(as an individual) COmmenting below.
Joel
On 5/21/2026 1:52 PM, Andrew Stone (Nokia) wrote:
Hi SPRING WG, Authors
I support publication of the document. It's well-written and an easy
read, and I appreciate how tricky it must have been to balance scoping
the document to SRv6 without bleeding into other technology security
considerations.
Some minor non-blocking comments and feedback:
Introduction:
The list of segments is in the SRH and may not be processed at each
hop in the case of non-SR capable hops. So Perhaps:
OLD
"list of segments that are processed at each hop along the signaled path"
NEW
"list of segments that are processed at each SR capable hop along the
signaled path"
(or replace /capable/supporting/supported/aware etc. or equivalent)
I had missed that wording. As you say "processed at each hop" is too
strong. But I think even "processed at each SR capable hop" is too
strong. How about"list of segments that are processed at each addressed
node along the path". (Not worrying about SR capable as if they
designate a non-capable node it is still supposed to process it, even if
it can't. And removing "signaled" as we don't useusally describe the SR
path as being signaled. I think you were trying to get at this same
point by adding that word.)
Yours,
Joel
_______________________________________________
spring mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
