> On Mar 1, 2017, at 5:48 PM, Anoop Ghanwani <an...@alumni.duke.edu> wrote: > > Thanks for the responses. > > On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 7:44 AM, Stefano Previdi (sprevidi) > <sprev...@cisco.com> wrote: > > > On Feb 28, 2017, at 8:29 PM, Anoop Ghanwani <an...@alumni.duke.edu> wrote: > > > > > > - pg 5, line 1 > > What is the criteria that allow sharing the AS number? Is there a > > reference? > > > we changed this to “use the same AS”. As explained in 4.3, using the same AS > brings the update loop prevention mechanism so facilitate filtering and > propagation. > > > I think your response is about the spine/leaf nodes. My comment is about the > ToR nodes.
the same applies. The rules and guidelines related to bgp deployment and AS numbering are the same. > > - pg 7 > > "local label 1600x" -> "local label (16000 + x). > > Also because of the way loopbacks are assigned, does this mean that the > > number nodes that this scheme can handle is 512? May be good to mention > > why this is considered a good number. > > > the example assumes loopbacks assigned from 192.0.2/24. It gives you 255 host > addresses. This is of course just illustrative. > > It may be good to mention explicitly that the numbers used are illustrative. > I did not get that impression when reading the draft. > > > > - pg 11 > > "BGP Prefix Segment 16011 then directs the packet down to Node11 along > > the path (Node5, Node9, Node11)." > > I think it would be worth mentioning that node 9 need not appear in this > > path. In general, because of the nature of clos topologies, there is no > > need to have intermediate nodes between the spine and the ToR on the way > > down. (If there is, it would be good to know why.) > > > maybe I’m missing your point but the example is baed on the illustrative > topology where 9 in the shortest path but you don’t need to specify 9 in the > segment list. This is base of SR explained in the architecture draft. > > > Yes, that is indeed my point. I think it would be better to remove it and > have a statement that says why it doesn't appear pointing to the arch doc. I will add a reference but remember that this is a use case draft. For the mechanics of SR you always have to reference to the architecture draft (in fact, it is referenced in many places in the draft). Thanks. s. > > Thanks, > Anoop _______________________________________________ spring mailing list spring@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring
