Hi all,
I am not aware of any IPR applicable to this draft that should be disclosed in
accordance with IETF rules.
Regards,
Samuel
-Original Message-
From: peng.sha...@zte.com.cn
Sent: Saturday, February 5, 2022 4:04 AM
To: h...@netflix.com
Cc: Alex Tokar (atokar) ; msiva...@gmail.com
Thanks Dhruv for the information.
On Fri, Jan 21, 2022 at 4:08 PM Dhruv Dhody wrote:
> Hi Mrinmoy,
>
> You are correct. There was a recent errata on RFC 8664 regarding this
> issue - https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid6753
>
> The authors of draft-ietf-pce-segment-routing-ipv6 should also fix
Hi all,
I am not aware of any IPR applicable to this draft that should be disclosed in
accordance with IETF IPR rules.
Regards,
Tarek
From: Hariharan Ananthakrishnan
Date: Friday, February 4, 2022 at 12:58 PM
To: "ssi...@cisco.com" , "peng.sha...@zte.com.cn"
, "ato...@cisco.com" ,
"msiva...@
Hi PCE WG,
Support adoption. Seems reasonable to convey flex algo related constraint and
status between PCE and PCC, and the document is written quite clear.
One general potential question/concern is the SR-ERO encoding of
A-bit/Algorithm value, since it describes it comes after other optional
