wgchairs <at> ietf.org
>X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
>List-Id: Working Group Chairs <wgchairs.ietf.org>
>List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/wgchairs>,
>         <mailto:wgchairs-request <at> ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
>List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/wgchairs>
>List-Post: <mailto:wgchairs <at> ietf.org>
>List-Help: <mailto:wgchairs-request <at> ietf.org?subject=help>
>List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/wgchairs>,
>         <mailto:wgchairs-request <at> ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
>Sender: wgchairs-bounces <at> ietf.org
>
>Working Group Chairs,
>
>Can you please forward this message to your individual working group
>emails lists.  We want to ensure that as many people as possible are aware
>of the sponsorship opportunities available at IETF meetings.
>
>Thank you.
>==========================================
>78th IETF Meeting
>Maastricht, Netherlands
>July 25-30, 2010
>
>1. Sponsorship Opportunities
(Continue reading)

The IESG | 11 Jun 17:20 2010
Picon

Last Call: draft-ietf-bmwg-igp-dataplane-conv-meth (Benchmarking Methodology for IGP ) to Informational RFC

The IESG has received a request from the Benchmarking Methodology WG 
(bmwg) to consider the following document:

- 'Benchmarking Methodology for Link-State IGP Data Plane Route 
   Convergence '
   <draft-ietf-bmwg-igp-dataplane-conv-meth-21.txt> as an Informational RFC

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 <at> ietf.org mailing lists by 2010-06-25. Exceptionally, 
comments may be sent to iesg <at> ietf.org instead. In either case, please 
retain the beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting.

The file can be obtained via
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-bmwg-igp-dataplane-conv-meth-21.txt

IESG discussion can be tracked via
https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/pidtracker.cgi?command=view_id&dTag=10466&rfc_flag=0

Al Morton | 16 Jun 23:58 2010
Picon

WGLC: draft-ietf-bmwg-reset-00

BMWG,

We've just added a Milestone to update 2544 Reset Benchmarking:
Sep 2010  Networking Device Reset Benchmark (Updates RFC 2544) to IESG Review

This message begins the First WG Last call on the corresponding draft:

http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-bmwg-reset-00

The Last Call will end on July 21, 2010, which gives a little extra
time for Summer holidays.  Since this is the First WGLC, I ask folks
to consider items in the active review template as they review the
drafts.  Almost everyone of us has conducted this sort of testing,
and so many should have an opinion on the updated methods this draft
will bring to the industry.

The authors plan to revise the draft quickly and have an updated version
ready for discussion at IETF-78.

Please weigh-in on whether or not this Internet-Draft
should be given to the Area Directors and IESG for consideration and
publication as an Informational RFC.  Send your comments
to this list and/or acmorton <at> att.com.

Al
bmwg chair
Andrew Yourtchenko | 18 Jun 00:16 2010
Picon

Re: WGLC: draft-ietf-bmwg-reset-00

Hello,

I wanted to express the support for this document.

And a couple of nits:

1) A purist nit:

in (3) we have:

'it is desirable to classify each test case as "MUST" or "optional".'

but then later:

'3.1.1.1. RP Failure for a single-RP device (mandatory)'

i.e. "mandatory" vs. "MUST".

2) A formatting one:

on page 15, everything includes an extra empty line at linebreak,
makes it a bit "sparse" to read:

              Throughput               Frames per second and bits per

                                       second

              Loss                     Frames

Maybe more like this:
(Continue reading)

Carlos Pignataro | 19 Jun 05:56 2010
X-Face
Picon

Re: WGLC: draft-ietf-bmwg-reset-00

Andrew,

Many thanks for your review. We have fixed these two issues you
identified in our working copy as follows:

1. Use "REQUIRED" and "OPTIONAL" consistently.
   (great catch, thank you !)

2. Remove extraneous empty lines.

Thanks,

-- Carlos.

