rks for me.
As the charter has now been sent to IESG, this is currently in Martin’s hand.
Thanks,
--Bruno
From: Linda Dunbar [mailto:linda.dun...@huawei.com]
Sent: Friday, June 29, 2018 5:26 PM
To: Jeff Tantsura; DECRAENE Bruno IMT/OLN
Cc: SPRING WG List
Subject: RE: [spring] Updating the SPRI
Hi Bruno/Rob,
Looks good, well done!
Cheers,
Jeff
From: spring on behalf of
Date: Thursday, June 28, 2018 at 08:52
To: SPRING WG List
Subject: Re: [spring] Updating the SPRING WG Charter
Hi SPRING,
Following the discussion on the mailing list, please find below the updated
How about “Interworking SR with existing networks”?
Linda
From: Jeff Tantsura [mailto:jefftant.i...@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, June 29, 2018 10:20 AM
To: Linda Dunbar ; bruno.decra...@orange.com
Cc: SPRING WG List
Subject: Re: [spring] Updating the SPRING WG Charter
Linda,
“Legacy Networks” is
– “Legacy”.
Cheers,
Jeff
From: spring on behalf of Linda Dunbar
Date: Friday, June 29, 2018 at 11:05
To: "bruno.decra...@orange.com"
Cc: SPRING WG List
Subject: Re: [spring] Updating the SPRING WG Charter
Bruno,
IMHO, “Interworking between SR and Legacy Networks” is more a
...@orange.com [mailto:bruno.decra...@orange.com]
Sent: Friday, June 29, 2018 8:56 AM
To: Linda Dunbar
Cc: SPRING WG List
Subject: RE: [spring] Updating the SPRING WG Charter
Linda,
Thanks for the feedback.
Please see inline [Bruno]
From: Linda Dunbar [mailto:linda.dun...@huawei.com]
Sent: Thursday
Linda,
Thanks for the feedback.
Please see inline [Bruno]
From: Linda Dunbar [mailto:linda.dun...@huawei.com]
Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2018 6:18 PM
To: DECRAENE Bruno IMT/OLN; SPRING WG List
Subject: RE: [spring] Updating the SPRING WG Charter
Bruno,
Many thanks for the updated charter. All
by the WG.
Thanks,
Best regards,
--Bruno
From: Dongjie (Jimmy) [mailto:jie.d...@huawei.com]
Sent: Friday, June 29, 2018 10:33 AM
To: DECRAENE Bruno IMT/OLN; SPRING WG List
Subject: RE: [spring] Updating the SPRING WG Charter
Hi Bruno,
The updated charter text looks good to me. Thanks.
For the
bruno.decra...@orange.com
Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2018 8:52 PM
To: SPRING WG List
Subject: Re: [spring] Updating the SPRING WG Charter
Hi SPRING,
Following the discussion on the mailing list, please find below the updated
text.
The plan is to send it to Martin end of this week.
The Source Packet
Hi Bruno,
thanks, looks good to me.
Regards, Ruediger
Von: spring [mailto:spring-boun...@ietf.org] Im Auftrag von
bruno.decra...@orange.com
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 28. Juni 2018 14:52
An: SPRING WG List
Betreff: Re: [spring] Updating the SPRING WG Charter
Hi SPRING,
Following the discussion
applications
* rtgwg on fast-reroute technologies
Thanks,
Rob, Bruno
From: spring [mailto:spring-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Rob Shakir
Sent: Friday, June 01, 2018 6:06 PM
To: SPRING WG List
Subject: [spring] Updating the SPRING WG Charter
Hi SPRING,
After the discussions on the list and in
Bruno and all,
At the first glance looks just fine to me!
Thumb typed by Sasha Vainshtein
From: spring on behalf of bruno.decra...@orange.com
Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2018 3:51:43 PM
To: SPRING WG List
Subject: Re: [spring] Updating the SPRING WG Charter
Hi
* rtgwg on fast-reroute technologies
Thanks,
Rob, Bruno
From: spring [mailto:spring-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Rob Shakir
Sent: Friday, June 01, 2018 6:06 PM
To: SPRING WG List
Subject: [spring] Updating the SPRING WG Charter
Hi SPRING,
After the discussions on the list and in London relating
Hi Robert,
OK, so I understand this a bit more.
Yes, we could introduce a m/c tree in the middle of the network and have
the leaves terminate in anything. That would include an SR unicast path
and/or a new m/c tree or any combination thereof. What you have to do is
to place the correct bindin
nge.com>
*Sent:* Tuesday, June 19, 2018 3:38 PM
*To:* Stewart Bryant <mailto:stewart.bry...@gmail.com>>
*Cc:* SPRING WG List mailto:spring@ietf.org>>; Rob
Shakir <mailto:robjs=40google....@dmarc.ietf.org>>
*Subject:* Re: [spring] Updating the SPRING WG Charter
Hi St
.
Cheers
Dave
From: spring On Behalf Of Alexander Vainshtein
Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2018 6:38 AM
To: bruno.decra...@orange.com; Stewart Bryant
Cc: SPRING WG List ; Rob Shakir
Subject: Re: [spring] Updating the SPRING WG Charter
Bruno, Stewart and all,
I have looked up Section 5 “Binding Segment” of
On 19/06/2018 13:38, bruno.decra...@orange.com wrote:
Hi Stewart,
Speaking as individual contributor, please see inline [Bruno]
*From:*spring [mailto:spring-boun...@ietf.org] *On Behalf Of *Stewart
Bryant
*Sent:* Tuesday, June 19, 2018 1:19 PM
On 01/06/2018 17:05, Rob Shakir wrote:
T
Hi Stewart,
Nope that would be incorrect assumption.
Replication anchors would be where topologically it makes sense. And there
may not be at all any multicast trees those subject flows would need to
traverse. It is just about efficiency in content distribution.
Regards,
R.
On Tue, Jun 19, 2018
For clarification:
Can I assume that we are talking about replication at ingress to a
series of unicast SR paths each to an installed multicast tree close to
egress?
- Stewart
On 10/06/2018 10:58, Robert Raszuk wrote:
Hey Sasha,
100% agree with your last post. Very glad to see your suppo
; Rob Shakir
Subject: Re: [spring] Updating the SPRING WG Charter
Hi Stewart,
Speaking as individual contributor, please see inline [Bruno]
From: spring [mailto:spring-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Stewart Bryant
Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2018 1:19 PM
On 01/06/2018 17:05, Rob Shakir wrot
Hi Stewart,
Speaking as individual contributor, please see inline [Bruno]
From: spring [mailto:spring-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Stewart Bryant
Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2018 1:19 PM
On 01/06/2018 17:05, Rob Shakir wrote:
The SPRING WG defines procedures that allow a node to steer a packet
Office: +972-39266302
Cell: +972-549266302
Email: alexander.vainsht...@ecitele.com
From: spring [mailto:spring-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Stewart Bryant
Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2018 2:19 PM
To: Rob Shakir ; SPRING WG List
Subject: Re: [spring] Updating the SPRING WG Charter
On 01/06
:19
An: Rob Shakir ; SPRING WG List
Betreff: Re: [spring] Updating the SPRING WG Charter
On 01/06/2018 17:05, Rob Shakir wrote:
The SPRING WG defines procedures that allow a node to steer a packet through an
SR Policy instantiated as an ordered list of instructions called segments and
without
On 01/06/2018 17:05, Rob Shakir wrote:
The SPRING WG defines procedures that allow a node to steer a packet
through an
SR Policy instantiated as an ordered list of instructions called
segments and
without the need for per-path state information to be held at transit
nodes.
I am not sure whe
6, 2018 10:20 PM
To: Zafar Ali (zali); Rob Shakir; Michael McBride
Cc: Xiejingrong; spring@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [spring] Updating the SPRING WG Charter
Hi all,
I support and agree w/ Zafar.
Multicast in SR is much needed and there is lots of development that needs to
happen, whether for
Shakir; Michael McBride
Cc: Xiejingrong; spring@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [spring] Updating the SPRING WG Charter
Hi all,
I support and agree w/ Zafar.
Multicast in SR is much needed and there is lots of development that needs to
happen, whether for SRv6 or with SR-MPLS. The core architecture and
Rob,
Two things
- do we have an available current state of the charter-to-bu-updated
text.
- inline plz
On 2018-06-04 18:44, Rob Shakir wrote:
Michael,
Thanks for the comment.
On Mon, Jun 4, 2018 at 9:42 AM Michael McBride
mailto:michael.mcbr...@huawei.com>> wrote:
It would be helpf
une 13, 2018 at 11:26 PM
To: "Zafar Ali (zali)" ,
"bruno.decra...@orange.com"
Cc: SPRING WG List , "Zafar Ali (zali)" , Rob
Shakir
Subject: Re: [spring] Updating the SPRING WG Charter
Hi Zafar,
As mentioned in my previous mail, the VPN+ drafts and this work item
@dmarc.ietf.org>>
Cc: "Zafar Ali (zali)" mailto:z...@cisco.com>>, Rob Shakir
mailto:robjs=40google@dmarc.ietf.org>>,
SPRING WG List mailto:spring@ietf.org>>
Subject: RE: [spring] Updating the SPRING WG Charter
Dear Zafar,
Please see inline [Bruno]
From: sp
presented to the Spring WG in London.
Thanks
Regards … Zafar
From: "bruno.decra...@orange.com"
Date: Tuesday, June 12, 2018 at 12:13 PM
To: "Zafar Ali (zali)"
Cc: "Zafar Ali (zali)" , Rob Shakir
, SPRING WG List
Subject: RE: [spring] Updating the SPRING WG Ch
: SPRING WG List ; Zafar Ali (zali) ; Rob
Shakir
Betreff: Re: [spring] Updating the SPRING WG Charter
Dear Zafar,
As Bruno and Sasha have pointed out, the enhanced VPN drafts are relevant to
this work item.
As mentioned in one of my previous email (the pointer is also provided in
Bruno’s mail
, June 13, 2018 12:13 AM
To: Zafar Ali (zali)
Cc: SPRING WG List ; Zafar Ali (zali) ; Rob
Shakir
Subject: Re: [spring] Updating the SPRING WG Charter
Dear Zafar,
Please see inline [Bruno]
From: spring [mailto:spring-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Zafar Ali (zali)
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2018 3
Rob,
Sorry for the delay, please see inline.
Thanks!
Cheers,
Jeff
From: Rob Shakir
Date: Sunday, June 3, 2018 at 14:36
To: Jeff Tantsura
Cc: SPRING WG List
Subject: Re: [spring] Updating the SPRING WG Charter
Hi Jeff,
Thanks for the comments.
On Fri, Jun 1, 2018 at 9:44
Dear Zafar,
Please see inline [Bruno]
From: spring [mailto:spring-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Zafar Ali (zali)
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2018 3:45 PM
To: Rob Shakir; SPRING WG List
Cc: Zafar Ali (zali)
Subject: Re: [spring] Updating the SPRING WG Charter
Dear Rob, Bruno,
I have a question on
(zali)
Subject: Re: [spring] Updating the SPRING WG Charter
Dear Rob, Bruno,
I have a question on the specifics of the following milestone:
�. Using SR as the mechanism to identify sets of resources in networks
with SR-MPLS and SRv6 dataplanes.
I do not know of any specific use-case, requi
From: spring on behalf of Rob Shakir
Date: Friday, June 1, 2018 at 12:07 PM
To: SPRING WG List
Subject: [spring] Updating the SPRING WG Charter
Hi SPRING,
After the discussions on the list and in London relating to the charter, Bruno
and I have been working to propose a new charter for the WG
Wednesday, June 6, 2018 2:41 PM
To: Rob Shakir; Linda Dunbar
Cc: Jeff Tantsura; Zafar Ali (zali); SPRING WG List
Subject: Re: [spring] Updating the SPRING WG Charter
Hi Rob,
Re: Linda comment on SR assisted SD-WAN.
At IETF101, Bruno and you presented a slide based on the WG feedback on the
ma
Hey Sasha,
100% agree with your last post. Very glad to see your support for
spray/fan-out or if you will
static MDTs to be in scope of SPRING.
Based on number of WG members input expressed both at the meeting and on
the list I hope
proposed SPRING charter will be updated soon to reflect that.
...@gmail.com [mailto:rras...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Robert Raszuk
Sent: Saturday, June 9, 2018 10:50 PM
To: Alexander Vainshtein
Cc: spring@ietf.org; Xiejingrong ; Michael McBride
; Rob Shakir ;
Paul Mattes ; Zafar Ali (zali) ; Eric C
Rosen ; Voyer, Daniel
Subject: Re: [spring] Updating the
Sasha,
1. Where did I say it is a requirement ? My quote was precise and it
clearly said that this is recommended.
2. Nothing in this thread requires use of domain-wide labels. All required
functionality will work just fine with domain-wide indexes - so even we I
or anyone one else said here anyt
nt: Friday, June 8, 2018 11:44 PM
To: Alexander Vainshtein
Cc: Paul Mattes ; spring@ietf.org; Xiejingrong
; Michael McBride ; Rob
Shakir ; Zafar Ali (zali) ;
Eric C Rosen ; Voyer, Daniel
Subject: Re: [spring] Updating the SPRING WG Charter
Folks,
The only reason why SR-MPLS architecture is using
Folks,
The only reason why SR-MPLS architecture is using indexes as opposed to
domain wide labels is a claim from few folks that possibly in some networks
deployed platforms would not be able to use the same global label block for
SR.
So SR-MPLS architecture agreed to use index to offset possible
Inline [DV]
At IETF101, you and Bruno presented a slide based on the WG feedback on the
mailing list
(https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/101/materials/slides-101-spring-00-chairs-slides-01).
During the Spring meeting, the WG agreed to add milestones to those items. In
general, I see some mile
, 2018 10:02:47 PM
To: Robert Raszuk; Alexander Vainshtein
Cc: spring@ietf.org; Xiejingrong; Michael McBride; Rob Shakir; Zafar Ali
(zali); Eric C Rosen; Voyer, Daniel
Subject: RE: [spring] Updating the SPRING WG Charter
We don’t have domain-wide labels. We have domain-wide indices. The same index
is
The below sentence I am going to frame next to the best quotes ever
Thank you Paul !
We don’t have domain-wide labels. We have domain-wide indices. The same
> index is represented with different label values by different hosts,
> depending on their SRGBs.
>
>
>
> *pdm*
>
>
_
@ietf.org; Xiejingrong ; Michael McBride
; Rob Shakir ;
Zafar Ali (zali) ; Eric C Rosen ; Voyer,
Daniel
Subject: Re: [spring] Updating the SPRING WG Charter
Sasha,
> because usage of domain-wide labels has been discussed many times in the past
> and rejected by the MPLS WG.
That comment I
:* Alexander Vainshtein ;
> spring@ietf.org; Xiejingrong ; Michael McBride <
> michael.mcbr...@huawei.com>; Rob Shakir ;
> Zafar Ali (zali) ; Voyer, Daniel
> *Subject:* Re: [spring] Updating the SPRING WG Charter
>
>
>
> Hi Eric,
>
>
>
> The way I look at th
k
Sent: Thursday, June 7, 2018 7:04 PM
To: Eric C Rosen
Cc: Alexander Vainshtein ; spring@ietf.org;
Xiejingrong ; Michael McBride
; Rob Shakir ;
Zafar Ali (zali) ; Voyer, Daniel
Subject: Re: [spring] Updating the SPRING WG Charter
Hi Eric,
The way I look at this is really not from the perspective o
@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [spring] Updating the SPRING WG Charter
On Thu, Jun 7, 2018 at 10:06 AM David Allan I
mailto:david.i.al...@ericsson.com>> wrote:
Would not the existence of SRLB’s be an existence proof of per-path state at
transit nodes in the SPRING architecture?
No - SRLBs are just
: Xiejingrong ; spring@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [spring] Updating the SPRING WG Charter
Hi all,
I do not think that SPRING WG should deal with MC – possibly, excluding use of
ingress replication for multicast.
This is based on what I see as the key element (highlighted) in definition of
SPRING activities in
Zafar,
I intentionally left the list of milestones out of the mail. Clearly, we
need to agree the areas of work before we can break this down into
milestones. Equally, we have more flexibility in defining these since they
do not need to be reviewed by the IESG.
On Wed, Jun 6, 2018 at 12:14 PM Zaf
Hi Eric,
The way I look at this is really not from the perspective of true dynamic
multicast with tree building etc .. .I look at this as anchor points to
replicate unicast flows into two or more endpoints maybe once or twice in
entire domain.
So for sure if you would try to apply this technique
On 6/7/2018 10:55 AM, Robert Raszuk wrote:
Imagine a segment with embedded meaning that packets received with
such value X should be replicated to interfaces Y & Z. Such decision
can be configured from controller or locally computed.
Nothing there is per-path as well as nothing there is per f
*Voyer,
> Daniel
> *Sent:* Wednesday, June 6, 2018 11:20 PM
> *To:* Zafar Ali (zali) ; Rob Shakir 40google@dmarc.ietf.org>; Michael McBride
> *Cc:* Xiejingrong ; spring@ietf.org
>
> *Subject:* Re: [spring] Updating the SPRING WG Charter
>
>
>
> Hi all,
>
&g
g-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Voyer, Daniel
Sent: Wednesday, June 6, 2018 11:20 PM
To: Zafar Ali (zali) ; Rob Shakir
; Michael McBride
Cc: Xiejingrong ; spring@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [spring] Updating the SPRING WG Charter
Hi all,
I support and agree w/ Zafar.
Multicast in SR is much needed and th
uot;
Date: Wednesday, June 6, 2018 at 3:14 PM
To: Rob Shakir , Michael McBride
Cc: Xiejingrong , "spring@ietf.org" ,
"Zafar Ali (zali)"
Subject: Re: [spring] Updating the SPRING WG Charter
Hi Rob,
The multicast in SR belongs to the same category as I highlighted in my last
email
t owns the protocol.
Thanks
Regards … Zafar
From: spring on behalf of Rob Shakir
Date: Monday, June 4, 2018 at 12:45 PM
To: Michael McBride
Cc: Xiejingrong , "spring@ietf.org"
Subject: Re: [spring] Updating the SPRING WG Charter
Michael,
Thanks for the comment.
On Mon, Jun 4, 201
protocol extension work will be done at the WG that
owns the protocol.
Thanks
Regards … Zafar
From: spring on behalf of Rob Shakir
Date: Sunday, June 3, 2018 at 5:32 PM
To: Linda Dunbar
Cc: Jeff Tantsura , SPRING WG List
Subject: Re: [spring] Updating the SPRING WG Charter
Hi Linda,
On Fri, Jun
Michael,
Thanks for the comment.
On Mon, Jun 4, 2018 at 9:42 AM Michael McBride
wrote:
> It would be helpful, while updating the charter, to state whether
> multicast in SR is in/out of scope in order to know which wg to take our
> future work.
>
I think this is impractical. If we state everyt
Cc: spring@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [spring] Updating the SPRING WG Charter
Hi Jingrong,
On Sun, Jun 3, 2018 at 7:44 PM Xiejingrong
mailto:xiejingr...@huawei.com>> wrote:
Will SPRING consider multicast/BIER being included ? These are some reasons I
am thinking about:
(1) multicast/mult
mentioned in ietf101 London to consider cooperating with BIER
for some purpose.
Thanks,
Jingrong
From: spring [mailto:spring-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Rob Shakir
Sent: Friday, June 01, 2018 9:06 AM
To: SPRING WG List mailto:spring@ietf.org>>
Subject: [spring] Updating the SPRING WG Chart
: [spring] Updating the SPRING WG Charter
Hi Rob,
Looks good, few additions, please see inline
Cheers,
Jeff
From: spring mailto:spring-boun...@ietf..org>> on
behalf of Rob Shakir
mailto:robjs=40google@dmarc.ietf.org>>
Date: Friday, June 1, 2018 at 09:05
To: SPRING WG List m
Hi Rob,
My suggestions (& comments) are inserted below.
Linda
From: spring [mailto:spring-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Jeff Tantsura
Sent: Friday, June 01, 2018 11:44 AM
To: Rob Shakir ; SPRING WG List
Subject: Re: [spring] Updating the SPRING WG Charter
Hi Rob,
Looks good, few addit
Hi Rob,
Looks good, few additions, please see inline
Cheers,
Jeff
From: spring on behalf of Rob Shakir
Date: Friday, June 1, 2018 at 09:05
To: SPRING WG List
Subject: [spring] Updating the SPRING WG Charter
Hi SPRING,
After the discussions on the list and in London relating
63 matches
Mail list logo
