Thanks! I overlooked that this draft already has a placeholder for co-existence, no specific approaches included yet. Would be happy to contribute if needed.
cheers, Eduard On Tue, May 18, 2021 at 2:13 PM Ketan Talaulikar (ketant) <ket...@cisco.com> wrote: > Hi Eduard, > > > > I do believe that BGP ADD-PATH mechanism can be leveraged for > co-existence. There are also other design approaches to achieve the same. > > > > I am copying the authors of > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-agrawal-spring-srv6-mpls-interworking/ > who were working to document these approaches. > > > > Thanks, > > Ketan > > > > *From:* BESS <bess-boun...@ietf.org> *On Behalf Of *Eduard Metz > *Sent:* 17 May 2021 13:46 > *To:* bess@ietf.org > *Subject:* [bess] SRv6 / (SR)MPLS co-existence for bess > > > > Hello, > > > > Co-existence of multiple dataplane technologies to carry BESS services is > useful for among others migration of one dataplane technology to another > (e.g. (SR)MPLS to SRv6). > > > > Can co-existence be achieved without changing current specifications, or > would it require extensions / changes? For example as proposed in > draft-ls-bess-srv6-mpls-coexisting-vpn. > > > > I was thinking maybe the BGP ADD-PATH capability could be leveraged to > achieve co-existence. > > > > Would it be of interest to document co-existence cases and solutions? > > > > Thanks! > > > > cheers, > > Eduard >
_______________________________________________ BESS mailing list BESS@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess
