>Let me think just an example, if a SMF sees an IPv6 address as an UPF
address, is actually an IPv6 segment ID of a TE path through several IPv6
routers and links, a southbound could be PCEP but not limited.
>BGP-LS should work to disseminate that segment and FPC may
Hello Uma,
>
> When it comes to service function type UPF, you name it. Following draft
> exhibits how service chain can be done by SRv6:
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-xuclad-spring-sr-service-chaining-00
>
> [Uma]: I presume this is on N6 interface once de-capsulation is done at
>
m> | Mailing Lists: <ebike...@gmail.com>
-- Original Message --
From: "Satoru Matsushima" <satoru.matsush...@gmail.com>
To: "Kentaro Ebisawa" <ebike...@gmail.com>
Cc: "dmm" <dmm@ietf.org>
date: 2017/12/05 18:35:37
Subject: Re: review com
Hi Ebisawa-san,
Thank you for your review. That’s helpful. Please see my comments in line:
> [...]
> ## Comments to Stateless Interworking
>
> In general, I thought 5.4 and 6.3 could be combined or be more closer.
> I think organization of the document would be changed a lot from various
>
Hi,
Please find my review comments for draft-ietf-dmm-srv6-mobile-uplane-00.
## Comments to Stateless Interworking
In general, I thought 5.4 and 6.3 could be combined or be more closer.
I think organization of the document would be changed a lot from various
feedback so just my 2 cents
