Jeff,
For sure. It was our intention to have this reference. It is absolutely
obvious that it must be. The point of the section 9.1 and especially the
new SID that we defined is to provide the proper support/context for the
POI draft and hence the reference is clear.
Cheers,
Clarence
On 01/
Hi Jeff,
Thanks for clarifying and we should definitely add the reference to the POI
draft in sec 9.1. I’ll work with other authors to incorporate the same in the
next rev.
Also thanks for pointing this out as it helps indeed to clarify the
relationship between these two drafts and the both dr
Ketan,
Thank you for addressing my comments.
Always a pleasure working with you!
Cheers,
Jeff
From: "Ketan Talaulikar (ketant)"
Date: Friday, March 2, 2018 at 00:39
To: Jeff Tantsura ,
"draft-filsfils-spring-segment-routing-pol...@ietf.org"
,
"draft-anand-spring-poi...@ietf.org"
Cc
Thanks Clarence, we are on the same page then.
Cheers,
Jeff
On 3/2/18, 00:37, "Clarence Filsfils (cfilsfil)" wrote:
Jeff,
For sure. It was our intention to have this reference. It is absolutely
obvious that it must be. The point of the section 9.1 and especially the
new S
Dear Bruno, Rob, and Martin,
would appreciate opportunity to present and discuss two drafts during
SPRING WG meeting in London:
- Unified Identifier in IPv6 Segment Routing Networks
draft-mirsky-6man-unified-id-srpresenter: Greg Mirskytime: 10
min
- BFD in SR Networks using