On 9/24/14 11:48 AM, "Stewart Bryant (stbryant)"
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Stewart:
I'm ok with everything else..
1.
* The last few sentences of the section propose other solutions in case
the intersection between P and Q spaces is empty. I think that is out of scope
and should be taken out. As with the suggestion of IGP extensions (section 7),
if there is a specific/complete solution then it should be specified.
I have trimmed this down to
In the small number of cases where there is no intersection between the
(extended)P-space and the Q-space, a number of solutions to providing a
suitable path between such disjoint regions in the network have been discussed
in the working group. For example an explicitly routed LSP between P and Q
might be set up using RSVP-TE or using Segment Routing
[I-D.filsfils-rtgwg-segment-routing]. Such extended repair methods are outside
the scope of this document.
I still think that it is unnecessary, but I'm ok if you want to leave it in.
I'm assuming that by "discussed in the working group" you mean that it came up
on the list while discussing the draft, right? Technically, those topics are
not rtgwg topics..but that's just another nit. BTW, the correct reference for
Segment Routing is I-D.filsfils-spring-segment-routing.
Thanks!
Alvaro.
_______________________________________________
rtgwg mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg
