Hi Joel,
I was informed by Giuseppe Fioccola and Mauro Cociglio about the adoption call
for the draft at:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-fz-spring-srv6-alt-mark
As the Alternate Marking Method is already used successfully as a passive
measurement method with several protocols, I think
Thanks for the review Bruno. Responses inline @ [RP]
-Rishabh
On Fri, Feb 10, 2023 at 1:27 AM wrote:
> Hi Rishabh, authors
>
>
>
> Speaking as an individual contributor.
>
> Following a request, I've done a review of the latest version of the draft.
>
> Please find below some proposed comments.
IMO，the method in this draft clearly defines the AM effective scope by data
plane encapsulation itself. It avoids the need of using two EHs to achieve the
goal. Using two EHs not only bloats the header size but also requires
cumbersome configurations to the non-SR routers.
In either case (SRH or
Hi Giuseppe,
would you propose a text that can guide developers and operators through
the implementation and deployment of the Alternate Marking in IPv6 and SRv6
scenarios? Perhaps as Operational Considerations?
Thank you for pointing out two IOAM specifications. I agree with you that
our discussio
Hi WG,
I don’t agree with Bruno’s point that “this draft could be better restricted to
the SR-replication segment itself, leaving any application/VPN specifics
outside the scope of this SPRING document”.
As I commented in [8] to the same point, the backing solution of this document
is tightly r
Hi Rishabh, authors
Speaking as an individual contributor.
Following a request, I've done a review of the latest version of the draft.
Please find below some proposed comments.
--
As a general comment, may be this draft could be better restricted to the
SR-replication segment itself, leaving any
Hi Xiao,
Thank you for the feedback.
As also discussed with Greg, this is a general issue if you want to add on-path
information for SRv6 and avoid some limitations with the option header (RFC
9098 and draft-ietf-6man-eh-limits). I think that, for SRv6, a more robust way
can be to integrate the
Hi Greg,
I think that this draft for SRv6 can recommend to integrate AltMark into SRH,
since this can mitigate the issues. But the choice between DOH and SRH TLV
should be a more general decision taken by the WGs. Indeed, the same question
involves all the on-path telemetry techniques, e.g. for
