Chris, <sorry for being late on this one>
I will put back the original Mirror Segment section in the draft. In fact we did have a text for it in the very first instance of the draft (draft-filsfils-rtgwg-segment-routing-00) Thanks. s. On Aug 7, 2015, at 5:09 PM, Chris Bowers <[email protected]> wrote: > All, > > It appears that section 3.6.3 of this draft which covers using the > binding-sid to advertise a mirroring context got dropped between > draft-ietf-spring-segment-routing-00 and > draft-ietf-spring-segment-routing-01, in February. Presumably this was > done because it didn't have any text in it. The text for the section in the > draft-00 version read "TBD". > > I would like to request that this section be put back into the draft. I > propose the following text for this section. > > 3.6.3 Mirroring Context > The Binding SID is used to advertise the context label for egress node > protection. As described in draft-bowers-spring-advertising-lsps-with-sr, a > node B providing egress node protection for a protected node A advertises a > segment associated with A's context identifier using the Binding SID with the > mirror context flag set . In the event of a failure, a point of local repair > (PLR) diverting traffic from A to B pushes that segment on the traffic. B > then uses that segment to interpret underlying segments or labels in the > context of A. > > Thanks, > Chris > > -----Original Message----- > From: mpls [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of John G. Scudder > Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2015 8:12 AM > To: [email protected] > Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] > Subject: [mpls] working group last call for draft-ietf-spring-segment-routing > > Dear SPRING WG (and cc MPLS, OSPF, IS-IS, 6MAN, please include SPRING in > replies per the reply-to): > > As we discussed at the SPRING meeting yesterday, working group last call has > been requested for draft-ietf-spring-segment-routing. Please reply to the > list with your comments, including although not limited to whether or not you > support advancing the document to RFC. Non-authors are especially encouraged > to comment. > > In consideration of the fact that a number of WG calls are going on > concurrently, we will end the call on August 31, 2015. > > Authors, please indicate whether you are aware of any relevant IPR and if so, > whether it has been disclosed. (Please do this even if you've done it before, > thanks for your help.) > > Thanks, > > --Bruno and John > > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > > _______________________________________________ > spring mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring _______________________________________________ spring mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring
