Dear Authors and Chairs,
I have a clarification question and appreciate your consideration.
It seems to me that the proposed text updates either RFC 8754 or RFC 8200
where the Segments Left field is defined as:
- RFC 8754:
Segments Left: Defined in [RFC8200], Section 4.4.
- RFC 8200:
Segments Left 8-bit unsigned integer. Number of route
segments remaining, i.e., the number of explicitly
listed intermediate nodes still to be visited
before reaching the final destination.
At the same time, the proposed update does not include any reference to RFC
8200 or RFC 8754.
Hence is my question How do you see the relationship between the proposed
new text and RFCs 8200 and 8754?
Regards,
Greg
On Tue, Aug 8, 2023 at 8:00 AM Joel Halpern <j...@joelhalpern.com> wrote:
> Issue #3 in the datatracker reads
>
> The definition for the SegmentsLeft field of the SRH as currently stated
> in [RFC8754][RFC8200] no longer holds true in the presence of C-SIDs. This
> definition needs to be updated to still hold true in the presence of C-SIDs.
>
> The response from the document editors reads:
>
> Segments Left: Defined in [RFC8200], Section 4.4. Specifically, for the
> SRH, the number of unprocessed 128-bit entries in the Segment List.
>
>
> Please indicate to the list whether you consider this resolution
> sufficient to close the issue, or have further concerns that should be
> addressed. If you have concerns, clarity about them is appreciated. This
> call is open for two weeks, through August 22.
> _______________________________________________
> spring mailing list
> spring@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring
>
_______________________________________________
spring mailing list
spring@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring
