Hi Chris,
Thank you very much for your suggestion.
We will add the reference accordingly.
Best Regards,
Huaimo
________________________________
From: Chris Bowers <chrisbowers.i...@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, July 28, 2020 3:42 PM
To: draft-ietf-rtgwg-srv6-egress-protect...@ietf.org
<draft-ietf-rtgwg-srv6-egress-protect...@ietf.org>
Cc: rtgwg@ietf.org <rtgwg@ietf.org>; Ketan Talaulikar (ketant)
<ketant=40cisco....@dmarc.ietf.org>
Subject: Re: Comments on draft-ietf-rtgwg-srv6-egress-protection
I would also suggest that the authors of
draft-ietf-rtgwg-srv6-egress-protection add a reference to Section 5.1 of
RFC8402 (Segment Routing Architecture) which describes the Mirror SID.
Thanks,
Chris
On Mon, Jul 27, 2020 at 10:18 AM Ketan Talaulikar (ketant)
<ketant=40cisco....@dmarc.ietf.org<mailto:40cisco....@dmarc.ietf.org>> wrote:
Hello,
I am summarizing the questions/comments on the mike on the list with more
details for a follow-up from the authors.
1) SRv6 Mirror SID is a new behavior for SRv6 SIDs that needs to be formally
introduced, defined (using a pseudocode?) and a IANA code-point allocated for
it. E.g. refer
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming-16#section-4.6<https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ftools.ietf.org%2Fhtml%2Fdraft-ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming-16%23section-4.6&data=02%7C01%7Chuaimo.chen%40futurewei.com%7C9fe1997188ce49d2dbc208d8332ebfc5%7C0fee8ff2a3b240189c753a1d5591fedc%7C1%7C0%7C637315623167169013&sdata=EIuE1TCcJ4vfxuEI44V8BGJQ54qIKLUYcfE3Urm2Epk%3D&reserved=0>
and for codepoint check
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming-16#section-9.2<https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ftools.ietf.org%2Fhtml%2Fdraft-ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming-16%23section-9.2&data=02%7C01%7Chuaimo.chen%40futurewei.com%7C9fe1997188ce49d2dbc208d8332ebfc5%7C0fee8ff2a3b240189c753a1d5591fedc%7C1%7C0%7C637315623167179016&sdata=TdiaIKsK%2FNJ3vZKT9v%2B53u%2FOEhkho67o4A%2FdCKj2bGQ%3D&reserved=0>.
My question was whether the authors intended to add that in this document or a
separate Spring document (may be the chairs can guide here)? Regardless, this
would be something that would require review from the Spring WG.
2) Once (1) has been addressed, then it provides the necessary foundation for
the review of the IGP encodings for signaling of SRv6 Mirror SIDs (Section 4).
I would suggest that this proposal then get reviewed in the LSR WG - whether in
this document or as a separate LSR draft is up to the chairs.
Thanks,
Ketan
_______________________________________________
rtgwg mailing list
rtgwg@ietf.org<mailto:rtgwg@ietf.org>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg<https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ietf.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Frtgwg&data=02%7C01%7Chuaimo.chen%40futurewei.com%7C9fe1997188ce49d2dbc208d8332ebfc5%7C0fee8ff2a3b240189c753a1d5591fedc%7C1%7C0%7C637315623167179016&sdata=Rqc%2F%2BgsjPCY1og8UcRA2VyFhk2yZO3Cg3SVeouex96s%3D&reserved=0>
_______________________________________________
rtgwg mailing list
rtgwg@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg
