> On Sep 14, 2016, at 7:06 PM, Chris Bowers <cbow...@juniper.net> wrote:
> SPRING WG,
> The current text in draft-ietf-spring-segment-routing-09 regarding the
> "Strict Shortest Path" algorithm reads as follows.
> o "Strict Shortest Path": This algorithm mandates that the packet is
> forwarded according to ECMP-aware SPF algorithm and instruct any
> router in the path to ignore any possible local policy overriding
> SPF decision. The SID advertised with "Strict Shortest Path"
> algorithm ensures that the path the packet is going to take is the
> expected, and not altered, SPF path.
> One example of a local policy that overrides the ECMP-aware SPF algorithm
> decision is a limit
> on the number of ECMP next-hops. The text above implies that if a router
> places any
> limit on the number of ECMP forwarding next-hops then it would be wrong for
> it to advertise
> the “Strict Shortest Path” algorithm capability.
> Is this the intended interpretation?
well, yes. Your example is a good one for the “strict-SPF” behavior.
> If not, what is the intended interpretation?
> spring mailing list
spring mailing list