:56 AM
To: Ron Bonica
Cc: Zafar Ali (zali) ; EXT - daniel.bern...@bell.ca
; Jeff Tantsura ; Chengli
(Cheng Li) ; Stewart Bryant ;
SPRING WG List ; SING Team
Subject: Re: [spring] SR-MPLS over IPv6？
Hi Ron,
You may also consider SR-mapped-6 (SRm6) as it even better reflects the spirit
.bern...@bell.ca>; Jeff Tantsura ; Chengli
> (Cheng Li) ; Stewart Bryant <
> stewart.bry...@gmail.com>; SPRING WG List ; SING Team <
> s.i.n.g.team.0...@gmail.com>
> *Subject:* Re: [spring] SR-MPLS over IPv6？
>
>
>
> Hi Ron,
>
>
>
> While sitting and watc
Tantsura ; Chengli
(Cheng Li) ; Stewart Bryant ;
SPRING WG List ; SING Team
Subject: Re: [spring] SR-MPLS over IPv6？
Hi Ron,
While sitting and watching this very educational thread to enhance anyone
linguistic skills why don't you just call your architecture as either SRc6 or
SRs6 and move
-Original Message-
From: spring On Behalf Of Bernier, Daniel
Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2019 4:07 PM
To: Joel M. Halpern
Cc: SPRING WG List
Subject: Re: [spring] SR-MPLS over IPv6？
Ah but Joel,
As was debated over the mailing list, if I have multiple paths (i.e.
unidirectional PPSIs) that go
Hi Ron,
While sitting and watching this very educational thread to enhance anyone
linguistic skills why don't you just call your architecture as either SRc6
or SRs6 and move on ?
Legend:
c - compressed
s - squeezed or shrank
Best,
Robert.
PS. That is not to say that I suddenly think the
*spring on behalf of "Bernier, Daniel" <
> daniel.bern...@bell.ca>
> *Date: *Wednesday, September 25, 2019 at 3:41 PM
> *To: *Jeff Tantsura , Ron Bonica 40juniper@dmarc.ietf.org>, "Chengli (Cheng Li)" ,
> Stewart Bryant
> *Cc: *SPRING WG List , SIN
Regards … Zafar
From: Ron Bonica
Date: Thursday, September 26, 2019 at 2:58 PM
To: "Zafar Ali (zali)" , "EXT - daniel.bern...@bell.ca"
, Jeff Tantsura , "Chengli
(Cheng Li)" , Stewart Bryant
Cc: SPRING WG List , SING Team
Subject: RE: [spring] SR-MPLS over IPv6？
Za
: SPRING WG List ; SING Team ;
Zafar Ali (zali)
Subject: Re: [spring] SR-MPLS over IPv6？
Hi Ron,
I agree with Dan, Jeff and others that the name should NOT create confusion
with an already established technology (SR).
The name should reflect the design and the spirit of your proposal.
To try to help
ryant
Cc: SPRING WG List , SING Team
Subject: Re: [spring] SR-MPLS over IPv6？
Hi Ron,
Similarly I would refrain from using the SR acronym since a key characteristic
of the SR architecture as per RFC8402 is statelessness.
As per current SRv6+ documents, state is required for an inter
.i...@gmail.com>;
Ron Bonica <mailto:rbon...@juniper.net>; Chengli (Cheng
Li) <mailto:chengl...@huawei.com>; Stewart Bryant
<mailto:stewart.bry...@gmail.com>
Cc: SPRING WG List <mailto:spring@ietf.org>; SING Team
<mailto:s.i.n.g.team.0...@gmail.com>
Subject: RE: [
, September 25, 2019 3:41 PM
*To:* Jeff Tantsura ; Ron Bonica
; Chengli (Cheng Li) ;
Stewart Bryant
*Cc:* SPRING WG List ; SING Team
*Subject:* RE: [spring] SR-MPLS over IPv6？
Hi Ron,
Similarly I would refrain from using the SR acronym since a key
characteristic of the SR architecture
Team
<mailto:s.i.n.g.team.0...@gmail.com>; EXT -
daniel.bern...@bell.ca <mailto:daniel.bern...@bell.ca>
<mailto:daniel.bern...@bell.ca>; SPRING
WG List <mailto:spring@ietf.org>
*Subject:* RE: [spring] SR-MPLS over IPv6？
out what to apply based on source/dest PPSIs plus + the FIB/SFIB mapping.
Cheers,
Dan
From: Ron Bonica
Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2019 5:46 PM
To: Bernier, Daniel; Joel M. Halpern
Cc: SPRING WG List
Subject: [EXT]RE: [spring] SR-MPLS over IPv6？
Daniel
-
From: spring On Behalf Of Bernier, Daniel
Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2019 4:07 PM
To: Joel M. Halpern
Cc: SPRING WG List
Subject: Re: [spring] SR-MPLS over IPv6？
Ah but Joel,
As was debated over the mailing list, if I have multiple paths (i.e.
unidirectional PPSIs) that go across
, 2019 3:41 PM
To: Jeff Tantsura ; Ron Bonica ;
Chengli (Cheng Li) ; Stewart Bryant
Cc: SPRING WG List ; SING Team
Subject: RE: [spring] SR-MPLS over IPv6？
Hi Ron,
Similarly I would refrain from using the SR acronym since a key characteristic
of the SR architecture as per RFC8402 is statelessness
.
And since these PSSIs are not all carried from source, this requires state.
From: Joel M. Halpern
Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2019 3:50 PM
To: Bernier, Daniel
Cc: SPRING WG List
Subject: [EXT]Re: [spring] SR-MPLS over IPv6？
SR is Stateless in the sense
ll.ca>
<mailto:daniel.bern...@bell.ca>; SPRING
WG List <mailto:spring@ietf.org>
*Subject:* RE: [spring] SR-MPLS over IPv6？
Oh, I misunderstood the BSID in CRH in last email, sorry for that.
Yes, the SID is not an IPv6 address in CRH, but a 16/3
lto:s.i.n.g.team.0...@gmail.com>; EXT -
daniel.bern...@bell.ca<mailto:daniel.bern...@bell.ca>
<mailto:daniel.bern...@bell.ca>; SPRING WG List
<mailto:spring@ietf.org>
Subject: RE: [spring] SR-MPLS over IPv6？
Oh, I misunderstood the BSID in CRH in last email, sorry for that.
Y
gt; Juniper Business Use Only
> > From: Chengli (Cheng Li)
> > Sent: Monday, September 23, 2019 10:14 PM
> > To: Ron Bonica ; Jeff Tantsura
> >
> > Cc: SING Team ; EXT - daniel.bern...@bell.ca
> > ; SPRING WG List
> > Subject: RE: [spring] SR-MPLS over
(Cheng Li)
*Sent:* Monday, September 23, 2019 10:14 PM
*To:* Ron Bonica ; Jeff Tantsura
*Cc:* SING Team ; EXT -
daniel.bern...@bell.ca ; SPRING WG List
*Subject:* RE: [spring] SR-MPLS over IPv6？
Oh, I misunderstood the BSID in CRH in last email, sorry for that.
Yes, the SID is not an IPv6
From: Chengli (Cheng Li)
Sent: Monday, September 23, 2019 10:14 PM
To: Ron Bonica ; Jeff Tantsura
Cc: SING Team ; EXT - daniel.bern...@bell.ca
; SPRING WG List
Subject: RE: [spring] SR-MPLS over IPv6？
Oh, I misunderstood the BSID in CRH in last email, sorry for that.
Yes, the SID is not an IPv6
Oh, I misunderstood the BSID in CRH in last email, sorry for that.
Yes, the SID is not an IPv6 address in CRH, but a 16/32 bit value like MPLS
label.
Therefore, IMHO, it may not comply with RFC8402:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc8402#section-3.1.3
If possible, I suggest to change the name of
22 matches
Mail list logo
