Hi Acee,
Many thanks for your review and suggestions. I agree with them and will update
the draft accordingly.
Please see some further replies inline [Chongfeng]:
From: spring <spring-boun...@ietf.org> On Behalf Of Acee Lindem
Sent: Saturday, January 20, 2024 2:42 AM
To: Lsr <l...@ietf.org>; t...@ietf.org; spring@ietf.org
Subject: [spring] Shepherd's Review of "Applicability of IS-IS Multi-Topology
(MT) for Segment Routing based Network Resource Partition (NRP)" -
draft-ietf-lsr-isis-sr-vtn-mt-06
Speaking as WG Member and Document Shepherd:
I have reviewed the document and have three comments.
1. The document can go forward implying that
draft-dong-lsr-sr-enhanced-vpn-10 is the accepted solution for supporting
higher scale of NRPs. While the reference is informative, the text implies
this. I’d remove the reference altogether and this is reflected in my comments.
[Chongfeng]: This is OK, we will follow this change in next revision.
2. To support NRPs in IS-IS, three pieces are required - IS-IS SR (MPLS
and SRv6), IS-IS Multi-topology, and the SR resource-aware segment. The latter
is not being progressed in SPRING yet. If it is not accepted, the draft will be
stranded on awaiting publication. I’ve added the SPRING WG to the to list.
[Chongfeng] Understood. Resource-aware segments is a WG document and IMO it has
been stable for a while, hopefully it will progress quickly in SPRING.
3. There is design principle phrasing in
draft-ietf-teas-nrp-scalability-03 which discourage the usage of “any”
IGP-based solution (as Les commented). If you read the entire document, this is
not the case and I’d suggest these principles be qualified to match the intent.
Since there are common authors on both documents, I’d hope this could be
accomplished.
[Chongfeng] I will leave this to the co-author of the nrp-scalability draft to
comment, personally I agree with your reading of that document.
See the attached diff for editorial comments and addressing #1.
[Chongfeng] Thanks a lot for providing the diff.
Speaking as LSR WG Co-chair:
Of these comments, #1 is easy to remedy and #3 is on the other TEAS document.
IMO, #2 remains the only potential blocker to moving forward with publication.
I’d solicit others opinions on this point. While
draft-ietf-spring-resource-aware-segments-08 simply defines the semantics for
resource-aware segments, it is not certain that it will go forward and it seems
to be critical to draft-ietf-lsr-isis-sr-vtn-mt.
[Chongfeng] Understood. It would be efficient if both documents could move
forward in parallel.
Thanks,
Acee
Best regards
Chongfeng
> On Jan 8, 2024, at 5:50 PM, Acee Lindem <acee.i...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> This begins a two week LSR Working Group last call for the “Applicability of
> IS-IS Multi-Topology (MT) for Segment Routing based Network Resource
> Partition (NRP)”. Please express your support or objection prior to Tuesday,
> January 23rd, 2024.
>
> Thanks,
> Acee
_______________________________________________
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
