Re: [spring] Rtgdir last call review of draft-ietf-spring-sr-replication-segment-10

Many thanks Rishabh for addressing my comments. BR, Ines. On Wed, Dec 7, 2022 at 2:29 AM Rishabh Parekh wrote: > Ines, > > Please find my replies inline below @ [RP] > > >> 1- Requirements Language section should add RFC 8174, i.e. ""NOT >> RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this docume

Re: [spring] [ippm]Progressing the PBT-M “Zero Overhead property” draft

Hi Gyan, I’ve read this draft, and I agree with you this is very useful. The value I find special on the PBT-M proposed in this document is that it may not need an extension header. And it could be easy to implement. There are a lot of discussions in 6MAN and MPLS (MNA) about the device behavior