On 6/17/2010 6:16 PM, Andrew Yourtchenko wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> I wanted to express the support for this document.
> 
> And a couple of nits:
> 
> 1) A purist nit:
> 
> in (3) we have:
> 
> 'it is desirable to classify each test case as "MUST" or "optional".'
> 
> but then later:
> 
> '3.1.1.1. RP Failure for a single-RP device (mandatory)'
(Continue reading)

Al Morton | 22 Jun 14:50 2010
Picon

Fwd: Nomcom 2010-2011: Second Call for Volunteers

BMWG,

More volunteers for NomCom needed, note the eligibility
requirements and volunteer if you can.

Al
bmwg chair

>From: NomCom Chair <nomcom-chair <at> ietf.org>
>To: IETF Announcement list <ietf-announce <at> ietf.org>
>Subject: Nomcom 2010-2011: Second Call for Volunteers
>Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2010 14:49:08 -0700 (PDT)
>X-BeenThere: ietf-announce <at> ietf.org
>X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
>List-Id: "IETF announcement list. No discussions." <ietf-announce.ietf.org>
>List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce>,
>         <mailto:ietf-announce-request <at> ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
>List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf-announce>
>List-Post: <mailto:ietf-announce <at> ietf.org>
>List-Help: <mailto:ietf-announce-request <at> ietf.org?subject=help>
>List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce>,
>         <mailto:ietf-announce-request <at> ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
>Sender: ietf-announce-bounces <at> ietf.org
>
>Hi all,
>
>This is the Second call for Volunteers for the 2010-11 nomcom.  We are
>just about halfway through the volunteer period so if you are considering
>volunteering please do so very soon.
>
(Continue reading)

Al Morton | 24 Jun 21:10 2010
Picon

BMWG Agenda Requests [was Fwd: WebEx and Remote Presentations]

BMWG,

With the decision below in mind,  I ask that folks consider
their WG drafts and proposed work and make agenda requests
(with supporting info, as always) to me by July 13th, 2010.

regards,
Al
bmwg chair

>Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2010 14:50:21 -0400
>From: The IESG <iesg <at> ietf.org>
>User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US;
>         rv:1.9.1.10) Gecko/20100512 Thunderbird/3.0.5
>To: IETF WG Chairs <wgchairs <at> ietf.org>
>Subject: WebEx and Remote Presentations
>Cc: IAB <iab <at> iab.org>
>X-BeenThere: wgchairs <at> ietf.org
>X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
>Reply-To: iesg <at> ietf.org
>List-Id: Working Group Chairs <wgchairs.ietf.org>
>Sender: wgchairs-bounces <at> ietf.org
>
>Dear WG Chairs:
>
>WebEx has proven a very useful tool for interim virtual meetings, and we
>will continue to make WebEx available for this purpose.
>
>The IETF has tried a WebEx experiment for remote presentations at IETF
>meetings.  For the most part, this experiment has been a failure.  Too
(Continue reading)

Al Morton | 29 Jun 21:32 2010
Picon

Re: WGLC: draft-ietf-bmwg-reset-00

At 05:58 PM 6/16/2010, Al Morton wrote:
>... This message begins the First WG Last call on the corresponding draft:
>
>http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-bmwg-reset-00
>
>The Last Call will end on July 21, 2010,

As Chair, I'm reminding active bmwg'ers to queue this up
on their reading list in the next few weeks and provide
feedback.

As a participant, my comments follow.

Good draft, a little more to do.
Al

>PS: this PS text should show-up in your mail reader as
>indented or quoted text, otherwise you'll have some trouble
>deciphering my comments below.

>1. Introduction
>...
>    In order to provide consistent and fairness while benchmarking a set
>    of different DUTs, the Network tester / Operator MUST (a) use
>    identical control and data plane information during testing, (b)
>    document & report any factors that may influence the overall time
>    after reset / convergence.

It's odd to have a requirement in the Intro, I suggest to move it to
a later section.
(Continue reading)


Gmane