Hi Peter,
Thank you very much for your valuable comment in IETF 104.
[peter psenak] no problem with node protection -- but I don’t consider that
pretending a SID that has gone is a good idea. There can be second failures. If
you need this kind of protection then we should precompute disjoint path.
You are right. A backup disjoint path should be pre-computed. For
protecting a node, the proxy forwarding pre-computes a backup disjoint path
assuming that the node is down. This seems similar to other local protections
such as TILFA and LFA.
Best Regards,
Huaimo on behalf of co-authors
________________________________
From: spring <spring-boun...@ietf.org> on behalf of Huaimo Chen
<huaimo.c...@futurewei.com>
Sent: Saturday, August 1, 2020 11:45 PM
To: Bruno Decraene <bruno.decra...@orange.com>
Cc: spring@ietf.org <spring@ietf.org>
Subject: [spring] draft-hu-spring-segment-routing-proxy-forwarding-10
Hi Bruno,
Thank you very much for your valuable comments in IETF 104.
[Bruno] Clarify in the draft -- nhop will not disappear. IP prefix may be used
by BGP.
[H] …
[Bruno] Follow up on the list.
We have clarified it in the draft uploaded.
Best Regards,
Huaimo
_______________________________________________
spring mailing list
spring@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring
