Support. One quick comment:
While section 3 correctly documents MPLS instantiation of SR - given the constructs SR has (ADJ SID for example) it's good to document SID/Label depth implications in the deployments. -- Uma C. -----Original Message----- From: spring [mailto:spring-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Martin Vigoureux Sent: Friday, January 27, 2017 3:05 AM To: spring@ietf.org Cc: draft-ietf-spring-segment-routing-m...@ietf.org Subject: [spring] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-spring-segment-routing-mpls-06 Hello Working Group, This email starts a 2-week Working Group Last Call on draft-ietf-spring-segment-routing-mpls-06 [1]. ¤ Please read the document if you haven't read the most recent version yet, and send your comments to the list, no later than the *12th of February*. Note that this is *not only* a call for comments on the document; it is also a call for support (or not) to publish this document as a Proposed Standard RFC. ¤ We have already polled for IPR knowledge on this document and all Authors have replied. IPR exists against this document and has been disclosed [2]. Thank you M&B --- [1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-spring-segment-routing-mpls/ [2] https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/search/?submit=draft&id=draft-ietf-spring-segment-routing-mpls _______________________________________________ spring mailing list spring@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring _______________________________________________ spring mailing list spring@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring
