Support.
On 7/31/15, 1:32 AM, spring on behalf of Pushpasis Sarkar
spring-boun...@ietf.org on behalf of psar...@juniper.net wrote:
Support.
On 7/22/15, 3:17 PM, spring on behalf of John G.Scudder
spring-boun...@ietf.org on behalf of j...@juniper.net wrote:
Dear WG,
As we discussed at our
A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
This draft is a work item of the Source Packet Routing in Networking Working
Group of the IETF.
Title : Segment Routing Architecture
Authors : Clarence Filsfils
Robert –
Labels are a shared resource – the problem you mention below has to be
addressed independent of how many SRGBs are used in any solution. No protocol
implementation – whether part of a monolithic router product or an independent
implementation – can assume that it has free rein to use
Hi Stefano,
The new text for anycast fits perfectly my previous comment.
Best Regards,
-Original Message-
From: spring [mailto:spring-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Stefano Previdi
(sprevidi)
Sent: Friday, July 31, 2015 09:55
To: spring@ietf.org
Subject: [spring] Fwd: New Version
Looks that consensus is for option#2, so let's move SRGB to protocol
configuration.
From: Jeff Tantsura [mailto:jeff.tants...@ericsson.com]
Sent: Friday, July 31, 2015 08:04
To: LITKOWSKI Stephane SCE/IBNF; spring@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [spring] Modeling SRGB configuration for
