I support the WG adoption of this draft. I think it is a really good idea for each Virtual Network to have its own SIDs. A couple questions to the authors:
Page 9: Figure 1: The Red network has same SID on A & B for the path between them. But between B & E there are different SIDs. Is it intended? What scenario requires same SID on both nodes? Page 10: Section 4.3: the paragraph states that each node should advertise the identifiers of the Virtual networks it participates in: 1) does each Virtual Network has its own advertisement? i.e. if a node supports 5 Virtual Networks, the node sends out 5 independent advertisements? 2) The network controller configures the SIDs for each node. Why not let the network controller manage the advertisement? Cheers, Linda From: spring <spring-boun...@ietf.org> On Behalf Of James Guichard Sent: Wednesday, July 15, 2020 6:17 AM To: spring@ietf.org Cc: spring-cha...@ietf.org Subject: [spring] WG Adoption Call for draft-dong-spring-sr-for-enhanced-vpn Dear WG: This email begins a 2 week WG adoption call for https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-dong-spring-sr-for-enhanced-vpn/<https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdatatracker.ietf.org%2Fdoc%2Fdraft-dong-spring-sr-for-enhanced-vpn%2F&data=02%7C01%7Clinda.dunbar%40futurewei.com%7Cf03a8de844774eb62c1508d828b09948%7C0fee8ff2a3b240189c753a1d5591fedc%7C1%7C0%7C637304086252107481&sdata=G75TrLzE%2FhSgHuwP4cClUusCr%2BofY0C1Kq%2Fq9CBDOwE%3D&reserved=0> ending Wednesday 29th July 2020. Please speak up if you support or oppose adopting this document into the WG.. Please also provide comments/reasons for that support (or lack thereof). Silence will not be considered consent. Thanks! Jim, Joel & Bruno
_______________________________________________ spring mailing list spring@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring
