Hi authors, Please find below two comments:
1) Following the work done in draft-ginsberg-spring-conflict-resolution, would you consider adding a notification to report SRGB block inconsistency? I think that there is consensus that the network operator need to be warned about this issue. 2) Regarding "notification segment-routing-global-sid-collision", what about adding the "identity" of both SR nodes (the one advertising the "received-target" and the one advertising the "original-target")? This looks useful as the network operator will likely need to look at the configuration of both of these nodes, and possibly fixe one. As a side note, "leaf routing-protocol" seems to assume that the check is not done across routing-instances, while I think there is the option that the SRGB be common for all routing protocols hence a use case to detect sid-collision across routing protocol/instances. Many thanks, Regards, Bruno _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration, Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci. This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law; they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments. As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified. Thank you. _______________________________________________ spring mailing list spring@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring
