Ron, If you want to discuss your analysis please let’s do so in a separate email thread out of the context of the Working Group Last Call of draft-ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming.
As I said before: draft-ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming is a Standards Track document and this topic is not about any standardization, hence out of scope of this document. Same applies to other content (e.g. illustrations) that was formerly in network programming and we moved to a separate draft since it was not standardizing anything at all and was merely informative. Thanks, Pablo. From: Ron Bonica <[email protected]> Date: Tuesday, 7 January 2020 at 19:17 To: "Pablo Camarillo (pcamaril)" <[email protected]> Cc: SPRING WG <[email protected]> Subject: RE: [spring] draft-ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming: Relative advantages of SRv6 Pablo, RFC 8354 reinforces my analysis in https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spring/3WGuQumIfcmH281nwq3s9Un6raI. Are you saying that you agree with this analysis? Ron Juniper Business Use Only From: Pablo Camarillo (pcamaril) <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, January 7, 2020 4:17 AM To: Ron Bonica <[email protected]> Cc: SPRING WG <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [spring] draft-ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming: Relative advantages of SRv6 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]<mailto:[email protected]>> on behalf of Ron Bonica <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Date: Monday, 30 December 2019 at 11:08 To: SPRING WG <[email protected]<mailto:[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 Please excuse any typos, sent from my 'smart'phone.
_______________________________________________ spring mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring
