Hi Spring WG
Support adoption.
Willing to work on the document, and already participating in related documents
in PCE and IDR.
Thanks
Andrew
On 2020-06-22, 10:46 AM, "spring on behalf of bruno.decra...@orange.com"
wrote:
Hi SPRING WG,
Authors of draft-voyer-spring-sr-replicati
s that are not part of a Replication
segment.
[HC]: Can you show an example of this (one SR point-to-multipoint path
transports a packet from its ingress via some core nodes to its egresses
without any state stored in the core nodes for this SR P2MP path) ?
>
> Best Regards,
> Huaimo
&g
Hello authors. I have some observations/questions:
1. Dynamic Candidate path has constraints but no optimization-metric that I
can see: i.e find shortest path by TE METRIC, Latency etc. Any plans to add?
1. Bandwidth demand appear to be missing. For example, requested would be
useful for
Hello,
As requested due to contributions on
draft-voyer-spring-sr-replication-segment-04:
As a contributor, I am not aware of any IPR related to this document.
Thanks
Andrew
From: spring on behalf of "bruno.decra...@orange.com"
Date: Tuesday, November 12, 2019 at 12:04 PM
To: "draft-voyer-s
Hi Authors,
Any thoughts/comments for the below?
Thanks again,
Andrew
From: spring on behalf of "Stone, Andrew (Nokia -
CA/Ottawa)"
Date: Monday, July 13, 2020 at 3:11 PM
To: "spring@ietf.org"
Subject: Re: [spring] WG Adoption Call for draft-raza-spring-sr-policy-yang
H
Hi Ketan,
Thanks for this update / referencing the yang related question I had about
multiple objective/constraints (1). Regarding composite candidate path, quickly
thinking about it from a controller/pce point of view, it does seem like an
elegant solution to re-use the entire SR Policy constr
Hi Ketan, Pavan,
Good discussion. Just going to chip in some thoughts…
One of the elements I personally like of the SR Policy model is that many
Candidate Paths may exist, but only one may be active and a candidate path
contains 1 or many SID lists. It’s a simple parent/child - root/leaf tree w
Hi Tarek,
Thanks for the comments. Small reply below.
Thanks
Andrew
From: Tarek Saad
Date: Thursday, November 12, 2020 at 2:22 PM
To: "Stone, Andrew (Nokia - CA/Ottawa)" , "Ketan
Talaulikar (ketant)" , Vishnu Pavan Beeram
Cc: "spring@ietf.org"
Subject: Re: [s
Hello Chairs, WG and Authors
I think there may need to be a wording adjustment required to the BGP related
text in section 2.5, for more clarity regarding the use of BGP distinguisher in
place of discriminator:
When BGP SR Policy is the Protocol-Origin, it is the distinguisher
(refer to
Looks good to me, thanks Ketan!
Andrew
From: "Ketan Talaulikar (ketant)"
Date: Thursday, April 29, 2021 at 1:57 AM
To: "Stone, Andrew (Nokia - CA/Ottawa)" , James
Guichard , "spring@ietf.org"
Cc: "spring-cha...@ietf.org"
Subject: RE: [spring] WGLC for
10 matches
Mail list logo
