Hi Stefano,
Just noticed, pg 7 still says 1600x, when I think it should say (16000 + x).
Anoop
On Fri, Mar 3, 2017 at 12:25 PM, Anoop Ghanwani
wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, Mar 3, 2017 at 6:38 AM, Stefano Previdi (sprevidi) <
> sprev...@cisco.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> > On Mar 1, 2017, at 7:27 PM, Anoop Ghan
Jon,
many thanks for the useful review.
Stefano,
Thanks for the quick follow up.
Pending publication of -05 addressing Jon's comments.
Regards,
Bruno
> -Original Message-
> From: Jonathan Hardwick [mailto:jonathan.hardw...@metaswitch.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 08, 2017 3:42 PM
> T
Cross-posting to SPRING WG as this document is highly related to
draft-ietf-spring-segment-routing-msdc which is under WG Last Call in the
SPRING WG.
I've read the document and have the following comments.
-
§2
'A BGP-Prefix-SID is always global within the SR/BGP domain'
Do you imply that
Bruno:
Thank you for cross-posing this to the spring WG.
Sue
From: bruno.decra...@orange.com [mailto:bruno.decra...@orange.com]
Sent: Wednesday, March 8, 2017 11:51 AM
To: Susan Hares
Cc: 'Hannes Gredler'; spring@ietf.org; i...@ietf.org
Subject: RE: [Idr] 2 Week WG LC for draft-ietf
Thanks Stefano. I'm happy with these resolutions.
Cheers
Jon
-Original Message-
From: Stefano Previdi (sprevidi) [mailto:sprev...@cisco.com]
Sent: 08 March 2017 06:37
To: Jonathan Hardwick
Cc: draft-ietf-spring-segment-routing-central-...@ietf.org; spring@ietf.org;
spring-cha...@ietf.o
Hi Jon,
many thanks for your review. Some comments inline.
where you don’t see any answer to your comments is because I applied them to
the draft.
> On Mar 7, 2017, at 7:35 PM, Jonathan Hardwick
> wrote:
>
> Hello
>
> I have been selected to do a routing directorate “early” review of this
Hi Stefano,
Thanks for the updated version.
-03 address all my comments except two. Please see below:
---
> §7.3 seems very similar to me than §7.2. e.g.
>
> §7.2:
> " One particularly interesting instance of performance-aware routing is
> dynamic fault-avoidance. If some links or devices in
