+1 to Rob's comment here Just because use cases come along while another draft is in flight shouldn't mean you have to loop back to the initial draft. If this was the case, you're prolonging an already lengthy process. There are likely many more to come in the future that have not been thought of yet....
On 09/25/2015 02:22 AM, Rob Shakir wrote: > > On 24 September 2015 at 09:09:00, Anil Kumar S N (VRP Network BL) > (anil...@huawei.com) wrote: >> Hi Rob, >> >> Thanks for reverting back the mail. >> >> If there is a desire to control traffic flows on individual bundle interface, >> information about each of the bundle members interface is required to be >> flooded >> using IGP extension. Segment routing framework is generic and flexible >> enough to handle >> this. >> IGP extension need to support it. >> […snip…] > > Right - but this draft does not seek to catalogue every possible use of SR - > since it could not possibly do this (given that some will be invented in the > future). The examples within it give sufficient motivation for the types of > SID that are defined which, IMHO, is their intention. > > I think it would be best to finalise this document with what is there. > Perhaps my co-authors will disagree. > > r. > > _______________________________________________ > spring mailing list > spring@ietf.org > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v1/url?u=https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring&k=ZVNjlDMF0FElm4dQtryO4A%3D%3D%0A&r=GJQFPrZyyh453ywaGV%2FvoQ%3D%3D%0A&m=iHfJlJW%2FL4TlTdzDDLsURt1PgCZ0SxsuqCo%2BvMo%2F6aQ%3D%0A&s=6e218431a9c85e2b85037955a8b78442a48f34373701dbff963e658251e612ff > _______________________________________________ spring mailing list spring@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring
