+1 From: Shraddha Hegde <shrad...@juniper.net<mailto:shrad...@juniper.net>> Date: Thursday, July 30, 2015 at 8:58 AM To: "Les Ginsberg (ginsberg)" <ginsb...@cisco.com<mailto:ginsb...@cisco.com>>, Robert Raszuk <rob...@raszuk.net<mailto:rob...@raszuk.net>> Cc: "stephane.litkow...@orange.com<mailto:stephane.litkow...@orange.com>" <stephane.litkow...@orange.com<mailto:stephane.litkow...@orange.com>>, Uma Chunduri <uma.chund...@ericsson.com<mailto:uma.chund...@ericsson.com>>, "Aissaoui, Mustapha (Mustapha)" <mustapha.aissa...@alcatel-lucent.com<mailto:mustapha.aissa...@alcatel-lucent.com>>, "spring@ietf.org<mailto:spring@ietf.org>" <spring@ietf.org<mailto:spring@ietf.org>>, Pushpasis Sarkar <psar...@juniper.net<mailto:psar...@juniper.net>>, Hannes Gredler <han...@juniper.net<mailto:han...@juniper.net>> Subject: RE: [spring] Modeling SRGB configuration for draft-ietf-spring-sr-yang
[Shraddha] route preference is local to router and the neighbor never knows what the other is going to choose. If there are inconsistencies in two protocols, there are going to be loops even when they use same SRGB. Keeping different labels makes it easier to troubleshoot.
_______________________________________________ spring mailing list spring@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring
