Re: [spring] RtgDir Early review: draft-ietf-rtgwg-srv6-egress-protection

With RTGWG chair hat. Hi Tal, Thanks for the review and comments. As an individual contributor: Authors, I have the same question about ti-lfa. Please provide more explanation about why the use case in the draft can't be addressed using ti-lfa? In section 3.1: " After PEA receives the in

[spring] Reminder! Side meeting on TI-LFA

Forwarding to SPRING WG. Hi all, Reminder. We will continue the discussion of the ti-lfa draft today! Meeting Time: Wednesday, 8 Nov, 17:00 - 18:00 (CET) Location: Palmovka 1/2 Webex Link: https://ietf.webex.com/meet/sidemeetingietf2 Thanks, Yingzhen On Tue, Nov 7, 2023 at 1:29 AM Yingzhen Qu

[spring] LINK! Re: Side meeting on TI-LFA

https://ietf.webex.com/meet/ietfsidemeeting2 -- Forwarded message - From: Yingzhen Qu Date: Tue, Nov 7, 2023 at 1:29 AM Subject: Side meeting on TI-LFA To: RTGWG , rtgwg-chairs Hi all, We'll have a side meeting to continue the discussion of draft-ietf-rtgwg-segment-routi

[spring] Summary of the side meeting on TI-LFA

Also sending the email to SPRING WG in case people are interested. Hi, We had a very productive discussion during the side meeting, and the review comments and open issues have been addressed. Outcome of the discussion: It’s important for the draft to clarify that with ti-lfa, when IGP starts to

Re: [spring] draft-ietf-spring-sr-policy-yang-01

Hi, It will be great if we can also have a plan for: draft-ietf-spring-srv6-yang-02 - YANG Data Model for SRv6 Base and Static The IGP SRv6 YANG models have dependencies on this draft. Thanks, Yingzhen On Sun, Dec 3, 2023 at 5:55 AM

[spring] WGLC for draft-ietf-rtgwg-segment-routing-ti-lfa (01/18/24 - 02/02/24)

Hi, This starts the Working Group Last Call for draft-ietf-rtgwg-segment-routing-ti-lfa (draft-ietf-rtgwg-segment-routing-ti-lfa-13 - Topology Independent Fast Reroute using Segment Routing ). Please express your support

Re: [spring] WGLC for draft-ietf-rtgwg-segment-routing-ti-lfa (01/18/24 - 02/02/24)

Speaking as a WG member, I support the publication of this draft. Thanks, Yingzhen On Mon, Jan 22, 2024 at 9:53 AM Stewart Bryant wrote: > This draft is now ready to proceed along the publications path. > > Best regards > > Stewart > > > > On 18 Jan 2024, at 23:45,

Re: [spring] WGLC for draft-ietf-rtgwg-segment-routing-ti-lfa (01/18/24 - 02/02/24)

Hi all, The WGLC has concluded. The document will be submitted to the IESG for publication. Thanks, Yingzhen On Wed, Jan 24, 2024 at 3:16 PM Yingzhen Qu wrote: > Speaking as a WG member, I support the publication of this draft. > > Thanks, > Yingzhen > > On Mon, Jan 2

[spring] WG Adoption Call - draft-cheng-rtgwg-srv6-multihome-egress-protection (02/09/24 - 02/24/24)

Hi, This email begins a 2 week WG adoption poll for the following draft:draft-cheng-rtgwg-srv6-multihome-egress-protection-05 - SRv6 Egress Protection in Multi-homed scenario (ietf.org) Please review the docume

Re: [spring] WG Adoption Call - draft-cheng-rtgwg-srv6-multihome-egress-protection (02/09/24 - 02/24/24)

Hi, You mentioned "verified solution", are you aware of any implementation or deployment? Thanks, Yingzhen On Sun, Feb 18, 2024 at 12:35 AM Feng Yang wrote: > Hi, > > Support. > > This is a simple, fast, verified solution for tail end protection. > 在 2024-02-10 0

Re: [spring] WG Adoption Call - draft-cheng-rtgwg-srv6-multihome-egress-protection (02/09/24 - 02/24/24)

hat a P router > needs to do when reachability to the PE is lost) and hence does not know > what that SID behavior is. This is something very new for SRv6 and it can > cause problems. e.g., consider the case that the active segment points to a > BSID - what happens when a BSID is skipped

