Hi,
We just updated the draft to address the comments from Adrian and Stewart.
Main updates:
1. Addressed comments from Adrian (text of handling Path Segment on
intermediate nodes, editorial modifications, etc. ), and Adrian has confirmed.
Thanks a lot to Adrian.
2. Modify the text ac
Hi,I agree with Ron.
B.R.
Weiqiang Cheng
邮件原文发件人：Ron Bonica 收件人：SPRING WG
抄 送: (无)发送时间：2019-12-30 18:07:24主题：[spring]
draft-ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming: Relativeadvantages of SRv6
Pablo,
Would you consider adding a short section to the draft explaining the r
Hi Group,
SR compression design team have submitted a new version of compression
requirement draft.
Main changes as follows:
- added 3 items about scalibility with agreement within the design team
- added an appendix including 3 items without without unanimous consensus
within the design te
Hi Group,
SR compression design team just post the new version of the compression
requirement draft.
There are 3 major changes compared to last version.
We modified the text about the goal of the design team to address the
comments for the scope of the design team.
We moved the
Hi Chairs,
Thanks a lot.
It is really good that working group can take the ownership of the two drafts.
The members of the design team are the co-authors of the both drafts. We will
republish the drafts and address the comments soon.
-
Best Regards,
Weiqiang
---邮件原文---
发件人："
Hi All,
On behalf of authors of the Unified SID draft, we didnot get any agreement
with the authors of Compressed routing header draft.
We were happy to have technical discussion. There maybe mis-understanding. We
welcome any comments to our draft.
So sorry for interrupting you.
B.R.
Aut
Hi Andrew,Thank you very much for your clarification.
Surely, we would like to have more technical discussion and we also welcome
more discussion on the topic with who are interested in it.
The topic how to improve the SRv6 solution is really important for the carriers
who hope to deploy it.
