Re: [spring] [EXTERNAL] A technical concern regarding draft-schmutzer-spring-cs-sr-policy-00

Hi, I am sensing two elements in this discussion here 1. Guaranteeing bandwidth commitment between CS-SR and non-CS-SR traffic as well as among CS-SR policies 2. Can we trust routers to do what we want them to do For #1 I don’t think we are doing anything radically different than what has been

Re: [spring] [EXTERNAL] A technical concern regarding draft-schmutzer-spring-cs-sr-policy-00

Christian, I respectfully disagree with the statement “I don’t think we are doing anything radically different than what has been done for RSVP-TE or MPLS-TP so far”. In both these cases you could be sure that the labels allocated for the LSP by each of the nodes on the paths are not used by any

Re: [spring] [EXTERNAL] A technical concern regarding draft-schmutzer-spring-cs-sr-policy-00

Alexander, I understand the differences in label values put on the packets between those approaches. But I was more referring to the aspect resource guarantees … I failed to find any public reference on implementations providing per LSP queuing nor a IETF document specifying it (but maybe I did

Re: [spring] [EXTERNAL] A technical concern regarding draft-schmutzer-spring-cs-sr-policy-00

Christian, Section 2-1 of the Resource-Aware Segments draft says that “A resource-aware Adj-SID represents a subset of the resources (e.g., bandwidth, buffer and queuing resources) of a given link” which, IMHO,

Re: [spring] [EXTERNAL] A technical concern regarding draft-schmutzer-spring-cs-sr-policy-00

Hi Christian, > I agree we may want to adjust the wording a bit around what we mean by “failure/fault” (i.e. not only a link > down but also issues detected by SRPM) and how to react to it (i.e. bring down a CS-SR policy) That would be super helpful and indeed a significant improvement. - - As

[spring] I-D Action: draft-ietf-spring-cs-sr-policy-00.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 : Circuit Style Segment Routing Policies Authors : Christian Schmutzer

[spring] [Errata Rejected] RFC8402 (7546)

The following errata report has been rejected for RFC8402, "Segment Routing Architecture". -- You may review the report below and at: https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid7546 -- Status: Rejected Type: Technical Reported by:

[spring] Opsdir last call review of draft-ietf-spring-sr-replication-segment-14

Reviewer: Sarah Banks Review result: Has Issues Hi, Major issues: None Minor issues: I echo the sentiments of another reviewer with the security section; in particular, are the security considerations cited in RFC8754 strong enough, considering the replication of packets here? (It's OK if they a

Re: [spring] Opsdir last call review of draft-ietf-spring-sr-replication-segment-14

Sarah, Thanks for the review. Security sections of RFC 8402 and 8986 describe the trust model for SR domain and filtering of packets at domain boundaries to prevent unwanted or malicious injection of packets into a SR domain. The same apply to this new SR behavior. I will add some text to the Secu