Re: [spring] WG Adoption Call - draft-cheng-rtgwg-srv6-multihome-egress-protection (02/09/24 - 02/24/24)

understanding is that this protection mechanism is not to be deployed for all PEs, but only a subset of them. Otherwise I agree with you that it doesn't scale. On a side note, the abstract seems a bit short to me. > > So thanks for clarifying the document, > Regards, > --B

Re: [spring] WG Adoption Call - draft-cheng-rtgwg-srv6-multihome-egress-protection (02/09/24 - 02/24/24)

Hi all, Thank you for the comments and discussions. Based on the feedback, it has been determined that the draft is not adopted at this time. As discussed in the thread, the concerns raised, particularly regarding the changes to the SRH behavior, require further discussion in the 6man and spring

[spring] Re: WG Adoption Call for draft-bdmgct-spring-srv6-security (ends Aug/19)

The current intended status of this document is "Standards Track", is this intentional? Thanks, Yingzhen On Mon, Aug 5, 2024 at 6:04 AM Alvaro Retana wrote: > Dear WG: > > This message starts a two-week adoption call for > ddraft-bdmgct-spring-srv6-security, ending on August/19. From the > Abst

Re: [spring] WG LC https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-spring-sr-yang/

Hi Dhruv, Thank you for your review and comments. You're correct that SRv6 YANG should be augmenting segment-routing like sr-mpls. This was the agreement between SRv6 and SR-MPLS YANG authors. Hopefully SRv6 YANG authors will update so in the next revision. I've uploaded version -17 to addres

Re: [spring] WG LC https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-spring-sr-yang/

Hi Reshad, Thank you for your support and comments. I’ve uploaded a new version to address your comments: added references and a configuration xml example Thanks, Yingzhen From: spring on behalf of "Reshad Rahman (rrahman)" Date: Thursday, June 25, 2020 at 6:41 AM To: James Guichard , "spri

Re: [spring] WG Adoption Call for draft-raza-spring-srv6-yang

I support the adoption of this draft. The authors of SR-MPLS and SRv6 have done alignments of the models, and this draft is ready to progress. Thanks, Yingzhen From: spring on behalf of "Kamran Raza (skraza)" Date: Tuesday, July 14, 2020 at 11:44 PM To: James Guichard , "spring@ietf.org" C

Re: [spring] WG Adoption Call for draft-raza-spring-srv6-yang

Hi, I agree with Dhruv's comments that there should not be separate configuration and state trees. Also "grouping" is overly used in the model, and I'd suggest the authors remove some groups when updating the draft. Thanks, Yingzhen On 7/25/20, 10:23 AM, "spring on behalf of Dhruv Dhody"

Re: [spring] WG Adoption Call for draft-dong-spring-sr-for-enhanced-vpn

I support the adoption of this draft. The proposal provides a useful extension of SR regarding network resources. I have the following suggestions for the authors to consider: * The draft is very slicing/virtual network focused, however the proposal can be used in generic cases, e.g. with S

Re: [spring] Yangdoctors last call review of draft-ietf-spring-sr-yang-20

Hi Lada, Thank you for your review, really appreciate. I've uploaded version -21 to address your comments and please see detailed answers below inline starting with [YQ]. Thanks, Yingzhen On 8/24/20, 5:51 AM, "Ladislav Lhotka via Datatracker" wrote: Reviewer: Ladislav Lhotka Revie

Re: [spring] Yangdoctors last call review of draft-ietf-spring-sr-yang-20

Hi Lada, Thanks for the review. I've uploaded version -22 to address your comments. Please see my answers inline for details. Thanks, Yingzhen On 8/26/20, 1:59 AM, "Ladislav Lhotka" wrote: Hi Yingzhen, please see my responses inline. Yingzhen Qu writes:

Re: [spring] [RTG-DIR] RtgDir Review: draft-ietf-spring-sr-yang-28

Hi Tal, Thank you for your review and comments, we have published version -29 to address your comments. Please see my detailed answers below inline. Thanks, Yingzhen On Tue, Dec 8, 2020 at 3:52 AM Tal Mizrahi wrote: > Hello, > > I have been selected as the Routing Directorate reviewer for this

