Hi Yakov, thanks for the comments. See below.
On Mar 24, 2014, at 6:29 PM, Yakov Rekhter wrote: > Alvaro, > >> Hi! >> >> This message officially starts the call for adoption for >> draft-martin-spring-segment-routing-ipv6-use-cases. >> >> Please indicate your position about adopting this use cases >> draft by end-of-day on March 27, 2014. >> >> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-martin-spring-segment-routing-ipv6-use-ca > ses >> >> Thanks! > > Section 2.3 (IPv6 Segment Routing in the Data Center) of > draft-martin-spring-segment-routing-ipv6-use-cases talks about using > Segment Routing for service chaining. > > Please note that the SFC WG charter calls for the SFC WG to determine > the data plane behavior and the requirements on the control plane > in support of service chaining. Therefore, until the SFC WG determines > the data plane behavior and the control component requirements for > service chaining, presenting service chaining as a use case for IPv6 > Segment Routing header is premature. as far as I understand, SFC is not mandating any specific dataplane but rather use an additional shim header so to be dataplane agnostic. There are pro's and cons' to that approach but still, it looks to me legitimate to address service chaining in the context of a specific dataplane (i.e.: without the requirement of being agnostic). The definition of the use case can be done within spring activity. The solution (if one day we get there ;-) may be addressed somewhere else. Similarly to what has been done for igp protocol extensions for segment routing. Thanks. s. > > Yakov. > > _______________________________________________ > spring mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring _______________________________________________ spring mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring
