Thanks Ketan-san, yes it looks good to me. Cheers, --satoru
> On Apr 29, 2021, at 23:14, Ketan Talaulikar (ketant) <ket...@cisco.com> wrote: > > > Hi Satoru-san, > > Thanks for your review and comment. > > I believe your point is to also cover SRv6 BSID and to that I would propose > the following text : > > When the active candidate path has a specified BSID, the SR Policy uses that > BSID if this value (label in MPLS, IPv6 address in SRv6) is available (i.e., > not associated with any other usage: e.g. to another MPLS client, to another > SRv6 client, to another SID, to another SR Policy, outside the range of SRv6 > Locators). > > Thanks, > Ketan > > From: spring <spring-boun...@ietf.org> On Behalf Of Satoru Matsushima > Sent: 29 April 2021 18:36 > To: spring-cha...@ietf.org > Cc: James Guichard <james.n.guich...@futurewei.com>; spring@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [spring] WGLC for draft-ietf-spring-segment-routing-policy > > Hi spring chairs, > > I think that the document is ready to move forward. > > Here one minor comment is bellow: > > Section 6.2 says on BSID as follow: > > When the active candidate path has a specified BSID, the SR Policy > uses that BSID if this value (label in MPLS, IPv6 address in SRv6) is > available (i.e., not associated with any other usage: e.g. to another > MPLS client, to another SID, to another SR Policy). > > My suggestion for that above text as follow: > > When the active candidate path has a specified BSID, the SR Policy > uses that BSID if this value (label in MPLS, IPv6 address in SRv6) is > available (i.e., not associated with any other usage: e.g. to another > MPLS client, to another SID, to another SR Policy, within the range of > locators in SRv6). > > Best regards, > --satoru > > > On Apr 16, 2021, at 3:57, James Guichard <james.n.guich...@futurewei.com> > wrote: > > > Dear WG: > > This email starts a 2 week Working Group Last Call for > draft-ietf-spring-segment-routing-policy [1]. > > Please read this document if you haven’t read the most recent version and > send your comments to the SPRING WG list no later than April 29th 2021. > > If you are raising a point which you expect will be specifically debated on > the mailing list, consider using a specific email/thread for this point. > > Lastly, if you are an author or contributors for this document please > response to the IPR call in the previous email thread. > > Thanks! > > Jim, Joel & Bruno > > [1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-spring-segment-routing-policy/ > > > > _______________________________________________ > spring mailing list > spring@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring
_______________________________________________ spring mailing list spring@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring
