Hi Alia,
1. I see a benefit in having the BIER a way to map to any of the IGP
algorithms. Simply because IGPs already provide paths to all nodes in
the domain and BIER can simply use these paths instead of computing its own.
2. Not sure if people plan to deploy the BIER in a model where it
ebruary 12, 2018 1:50 PM
*To:* Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) <ginsb...@cisco.com
<mailto:ginsb...@cisco.com>>
*Cc:* Acee Lindem (acee) <a...@cisco.com <mailto:a...@cisco.com>>;
b...@ietf.org <mailto:b...@ietf.org>; Peter Psenak (ppsenak)
<ppse..
Hi Tony,
OSPF does not have the original text, so it does not need the new one.
IMHO, the text in section 5 of ISIS BIER draft suits better to the BIER
architecture draft than to the IGP extension draft.
thanks,
Peter
On 09/02/18 20:17 , Tony Przygienda wrote:
Sure ;-) let me ping Peter
Hi Tony,
On 09/02/18 20:04 , Tony Przygienda wrote:
Les has the diff, I'd expect him to publish any minute to the list ...
The encaps was a real defect, the rest is just tightening down the
language/spec where it was too loose/too strict.
OSPF still needs update with conversion TLV removed,
Hi Shradha,
please see inline:
On 14/10/17 19:13 , Shraddha Hegde wrote:
Peter,
Pls see inline..
-Original Message-
From: Peter Psenak [mailto:ppse...@cisco.com]
Sent: Friday, October 13, 2017 8:03 PM
To: Shraddha Hegde <shrad...@juniper.net>; stephane.litkow...@orange.com;
Hi Shraddha,
please see inline:
On 13/10/17 15:49 , Shraddha Hegde wrote:
Stephane,
In certain cases MPLS forwarding may not be supported on some legacy linecards.
The problem you are describing is not SR specific, it would apply to LDP
as well. So the indication should not be about SR,
