Hi Ketan
I have been following this draft as it has progressed and had gone a long
ways and has matured. Document is very well written.
A few comments on the draft.
Thank you
Section 2
Why is MVPN SAFI 129 RFC 6513 6514 out of scope for this document?
Just as we have BGP Prefix SID Attribute
Hi Sasha,
Indeed your version is better and we’ll put that in on the next draft update.
Thanks,
Ketan
From: Alexander Vainshtein
Sent: 10 March 2021 19:40
To: Ketan Talaulikar (ketant)
Cc: draft-ietf-bess-srv6-services@ietf.org; b...@ietf.org; spring@ietf.org;
Swadesh Agrawal (swaagraw) ;
Ketan,
From my POV an even better version would be “Usage of multicast trees as
P-tunnels is outside the scope of this document”.
But your proposed text is also OK with me.
Regards,
Sasha
Office: +972-39266302
Cell: +972-549266302
Email: alexander.vainsht...@rbbn.com
From: Ketan Talaulik
Hi Sasha,
My apologies and I think I understand your point. Would the following text
change convey the right meaning?
s/ The setup of multicast trees for use as P-tunnels is outside the scope of
this document / The setup and usage of multicast trees as P-tunnels is outside
the scope of this do
)
, Zafar Ali (zali) , rtg-...@ietf.org
,
Subject: RE: [spring] RTG-DIR review of draft-ietf-bess-srv6-services-05
Hi Ketan,
According to section “4. Encoding SRv6 SID information" for efficient
encoding, variable part of SRv6 SID is transposed to label field. This draft
has given an examp
alaulikar (ketant)
Cc: draft-ietf-bess-srv6-services@ietf.org; b...@ietf.org; spring@ietf.org;
Swadesh Agrawal (swaagraw) ; Zafar Ali (zali)
; rtg-...@ietf.org;
Subject: Re: [spring] RTG-DIR review of draft-ietf-bess-srv6-services-05
Ketan,
Lots of thanks for posting an updated version
Ketan,
Lots of thanks for posting an updated version of the draft.
I have looked it up, and it seems that the majority of my review comments have
been addressed.
I defer to the Routing ADs regarding my metadata comments.
One point that, IMHO, requires additional clarification, is restriction of
Hi Sasha,
Thanks a lot for your detailed review, your comments/feedback and for taking
time for discussions with the co-authors for their resolution.
We’ve just posted an update of the draft to address your comments based on our
discussions :
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-b
Adding RTG-DIR – my apologies
Regards,
Sasha
Office: +972-39266302
Cell: +972-549266302
Email: alexander.vainsht...@rbbn.com
From: Alexander Vainshtein
Sent: Friday, January 29, 2021 12:46 PM
To: rtg-...@ietf.org
Cc: draft-ietf-bess-srv6-services@ietf.org; b...@ietf.org; spring@ietf.o
Hello,
I have been selected as the Routing Directorate reviewer for this draft. The
Routing Directorate seeks to review all routing or routing-related drafts as
they pass through IETF last call and IESG review, and sometimes on special
request. The purpose of the review is to provide assistance
10 matches
Mail list logo
