Ron, SPRING has already done this work and documented the SRv6 use-cases in RFC8354 before progressing with the SRv6 standardization.
Further on, draft-ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming is a Standards Track document. I fail to see how a cite from RFC8354 or any other text on “SRv6 vs SR-MPLS” standardises anything at all. Note that we have already removed text from draft-ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming (e.g. illustrations) because it was not standardising anything. Thank you for the suggestion, Pablo. From: spring <[email protected]> on behalf of Ron Bonica <[email protected]> Date: Monday, 30 December 2019 at 11:08 To: SPRING WG <[email protected]> Subject: [spring] draft-ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming: Relative advantages of SRv6 Pablo, Would you consider adding a short section to the draft explaining the relative advantages of SRv6 over SR-MPLS? This section would explain why an network operator would deploy SRv6 instead of SR-MPLS. Ron Juniper Business Use Only
_______________________________________________ spring mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring
