Hi, Tony: For the AS boundary use case, do you have other better solution? I have responded to Les for his mentioned/insisted unnumbered link scenario. if it is acceptable, is it the general design then?
Best Regards Aijun Wang China Telecom -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Tony Li Sent: Tuesday, January 11, 2022 4:38 AM To: Christian Hopps <[email protected]> Cc: lsr <[email protected]>; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call for draft-wang-lsr-stub-link-attributes-02 I object to the adoption of this draft. I don’t think that it’s fundamentally a correct approach. One of the important things that we’ve learned over the years is that we need to build general designs and not simply add new elements and mechanisms for each use case that we think of. I understand the AS boundary use case. I agree that’s worthy of consideration. Not so much the others. I would suggest that the authors spend a bit more time cogitating. Regards, Tony > On Jan 3, 2022, at 10:58 PM, Christian Hopps <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Folks, > > This begins a 2 week WG Adoption Call for the following draft: > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-wang-lsr-stub-link-attributes/ > > Please indicate your support or objections by January 18th, 2022. > > Authors, please respond to the list indicating whether you are aware of any > IPR that applies to these drafts. > > Thanks, > Chris. > > _______________________________________________ > Lsr mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr _______________________________________________ Lsr mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr _______________________________________________ Lsr mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr
