Hi Joel,
Sure. This is a very good suggestion. Thanks ! II will update it in the next
version.
Best Regards,
Ran
Original
From: JoelHalpern <j...@joelhalpern.com>
To: 陈然00080434;
Cc: spring@ietf.org <spring@ietf.org>;ketant.i...@gmail.com
<ketant.i...@gmail.com>;
Date: 2023年08月31日 09:46
Subject: Re: [spring] Differences between
draft-liu-spring-sr-policy-flexible-path-selection and
draft-chen-spring-sr-policy-cp-validity
Hmmm. I think what confused me is that I don't see an explicit reference to
the RFC 9256 segment-list invalid rule, only a reference to the candidate path
validity. Seems easily fixed?
Would it make sense for that fix to have text along the lines of "other
segment-list validity criteria may aslo apply, such as []"? That would seem to
help clarify the relationship between the two drafts.
Yours,
Joel
On 8/30/2023 9:23 PM, chen....@zte.com.cn wrote:
Hi Joel,
Thanks very much for your comments.
Yes. The first draft does not define a new segment-list invalid rule, and it
still follows the invalid rules of the segment list defined in the SR policy
Architecture (RFC9256) . It only defines a new Candidate invalid rule.
Best Regards,
Ran
From: JoelHalpern <j...@joelhalpern.com>
To: 陈然00080434;spring@ietf.org <spring@ietf.org>;ketant.i...@gmail.com
<ketant.i...@gmail.com>;
Date: 2023年08月30日 19:59
Subject: Re: [spring] Differences between
draft-liu-spring-sr-policy-flexible-path-selection and
draft-chen-spring-sr-policy-cp-validity
_______________________________________________
spring mailing list
spring@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring
Speaking as an individual contributor.
I may be misreading this. It looks like the first draft depends upon a
definition of a valid or invalid segment list, but does not provide a
definition for that. It looks like the second draft provides a precise
definition for an invalid segment list. Do the author's of the first draft
envision some other definition of an invalid segment list? If so, what? If
not, doesn't that result in close coupling between the two drafts?
Yours,
Joel
On 8/30/2023 4:22 AM, chen....@zte.com.cn wrote:
Hi WG, Hi Ketan,
we received some comments about merging the two drafts at the IETF 117th. After
discussion between the authors of the two drafts, we believe that there are
differences between the two drafts. We hope to move forward separately, and
make some distinctions in content and title. The main difference is:
Draft #1 Link:
https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-chen-spring-sr-policy-cp-validity-00.txt
This draft is for the scenario where multiple segment list are in a CP of a SR
policy. When some of the segment list become invalid and it can not meet the
required quality of service. The validity of the current path is judged based
on the set effective SL number or effective SL weight.
Draft #2 Link:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-liu-spring-sr-policy-flexible-path-selection/
This draft is to check the validity of path quality for SR policies.
When the path quality of the corresponding segmentlist decreases and fails to
meet the requirements of a single path, the current path is marked as invalid,
triggering a path switch. It is applicable to both single Seglist and multiple
Seglist scenarios.
Best Regards,
Ran
_______________________________________________ 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
