Hi Ali,
thank you for the detailed response. Please find my follow up notes inlined
below under the GIM>> tag.
Regards,
Greg
On Wed, Jun 5, 2024 at 10:51 PM Ali Sajassi (sajassi)
wrote:
> Hi Greg,
>
>
>
> The questions that was asked initially are different that your questions.
> But let me ans
Hello Greg, Ali,
I know that there is existing equipment that perform deep packet inspection
based on the content of the first nibble and not on whether there is an entropy
label present in the MPLS stack.
Without a control word, and when the payload is a non-IP packet, such equipment
may misi
Reviewer: Jouni Korhonen
Review result: Ready with Nits
I am an assigned GEN-ART directorate reviewer for
draft-ietf-bess-evpn-mh-split-horizon-08.
Summary: Ready with nits
Overall I found the document ready for publication. I have not followed the
topic thus I abstain myself from technical comm
Hi Linda,
I don’t think we need to put too much explanation wrt SRv6 because with respect
to IPsec, it is just a IPv6 encapsulation. So, let me expand on it with respect
to your four points below:
1. Scenario description: The rational and the reasons for needing IPsec are
basically the same
Hi Greg,
Section 18 of RFC7432bis has been carefully worded to ensure its accuracy
specially wrt “SHOULD” and “MUST” keywords. We cannot blindly require the use
of control word for all non-IP payloads (e.g., Ethernet payload) as it depends
on a) type of tunnels used (TE vs. non-TE), b) unicast
