Hi all, Since the draft-ietf-rtgwg-segment-routing-ti-lfa version 13 was submitted to the IESG for publication in Feb this year, it has gone through several iterations to address review comments.
We'd like to bring the WG's attention that it is no longer a mandatory requirement to follow the post-convergence path. The section 11 in version 13 (Advantages of using the expected post-convergence path during FRR) is now in Appendix A. Ahmed mentioned during his presentation at IETF121 that this change was due to hardware limitations (recording: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6qVpJsG9nO4), but this is not included in the draft. Whether it is important to follow the post-convergence path is not clearly stated in the draft, or under what circumstances the post-convergence path is recommended and should be followed. We'd like to get the WG's opinion about the change. Please note that currently the draft is Standards Track. Whether it should be kept as Standards Track or moved to Informational should also be considered. Please review the latest version of the document and send your comments to the list before December 14th, especially if you're not in agreement with this change or you think it should be moved to Informational. Thanks, Jeff and Yingzhen (RTGWG co-chairs)
_______________________________________________ rtgwg mailing list -- rtgwg@ietf.org To unsubscribe send an email to rtgwg-le...@ietf.org
