Robert, Comments inline
Yours Irrespectively, John From: rras...@gmail.com [mailto:rras...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Robert Raszuk Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2018 12:00 PM To: John E Drake <jdr...@juniper.net> Cc: EXT - daniel.bern...@bell.ca <daniel.bern...@bell.ca>; mpls <m...@ietf.org>; SPRING WG List <spring@ietf.org>; s...@ietf.org; James N Guichard <james.n.guich...@huawei.com>; adr...@olddog.co.uk; Francois Clad (fclad) <fc...@cisco.com> Subject: Re: [spring] [mpls] [sfc] The MPLS WG has placed draft-farrel-mpls-sfc in state "Call For Adoption By WG Issued" Hi John, Daniel, It has a multiplicity of issues, primarily wrt scalability and ease of configuration. Am I reading your comment correctly that draft-ietf-bess-service-chaining-04 is unscalable and hard to configure and draft draft-farrel-mpls-sfc is superior ? [JD] The authors of that draft provided much input and guidance to the authors of draft-farrel-mpls-sfc. Please observe that your own Juniper products are based already for a long time on the former and as you admited no one has any product based on the latter. [JD] I am not sure of your point. Doesn't this makes it a bit of an odd argument ? Also please do notice that draft-ietf-bess-service-chaining-04 vastly reuses 20 years of experience of L3VPNs service so your claim may be IMHO a little weak :) [JD They both draw upon the same heritage. Cheers, R. Yours Irrespectively, John From: spring [mailto:spring-boun...@ietf.org<mailto:spring-boun...@ietf.org>] On Behalf Of Bernier, Daniel Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2018 10:54 AM To: John E Drake <jdr...@juniper.net<mailto:jdr...@juniper.net>>; Robert Raszuk <rob...@raszuk.net<mailto:rob...@raszuk.net>> Cc: mpls <m...@ietf.org<mailto:m...@ietf.org>>; SPRING WG List <spring@ietf.org<mailto:spring@ietf.org>>; s...@ietf.org<mailto:s...@ietf.org>; James N Guichard <james.n.guich...@huawei.com<mailto:james.n.guich...@huawei.com>>; adr...@olddog.co.uk<mailto:adr...@olddog.co.uk>; Francois Clad (fclad) <fc...@cisco.com<mailto:fc...@cisco.com>> Subject: Re: [spring] [mpls] [sfc] The MPLS WG has placed draft-farrel-mpls-sfc in state "Call For Adoption By WG Issued" Hi John, Don't we already have draft-fm-bess-service-chaining-01<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__tools.ietf.org_html_draft-2Dfm-2Dbess-2Dservice-2Dchaining-2D01&d=DwMGaQ&c=HAkYuh63rsuhr6Scbfh0UjBXeMK-ndb3voDTXcWzoCI&r=CRB2tJiQePk0cT-h5LGhEWH-s_xXXup3HzvBSMRj5VE&m=F3v0beOmsieoZ48B9JYfPjhGusHbW5F5SF9W20KcURU&s=UHNxeZF9m0BVCmAjG-ODELBOjV1v2yu25uDOeZSRw6g&e=> to perform service chains with existing MPLS implementations ? Thanks,
_______________________________________________ spring mailing list spring@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring
