Hi Nat Thanks for your support and the comments. We will document the suggested comparison in a later revision of the draft.
Thanks Regards … Zafar Cisco Confidential From: Nat Kao <[email protected]> Date: Thursday, November 27, 2025 at 4:09 AM To: Alvaro Retana <[email protected]> Cc: spring <[email protected]>, "[email protected]" <[email protected]>, spring Chairs <[email protected]>, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Subject: [spring] Re: [SRv6OPS] Re: Interest in draft-ali-6man-srv6-vpn-icmp-error-handling Hi, Alvaro & WG. I support this work. It's practical in the SRv6 networks with the Uniform TTL Model in some scenarios. I would also suggest adding a comparison(including the security implications) between the proposed approach and the RFC4443+RFC2473 approach. IMHO, the limitations are almost the same in the proposed approach and in the MPLS ICMP tunneling approach. If the tunnel isn't working all the way down to the egress PE, the approach won't work. (While the RFC4443+RFC2473 approach with PE support will work in this case.) Many Thanks, Nat On Wed, Nov 26, 2025 at 10:41 PM Alvaro Retana <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: [Adding srv6ops as this is also an operational topic. Sorry for not doing so before.] On November 25, 2025 at 5:38:32 PM, Alvaro Retana ([email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>) wrote: Hi! Quick reminder: we are looking for input on this topic. Please review the document and let us know your opinion. Given that this is a holiday week in the US, we are extending this poll until EOD on December 3, 2025. Thanks! Alvaro. On November 19, 2025 at 8:51:38 AM, Alvaro Retana ([email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>) wrote: Dear WG: This document belongs in 6man. The 6man-chairs have asked us to gauge whether there is interest in the spring WG for this work. After the presentation at the meeting in Montreal, we conducted a poll to gauge interest [1]; the results were 24 "Yes", 2 "No", and 5 "No Opinion". This message is intended to confirm the interest of the WG in this work. We are not issuing a call for adoption as that could take place in 6man if spring's interest is confirmed. After review of the document, please reply. Please also provide comments/reasons to indicate your (non) support, as this is not a vote. Any technical discussion should take place on the 6man list. We will keep this poll open until EOD on November 26, 2025. Thanks! Alvaro. [1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/polls-124-spring-202511041700/ _______________________________________________ SRv6OPS mailing list -- [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
_______________________________________________ spring mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
