Hi Satoru-san, Thanks for your review and comment.
I believe your point is to also cover SRv6 BSID and to that I would propose the following text : When the active candidate path has a specified BSID, the SR Policy uses that BSID if this value (label in MPLS, IPv6 address in SRv6) is available (i.e., not associated with any other usage: e.g. to another MPLS client, to another SRv6 client, to another SID, to another SR Policy, outside the range of SRv6 Locators). Thanks, Ketan From: spring <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Satoru Matsushima Sent: 29 April 2021 18:36 To: [email protected] Cc: James Guichard <[email protected]>; [email protected] Subject: Re: [spring] WGLC for draft-ietf-spring-segment-routing-policy Hi spring chairs, I think that the document is ready to move forward. Here one minor comment is bellow: Section 6.2 says on BSID as follow: When the active candidate path has a specified BSID, the SR Policy uses that BSID if this value (label in MPLS, IPv6 address in SRv6) is available (i.e., not associated with any other usage: e.g. to another MPLS client, to another SID, to another SR Policy). My suggestion for that above text as follow: When the active candidate path has a specified BSID, the SR Policy uses that BSID if this value (label in MPLS, IPv6 address in SRv6) is available (i.e., not associated with any other usage: e.g. to another MPLS client, to another SID, to another SR Policy, within the range of locators in SRv6). Best regards, --satoru On Apr 16, 2021, at 3:57, James Guichard <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: Dear WG: This email starts a 2 week Working Group Last Call for draft-ietf-spring-segment-routing-policy [1]. Please read this document if you haven’t read the most recent version and send your comments to the SPRING WG list no later than April 29th 2021. If you are raising a point which you expect will be specifically debated on the mailing list, consider using a specific email/thread for this point. Lastly, if you are an author or contributors for this document please response to the IPR call in the previous email thread. Thanks! Jim, Joel & Bruno [1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-spring-segment-routing-policy/ _______________________________________________ spring mailing list [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring
_______________________________________________ spring mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring
