[spring] 回复： Working Group Adoption Call for draft-filsfils-spring-segment-routing-policy

I support the adoption. Xiaohu 来自钉钉专属商务邮箱--发件人：Rob Shakir日　期：2018年05月16日 23:20:22收件人：SPRING WG List主　题：[spring] Working Group Adoption Call for

Re: [spring] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-spring-segment-routing-mpls-13

Hi all, I have read this doc and support the publication. Xiaohu -- From:bruno.decraene Send Time:2018年6月8日(星期五) 00:52 To:SPRING WG List Cc:draft-ietf-spring-segment-routing-m...@ietf.org Subject:Re: [spring] WG Last Call for

Re: [spring] draft-xu-mpls-sr-over-ip

Hi Loa, I don't know any IPR related to this draft. Best regards, Xiaohu -- From:Loa Andersson Send Time:2018年6月7日(星期四) 18:15 To:m...@ietf.org Cc:spring@ietf.org ; mpls-cha...@ietf.org ; draft-xu-mpls-sr-over...@ietf.org

Re: [spring] Signalling ERLD (ISIS, OSPF and BGP-LS)

If I understand it correctly, according to the ELC concept originated from RFC6790 (see below), the ELC itself doesn't mean the ELC originator should be capable of using the EL for load-balancing. It just means the egress of the tunnel advertising that capability is capable of popping the

Re: [spring] Request WG adoption for draft-xuclad-spring-sr-service-chaining-01

Hi SPRING WG co-chairs, I wonder what the current status of this WG adoption request. Best regards,Xiaohu--From:徐小虎(义先) <xiaohu@alibaba-inc.com>Send Time:2018年4月4日(星期三) 09:45To:SPRING WG List <spring@ietf.org>Cc:s

[spring] 回复：[mpls] The MPLS WG has placed draft-farrel-mpls-sfc in state "Call For Adoption By WG Issued"

Hi all,  As I had pointed out at the last IETF meeting, section 6 of this draft has an serious overlap with  https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-xu-mpls-service-chaining-03 that has now been updated by  https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-xuclad-spring-sr-service-chaining-01 with a merge with 

[spring] 转发：New Version Notification for draft-xu-mpls-sr-over-ip-00.txt

wart Bryant <stewart.bry...@gmail.com>; Adrian Farrel <afar...@juniper.net>; 徐小虎(义先) <xiaohu@alibaba-inc.com>主　题：New Version Notification for draft-xu-mpls-sr-over-ip-00.txt A new version of I-D, draft-xu-mpls-sr-over-ip-00.txt has been successfully submitted by Xiaohu X

Re: [spring] 答复: [mpls] [sfc] The MPLS WG has placed draft-farrel-mpls-sfc in state "Call For Adoption By WG Issued"

Hi Robin, It sounds reasonable and fair.  Best regards,Xiaohu --Lizhenbin <lizhen...@huawei.com>2018年3月15日(星期四) 15:48徐小虎(义先) <xiaohu@alibaba-inc.com>; spring <spring-boun...@ietf.org>; Francois Clad (fclad

[spring] What's the consensus among co-chairs and ADs regarding the better place for the SR-MPLS-over-IP work?

Dear co-chairs and ADs, Alvaro as an AD said at last IETF meeting that let's wait and decide (on the better place for the SR-MPLS-over-IP work) (see  https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/100/materials/minutes-100-spring), I wonder whether a rough consensus has been reached among co-chairs and

Re: [spring] [mpls] [sfc] The MPLS WG has placed draft-farrel-mpls-sfc in state "Call For Adoption By WG Issued"

to work on MPLS- This draft asks for MPLS code points so can only be in MPLS- This draft must be reviewed in SFC and SPRING as it progresses and   certainly at WG last call Adrian From: mpls [mailto:mpls-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Zafar Ali (zali) Sent: 09 March 2018 00:02 To: Francois Clad (f

[spring] For the fairness and justice of the IETF culture//Re: [mpls] What to do with draft-ietf-mpls-sfc-00.txt

Hi all, As I had pointed out before, this draft describes two MPLS-based SFC approaches: one is how to encode the NSH info, more specifically, the SPI and SI info by two MPLS labels, which is still a stateful SFC mechanism just like NSH; another is how to leverage the MPLS-SR to realize a

[spring] Request WG adoption for draft-xuclad-spring-sr-service-chaining-01

Hi SPRING WG co-chairs, We authors believe this draft (https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-xuclad-spring-sr-service-chaining-01) has been stable enough and therefore we would like to request a WG adoption call for it. We believe this work belongs to SPRING WG since the concept of service segment

[spring] using a different name for the same thing is not so clever :-) really?

Hi Adrian, Please see my comments inline with [Xiaohu]--Adrian Farrel 2018年3月22日(星期四) 22:32Ruediger.Geib ; spring Re: [spring] What is "TE" and the rechartering

Re: [spring] draft-ietf-isis-mpls-elc & draft-ietf-ospf-mpls-elc

If I understood it correctly, draft-wang-lsr-ospf-prefix-originator-ext-00 is an OSPF counterpart of RFC7794 from the perspective of correlation of prefixes and their originator in the inter-area scenario. As such, these two drafts are useful for the usage of ELC in the inter-area scenario. As

Re: [spring] [Lsr] draft-ietf-isis-mpls-elc & draft-ietf-ospf-mpls-elc

Why not directly use the BGP over SR model just like the BGP over LDP model? Best regards, Xiaohu -- From:stephane.litkowski Send Time:2018年11月20日(星期二) 15:20 To:徐小虎(义先) ; Lsr ; l...@ietf.org Cc:spring@ietf.org Subject:Re

Re: [spring] Working Group Adoption Call for draft-cheng-spring-mpls-path-segment

I support the adoption of this draft. Xiaohu -- From:bruno.decraene Send Time:2019年2月20日(星期三) 17:03 To:SPRING WG Cc:draft-cheng-spring-mpls-path-segm...@ietf.org Subject:[spring] Working Group Adoption Call for

Re: [spring] Seeking comments for draft-dunbar-sr-sdwan-over-hybrid-networks: is it appropriate for not-directly connect SDWAN edges to use GRE/VxLAN header bits to indicate the desired SR path?

Hi Linda, Why not directly use the MPLSoUDP encapsulation to carry the B-SID label so as to indicate the preferred path? For more details, please read https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-dukes-spring-sr-for-sdwan-02#section-7.3 Best regards, Xiaohu

Re: [spring] Beyond SRv6.

Hi Andrew, Thanks a lot for sharing your valuable opinions regarding SRv6 and SR-MPLS. You said "...Our solution we’re working towards where we need SRv6 in the absence of SR-MPLS is stitch SR-MPLS to SRv6 through packet encapsulation – effectively use an SR-MPLS binding label to trigger a

Re: [spring] Beyond SRv6.

-- From:Andrew Alston Send Time:2019年8月7日(星期三) 16:36 To:徐小虎(义先) ; spring ; Rob Shakir ; SPRING WG List Subject:RE: [spring] Beyond SRv6. Yes and no – because that assumption assumes that we will not see a growth

[spring] Fw: WG Adoption Call: draft-xuclad-spring-sr-service-programming

Hi Stewart, Hamid, Himanshu, Luis, Jeff, Martin, Dirk and Gaurav, Please respond to the IPR poll of draft-xuclad-spring-sr-service-programming as contributors. Thanks. Best regards, Xiaohu -- From:Rob Shakir Send

Re: [spring] IPR Poll: draft-xuclad-spring-sr-service-programming

I don't know all IPR related to this doc. Best regards, Xiaohu -- From:Rob Shakir Send Time:2019年6月27日(星期四) 14:14 To:draft-xuclad-spring-sr-service-programming ; SPRING WG List Subject:[spring] IPR Poll:

Re: [spring] [Idr] I-D Action: draft-ietf-idr-performance-routing-02.txt

-- From:徐小虎(义先) Send Time:2019年10月15日(星期二) 17:57 To:SPRING WG List Cc:idr Subject:Re: [Idr] I-D Action: draft-ietf-idr-performance-routing-02.txt Hi all, I just recently realized that the performance routing mechanism as described in this draft could facilitate

Re: [spring] [Idr] I-D Action: draft-ietf-idr-performance-routing-02.txt

Hi all, I just recently realized that the performance routing mechanism as described in this draft could facilitate the deployment of segment routing across multiple ASes of an administrative entity where low-latency SR paths across ASes are needed for carrying latency-sensitive and

Re: [spring] Limited domains ...

It makes sense of using source routing across the Internet. For example, using source routing for traffic steering across edge networks just like Akamai's SureRoute which is a limited domain over the Internet indeed. In that case, it's necessary to protect the source route information carried

[spring] 回复： IPR call for draft-hegde-spring-node-protection-for-sr-te-paths

I am not aware of any IPR related to this draft. xiaohu 来自钉钉专属商务邮箱-- 发件人： 日　期：2020年07月30日 20:24:35 收件人：spring@ietf.org; draft-hegde-spring-node-protection-for-sr-te-pa...@ietf.org 主　题：[spring] IPR call for