Just to pick up something that was agreed but was not included in this summary: we agreed to remove the reference to draft-bashandy in order to make the discussion on uloop prevention technology neutral.
- Stewart > On 10 Nov 2023, at 09:04, Yingzhen Qu <yingzhen.i...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Also sending the email to SPRING WG in case people are interested. > > Hi, > > We had a very productive discussion during the side meeting, and the review > comments and open issues have been addressed. > > Outcome of the discussion: > It’s important for the draft to clarify that with ti-lfa, when IGP starts to > reconverge, there is still a possibility for micro-loops. So customers should > be advised to deploy some micro-loop protection mechanisms to prevent traffic > loss. > > Action items for authors of the ti-lfa draft: > • To include text from RFC7490 second paragraph of section 10 > • To include the text summary in the email thread > • Change the text in section 6.1 from node to link > > Next steps: > After the draft is updated to address the open issues, Gyan Mishra will > update the OPS Directorate review, and the RTGWG WG Chairs will start the > WGLC of this draft. > > If I’m missing something, please let me know or reply to this thread. > > Thanks, > Yingzhen > _______________________________________________ > rtgwg mailing list > rt...@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg _______________________________________________ spring mailing list spring@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring
