Speaking as an individual participant, it seems to me that the
description of using CPE as SRv6 endpoints needs to state explicitly and
clearly that this assumes that the CPE are managed by the access
operator, and that all of the relevant endpoints are part of a single
operator / domain. Otherwise, this usage violates the base rules for SRv6.
Personally, I would like to see this fixed before adoption completes.
Yours,
Joel
On 7/14/2023 9:44 AM, Joel Halpern wrote:
I probably need to re-read the draft. Does the draft assume the CPE
is part of the operator domain? Remember that SRv6 MUST be used ONLY
within a limited domain?
Yours,
Joel
On 7/14/2023 2:22 AM, Weiqiang Cheng wrote:
Hi Aijun,
Thank you very much for your comments.
We will add some text to describe that the CPE utilizes locators
obtained through DHCP to provide differentiated services.
Best Regards
Weiqiang Cheng
*发件人：* Aijun Wang <mailto:wangai...@tsinghua.org.cn>
*发送时间：* 2023-07-14 11:19
*收件人：* 'Alvaro Retana' <mailto:aretana.i...@gmail.com>;
spring@ietf.org
*抄送：*
draft-cheng-spring-distribute-srv6-locator-by-d...@ietf.org;
spring-cha...@ietf.org
*主题：* 答复: [spring] spring WG Adoption Call for
draft-cheng-dhc-distribute-srv6-locator-by-dhcp
Support its adoption.
It will be more convincible to add some descriptions in the
document that the CPE itself needs to obtain different IPv6
address that can differentiate the services that it can provide.
Best Regards
Aijun Wang
China Telecom
-----邮件原件-----
发件人: spring-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:spring-boun...@ietf.org] 代表
Alvaro Retana
发送时间: 2023年7月5日 20:00
收件人: spring@ietf.org
抄送: draft-cheng-spring-distribute-srv6-locator-by-d...@ietf.org;
spring-cha...@ietf.org
主题: [spring] spring WG Adoption Call for
draft-cheng-dhc-distribute-srv6-locator-by-dhcp
Dear WG:
This message starts a two-week adoption call for
draft-cheng-dhc-distribute-srv6-locator-by-dhcp, ending on July/19.
It "describes the method of assigning locators to SRv6 Endpoints
through DHCPv6".
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-cheng-spring-distribute-srv6-locator-by-dhcp/
Please review the draft and consider whether you support its
adoption by the WG. Please share any thoughts with the list to
indicate support or opposition -- this is not a vote.
If you are willing to provide a more in-depth review, please
state it explicitly to give the chairs an indication of the
energy level in the working group willing to work on the document.
WG adoption is the start of the process. The fundamental
question is whether you agree the proposal is worth the WG's time
to work on and whether this draft represents a good starting
point. The chairs are particularly interested in hearing the
opinion of people who are not authors of the document.
Thanks!
Alvaro (for the Chairs)
_______________________________________________
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
_______________________________________________
spring mailing list
spring@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring
