> On Feb 23, 2017, at 2:45 PM, Alexander Vainshtein > <alexander.vainsht...@ecitele.com> wrote: > > Hi all, > I would like to point to what looks to me as inconsistency between the > current (-05) version of the SR YANG Data Model draft and the latest (-06) > version of the Segment Routing Interop with LDP draft. > > The following text has been added to the latter: > > Section 2 describes the co-existence of SR with other MPLS Control > > Plane. Section 3 documents a method to migrate from LDP to SR-based > > MPLS tunneling. Section 4 documents the interworking between SR and > > LDP in the case of non-homogeneous deployment. Section 5 describes > > how a partial SR deployment can be used to provide SR benefits to > > LDP-based traffic including a possible application of SR in the > > context of inter-domain MPLS use-cases. > > > > Typically, an implementation will allow an operator to select > > (through configuration) which of the described modes of SR and LDP > > co-existence to use. > > > To the best of my understanding, there is no match for the highlighted > configuration parameter in the former document.
well, from an SR perspective, “through configuration” is not limited to YANG... s. > (This is expected since such a parameter has not been mentioned in the > previous (-05) version of the former). > > I hope the next version of the YANG Model draft will take care of that. > > Regards, and lots of thanks in advance, > Sasha > > Office: +972-39266302 > Cell: +972-549266302 > Email: alexander.vainsht...@ecitele.com > > _______________________________________________ > 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
