Re: [spring] [Int-area] FW: New Version Notification for draft-raviolli-intarea-trusted-domain-srv6-00.txt

+1 If we allocate a /16 for SRv6 USIDs, as proposed in https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-6man-sids-02.txt, we can allow that prefix only when the new ethertype is used. Ron From: spring On Behalf Of Krz

Re: [spring] [Int-area] FW: New Version Notification for draft-raviolli-intarea-trusted-domain-srv6-00.txt

On second thought, if we had the new ethertype, we wouldn’t need the new /16! They serve the same function Ron From: Ron Bonica Sent: Friday, March 31, 2023 1:05 PM To: Krzysztof Szarkowicz ; Kireeti Kompella Cc: Adrian F

Re: [spring] Pending work items on draft-ietf-spring-bfd

Hi Greg I see S-BFD as the most prevalent flavour of BFD for monitoring SR Policies, avoiding the need for LSP Ping bootstrapping. Nokia has an implementation for both MPLS and SRv6 SR Policies, and I am aware of others out there. Given the widespread implementation of S-BFD for SR Policy, it

Re: [spring] [Int-area] FW: New Version Notification for draft-raviolli-intarea-trusted-domain-srv6-00.txt

On 01-Apr-23 06:18, Ron Bonica wrote: On second thought, if we had the new ethertype, we wouldn’t need the new /16! They serve the same function However, a new special-purpose prefix is rather trivial to deploy compared with a new Ethertype. Brian  

[spring] I-D Action: draft-ietf-spring-srv6-srh-compression-04.txt

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This Internet-Draft is a work item of the Source Packet Routing in Networking (SPRING) WG of the IETF. Title : Compressed SRv6 Segment List Encoding in SRH Authors : Weiqiang Cheng

Re: [spring] Pending work items on draft-ietf-spring-bfd

Hi Matthew, thank you for sharing the information about the implementation of S-BFD in segment routing. I hope that that can be also reflected in the Implementation Status section as suggested in RFC 7942 . I would appreciate it if other implementation