Dave, Rob and all,
I concur with Rob on this point.
Thumb typed by Sasha Vainshtein
________________________________
From: Rob Shakir <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, June 7, 2018 8:10:18 PM
To: David Allan I
Cc: Alexander Vainshtein; Voyer, Daniel; Zafar Ali (zali); Michael McBride;
Xiejingrong; [email protected]
Subject: Re: [spring] Updating the SPRING WG Charter
On Thu, Jun 7, 2018 at 10:06 AM David Allan I
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Would not the existence of SRLB’s be an existence proof of per-path state at
transit nodes in the SPRING architecture?
No - SRLBs are just label block allocations on that node. The labels allocated
from an SRLB continue to be per-forwarding behaviour, not per-path. In the
degenerate case, we might have a 1:1 mapping of forwarding behaviour to path,
but this is implementation specific.
To demonstrate: consider the case that some programming entity creates a SID
that means forward to SR label stacks 1, 2, 3 -- this can be used by any number
of TE paths that are within that network.
r.
___________________________________________________________________________
This e-mail message is intended for the recipient only and contains information
which is
CONFIDENTIAL and which may be proprietary to ECI Telecom. If you have received
this
transmission in error, please inform us by e-mail, phone or fax, and then
delete the original
and all copies thereof.
___________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________
spring mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring
