Hi,
It’s useful draft, support the adoption!
Best regards,
Mach
From: spring [mailto:spring-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Rob Shakir
Sent: Thursday, June 27, 2019 2:14 PM
To: SPRING WG List
Subject: [spring] WG Adoption Call: draft-xuclad-spring-sr-service-programming
Hi SPRING WG,
This
Hi,
I have read the draft and think it’s a useful document.
Support the adoption!
Best regards,
Mach
From: spring [mailto:spring-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Rob Shakir
Sent: Thursday, June 27, 2019 2:14 PM
To: SPRING WG List
Subject: [spring] WG Adoption Call: draft-guichard-spring-nsh-sr
Hi all,
DetNet(Deterministic Networking) provides a capability to carry specified data
flows with ultra-high-quality network service, including extremely low data
loss rates and bounded latency.
We have submitted a draft about how to implement DetNet in an SRv6 domain(this
version mainly
On Thu., 4 Jul. 2019, 06:06 Tom Herbert, wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 3, 2019 at 12:44 PM Ron Bonica wrote:
> >
> > Hi Tom,
> >
> > Thanks for the review.
> >
> > On Friday, I will update draft-bonica-6man-comp-rtg-hdr. It will contain
> a section on mutability. It will say:
> >
> > - the Segments Left
On Wed, Jul 3, 2019 at 12:44 PM Ron Bonica wrote:
>
> Hi Tom,
>
> Thanks for the review.
>
> On Friday, I will update draft-bonica-6man-comp-rtg-hdr. It will contain a
> section on mutability. It will say:
>
> - the Segments Left field is mutable
> - every other field in the CRH is immutable
>
>
Hi Tom,
Thanks for the review.
On Friday, I will update draft-bonica-6man-comp-rtg-hdr. It will contain a
section on mutability. It will say:
- the Segments Left field is mutable
- every other field in the CRH is immutable
I will also update draft-bonica-6man-vpn-dest-opt and
Hi Ron,
Thanks for the draft.
I think the name SRV6+ might be a little misleading in that it could
be misinterpreted as SRV6+ being a superset of SRV6. Specifically,
SRV6+ doesn't allow 128 bit SIDs which seems inherent in SRV6 and so
the primary function (and implementation) of SRV6 isn't
Hi Andy,
The draft is relevant to both working groups. So I announced it to both WGs and
will let the chairs decide where it belongs.
Ron
From: Andrew G. Malis
Sent: Tuesday, July 2, 2019 7:15 AM
To: Ron Bonica
Cc: SPRING WG ; 6man WG
Hi,
Support.
Regards,
Nagendra
From: spring On Behalf Of Rob Shakir
Sent: 27 June 2019 11:44
To: SPRING WG List
Subject: [spring] WG Adoption Call: draft-xuclad-spring-sr-service-programming
Hi SPRING WG,
This email initiates a two week working group adoption call for
Support.
On Thu, Jun 27, 2019 at 8:15 AM Rob Shakir wrote:
> Hi SPRING WG,
>
> This email initiates a two week working group adoption call for
> draft-xuclad-spring-sr-service-programming. This follows the discussion
> that we had in the last few IETF meetings, and particularly the focused
>
I support adoption of this draft.
It’s a necessary definition of the services portion of the SR architecture.
Darren
On Jun 27, 2019, at 2:13 AM, Rob Shakir
mailto:robjs=40google@dmarc.ietf.org>>
wrote:
Hi SPRING WG,
This email initiates a two week working group adoption call for
Hi Andrew,
As just a little contributor to the spec let me provide my own personal
view point.
Please kindly see inline ...
>1. What effect will this have on flow analysis if a packet is arriving
>with a modified DA – that is going to subsequently change
>
> Flow analysis needs to
Dear Authors,
I've read through this draft with some interest - and it would be remiss of me
not to express severe reservations to something that modified packet headers in
the manner described.
As such, I've got a couple of questions.
1. What effect will this have on flow analysis if a
Support adoption.
Thanks,
Francois
From: spring on behalf of Rob Shakir
Date: Thursday 27 June 2019 at 08:15
To: SPRING WG List
Subject: [spring] WG Adoption Call: draft-guichard-spring-nsh-sr
Hi SPRING WG,
This email initiates a two week working group adoption call for
Hi PK,
Please check inline below.
From: spring On Behalf Of Przemyslaw Krol
Sent: 30 March 2019 11:09
To: draft-ietf-idr-segment-routing-te-pol...@ietf.org
Cc: spring@ietf.org
Subject: [spring] draft-ietf-idr-segment-routing-te-policy-05 - EXP NULL
imposition
Greetings,
I have two minor
Support adoption of this draft.
Thanks,
Ketan
From: spring On Behalf Of Rob Shakir
Sent: 27 June 2019 11:44
To: SPRING WG List
Subject: [spring] WG Adoption Call: draft-xuclad-spring-sr-service-programming
Hi SPRING WG,
This email initiates a two week working group adoption call for
Support adoption of this draft.
Thanks,
Ketan
From: spring On Behalf Of Rob Shakir
Sent: 27 June 2019 11:44
To: SPRING WG List
Subject: [spring] WG Adoption Call: draft-guichard-spring-nsh-sr
Hi SPRING WG,
This email initiates a two week working group adoption call for
A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
This draft is a work item of the Source Packet Routing in Networking WG of the
IETF.
Title : SRv6 Network Programming
Authors : Clarence Filsfils
Pablo
I support the adoption. The solution can be used for some important application
scenarios combining with SR and NSH and the draft has been discussed for a long
time.
Best Regards,
Zhenbin (Robin)
发件人: spring [spring-boun...@ietf.org] 代表 Rob Shakir
I support the adoption. It is an important application scenario of SRv6 and the
draft has been discussed and revised for a long time. It is a right time for
adoption.
Best Regards,
Zhenbin (Robin)
发件人: spring [spring-boun...@ietf.org] 代表 Satoru
Hi, I support this adoption.
--satoru
> 2019/06/27 15:13、Rob Shakir のメール:
>
> Hi SPRING WG,
>
> This email initiates a two week working group adoption call for
> draft-xuclad-spring-sr-service-programming. This follows the discussion that
> we had in the last few IETF meetings, and
21 matches
Mail list logo
