Thank you, Rishabh, for your quick reply. I had a look at the revised -16. As you know, all my points were and are just non-blocking comments, see below for EV>
Regards -éric From: Rishabh Parekh <risha...@gmail.com> Date: Monday, 31 July 2023 at 22:05 To: Eric Vyncke <evyn...@cisco.com> Cc: The IESG <i...@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-spring-sr-replication-segm...@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-spring-sr-replication-segm...@ietf.org>, "spring-cha...@ietf.org" <spring-cha...@ietf.org>, "spring@ietf.org" <spring@ietf.org>, "Mankamana Mishra (mankamis)" <manka...@cisco.com> Subject: Re: [spring] Éric Vyncke's No Objection on draft-ietf-spring-sr-replication-segment-15: (with COMMENT) Eric, I have addressed your comments and nits in latest revision of draft. Thanks, -Rishabh On Fri, Jun 30, 2023 at 9:45 AM Rishabh Parekh <risha...@gmail.com<mailto:risha...@gmail.com>> wrote: Eric, Please find my responses below. Thanks, -Rishabh On Wed, Jun 28, 2023 at 2:17 AM Éric Vyncke via Datatracker <nore...@ietf.org<mailto:nore...@ietf.org>> wrote: Éric Vyncke has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-spring-sr-replication-segment-15: No Objection ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- # Éric Vyncke, INT AD, comments for draft-ietf-spring-sr-replication-segment-15 Thank you for the work put into this document. It is quite dense and not too easy to read though, perhaps adding some graphics? [RP] What type of graphics do you have in mind? Do you think the illustrations in appendix help in clarifying the concepts in the document? EV> mainly in the introduction and other places. # COMMENTS ## Section 1 The reader would probably welcome use case of this protocol: is it for multicast ? or more like a span port for monitoring/troubleshooting ? Waiting until section 3 is not really reader friendly. [RP] I will add some text about uses cases in the Introduction in the next revision. EV> Yes, I saw the section 1.2 even if, to be honest, if you are not an expert in the domain, then it is complex to read and understand EV> May I also suggest to move the use case before the terminology ? ## Section 2 `When the PCE signals a Replication segment to its node` what is 'its node' ? [RP] It should have been "When a PCE signals a Replication Segment to a node ...", but after reading again, I don't think this sentence is necessary in the paragraph. I will remove it. ## Section 2.2 In the 2nd paragraph, is the segment left field also decremented ? [RP] No, the SL in SRH is not decremented because the Downstream Replication SID that is put in the IPv6 DA field for a replication comes from the Replication State, not SRH. EV> so the SID list is unchanged and the next node will process it again, this does make sense indeed if it goes down a replication tree ## Section 2.2.3 Thanks for this section (no need to reply). # NITS ## Section 4.2 s/has all the Must and SHOULD clause/has all the MUST and SHOULD clauses/ ? [RP] I will fix this. _______________________________________________ spring mailing list spring@ietf.org<mailto:spring@ietf.org> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring
_______________________________________________ spring mailing list spring@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring
