Hey Sasha, 100% agree with your last post. Very glad to see your support for spray/fan-out or if you will static MDTs to be in scope of SPRING.
Based on number of WG members input expressed both at the meeting and on the list I hope proposed SPRING charter will be updated soon to reflect that. Cheers, R. PS. Btw - I am also ok that ingress replication is not relevant to SPRING as it essentially happens at the ingress to the domain. On Sun, Jun 10, 2018 at 7:39 AM, Alexander Vainshtein < [email protected]> wrote: > Robert, > > First of all, I did not say that your quote was inaccurate. I apologize > for possible misperception. > > > > Second, I believe that spray or fan-out (meaning support of externally > computed static MDTs) in SR-MPLS is a relevant focus area for the future WG > work. Of course the solution must be aligned with the SPRING and MPLS > architecture, and this imposes additional restrictions on how such a > solution would look. > > > > Last but not least, I have differentiated (from my first email on this > thread) *ingress replication* *in SR* from the more generic *multicast > support *in SR: > > - The latter is quite acceptable to me > > - The former, IMHO, should be left out of scope. > > > > Hope this helps to clarify my position. > > Regards, and, again, apologies for possible misinterpretation. > > > > Sasha >
_______________________________________________ spring mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring
