Hi Thomas,
I've clarified a few points inline.
Thank you,
--
Sergey
From: thomas.g...@swisscom.com
Sent: Tuesday, September 1, 2020 12:55 AM
To: Fomin, Sergey (Nokia - US/Mountain View) ;
ketant=40cisco@dmarc.ietf.org
Cc: l...@ietf.org; spr...@ietf.org; opsawg@ietf.org
Subject: RE:
A bit late but i support this work for the increased visibility it
brings into IPFIX for the MPLS-SR data plane.
Paolo
On 13/08/2020 14:41, Joe Clarke (jclarke) wrote:
Hello, WG members. During the IETF 108 virtual meeting, we had Thomas present
this work. It has been reviewed by SPRING
Hi Sabrina, Hi Loa
I would appreciate if you could feedback the following remaining questions
> The "Requester" column refers to the document that the code point requested,
> where the "Reference" column links to the document where the metric value is
> coming from. Please correct me if my
Hi Sergey,
Thanks for the feedback. I am fully in line with your comment.
* Maybe we should consider adding a generic type 'Segment Routing' w/o
extra details if this might become an implementation challenge?
I would be interested to understand what extra details you would include in
Hi Ketan,
Thanks a lot for the feedback. So far Sergey feedbacked in favor to keep IE46
and SrSidType being separate. Lets see which opinion others have on the list.
* Also, from an operational perspective (looking holistically), we have LSP
ping/trace tools specified for MPLS (including