Re: [spring] [RTG-DIR] RtgDir Review: draft-ietf-spring-sr-yang-28

nt in the draft. Cheers, Tal. On Tue, Dec 8, 2020 at 10:13 PM Yingzhen Qu wrote: > > Hi Tal, > > Thank you for your review and comments, we have published version -29 to address your comments. Please see my detailed answers below inline. > >

Re: [spring] Alvaro Retana's No Objection on draft-ietf-spring-sr-yang-29: (with COMMENT)

Hi Alvaro, Thank you for your thorough review and comments. We just published version -30 to address IESG review comments. Please see detailed answers below inline. Please let us know if you have more comments. Thanks, Yingzhen On Jan 20, 2021, at 7:36 AM, Alvaro Retana via Datatracker mailto

Re: [spring] WG Adoption Call for draft-dong-spring-sr-for-enhanced-vpn

Hi, I support the WG adoption of this draft, and I believe it’s a good starting point for the WG to work on this topic, and see how existing technologies can be integrated to provide new capabilities. Resource reservation has always been a controversial topic, whether it is needed, or efficien

Re: [spring] Progressing Standardizing SR over IPv6 compression

I support to have only one data plane compressing solution. Having more than one behaviors standardized means that vendors will need to support all the solutions, and before that happens there will be interoperability issues, essentially zero solution. Thanks, Yingzhen > On Aug 4, 2021, at 11

Re: [spring] WG Adoption call - draft-srcompdt-spring-compression-requirement - draft-srcompdt-spring-compression-analysis

I support adoption of both drafts. Thanks, Yingzhen > On Sep 7, 2021, at 6:12 AM, bruno.decra...@orange.com wrote: > > Dear WG, > > > The Design Team has produced two documents: > - A requirement document: draft-srcompdt-spring-compression-requirement > - A solution analysis document: draft-

Re: [spring] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-spring-segment-routing-ldp-interop-05

Support. Thanks, Yingzhen -Original Message- From: spring [mailto:spring-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Martin Vigoureux Sent: Monday, February 06, 2017 5:21 AM To: spring@ietf.org Cc: draft-ietf-spring-segment-routing-ldp-inte...@ietf.org Subject: [spring] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-sp

Re: [spring] Slots requests for SPRING WG session - IETF 100 - Singapore

Hi Martin and Bruno, We’d like to request a 5 min slot to present an update of the Yang Data Model for SR. Thanks, Yingzhen (on behalf of co-authors) On 10/19/17, 7:30 AM, "spring on behalf of Martin Vigoureux" wrote: >All, > >it is time we start building the SPRING WG agenda for Singapor

Re: [spring] Slot request for IETF 100

Hi, As an author of the SR Yang model, I'd be interested in this discussion in Singapore. Thanks, Yingzhen From: Mahesh Jethanandani To: Adrian Farellmailto:adr...@olddog.co.uk>> Cc: Adrian Farrelmailto:afar...@juniper.net>>;spring@ietf.org;Acee Lindem (acee)mailto:a.

Re: [spring] IETF 102 - SPRING meeting

Hi Bruno and Rob, I’d like to request a 5 mins slot to present an update of the SR YANG model: https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-spring-sr-yang-09.txt Presenter will be myself. Thanks, Yingzhen From: spring on behalf of "bruno.decra...@orange.com" Date: Monday, June 18, 201

Re: [spring] I-D Action: draft-ietf-spring-sr-yang-10.txt

: YANG Data Model for Segment Routing Authors : Stephane Litkowski Yingzhen Qu Pushpasis Sarkar Jeff Tantsura Acee Lindem Filename: draft-ietf-spri

Re: [spring] Poll for adoption: draft-litkowski-spring-sr-yang-01

I support this as co-author, and I¹m not aware of any IPR related to this draft. Thanks, Yingzhen > >> -Original Message- >> From: spring [mailto:spring-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of >> bruno.decra...@orange.com >> Sent: Monday, June 29, 2015 7:22 PM >> To: spring@ietf.org >> Subject: [s