Jeff Tantsura

Great Rob, thanks for that! Cheers, Jeff > On Jul 26, 2017, at 05:17, bclaise wrote: > > Good news Rob. > > — > You are receiving this because...

Guys, Could we please resurrect the discussion, we are 6 months later, have there been any changes, in any particular direction? I’m also trying to form in IETF RTGWG an...

Darren, Link BW functionality as described in draft-ietf-idr-link-bandwidth is rather limited, please take a look at draft-ietf-bess-ebgp-dmz which addresses most of the limitations (transitivity is still upto implementation though), there...

Please note that we (IETF RTGWG chairs) have just last called draft-ietf-rtgwg-vrrp-rfc5798bis, upon becoming RFC it will absolete RFC5798, please use it as a base. Cheers, Jeff On Fri, Jul...

In IETF models we have followed a similar approach: draft-ietf-idr-bgp-model: typedef bgp-next-hop-type { type union { type inet:ip-address-no-zone; type enumeration { enum self { description "Special designation for local router's...

Rob is right, bridging table is usually kept separately, and depending of whether it is qualified learning or not, it would be associated with a bridge or bridge/vlan Regards, Jeff...

+1 Adam Cheers, Jeff > On Jun 2, 2017, at 19:09, Rob Shakir wrote: > > Hi Adam, > > I tend to agree here. I've opened an operators-repo issue...