Hi Greg,
  There is a verified Errata on RFC8754 to mention the Segment List since it is 
not something RFC8200 defines.

https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid7102 
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid7102>

Thanks
Suresh

> On Aug 9, 2023, at 2:30 PM, Greg Mirsky <gregimir...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> 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 
> <mailto: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 <mailto:spring@ietf.org>
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring 
> <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring>
> _______________________________________________
> 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

Reply via email to