Was: Re: [spring]
draft-filsfilscheng-spring-srv6-srh-compression-02#section-4.1.1
I’m sending this note to redirect this question to the srcomp DT for an
editorial fix, when the team meets next.
For the DT:
Each proposal, introduced in section 1, discusses how it supports 16-bit and
32-bit SI
Thanks Darren!
On Mon, Sep 27, 2021 at 1:23 PM Darren Dukes (ddukes) wrote:
> Was: Re: [spring]
> draft-filsfilscheng-spring-srv6-srh-compression-02#section-4.1.1
>
>
>
> I’m sending this note to redirect this question to the srcomp DT for an
> editorial fix, when the team meets next.
>
>
>
> Fo
Hi Darren & Authors
In addition to that editorial fix can we take below into account and
addressed in the draft.
The main goal for operators is interoperability. As interoperability is
the key reason for a single SRv6 compression solution that we have WG
consensus and is highly desired.
Continu
Hi Darren, Chengli & Authors
In the update please also state what the advantages and disadvantages
compare and contrast of having both solutions together in a single unified
solution.
What does that offer and bring to the table from a compression standpoint
value add that one has over the other.
Use Only
From: spring On Behalf Of Gyan Mishra
Sent: Saturday, October 2, 2021 7:51 AM
To: Darren Dukes (ddukes)
Cc: src...@ietf.org; SPRING WG
Subject: Re: [spring] [srcomp] compression analysis draft question on proposals
analyzed
[External Email. Be cautious of content]
Thanks Darren!
On
