Hi all, I've read the draft and support the publication of the draft. I have some more nits on the current state:

 * In the introduction, the sentence "[...], the redundant copies are
   eliminated" is redundant with "redundant packets are eliminated" in
   the line above.
 * Terminology section introduces R-node as abbreviation for Redundancy
   node, but the document does not make use of it. I suggest either
   removing the abbreviation or using it consistently. Also sometimes,
   capitalization is inconsistent.
 * Section 3.3: "This packet meta data is included on each of the
   replicates" could clarify more about how those are encoded (or just
   put a forward pointer to Section 5).
 * Section 3.6 proposes that the redundancy node or other networks
   downstream may include a reordering node. But this also includes the
   replication node by the definition of redundancy nodes in the draft,
   I think having a reordering function at the replication node doesnt
   make sense?
 * Section 4.1: "Note that **a** implementation specific [...]"
 * The algorithm in 4.2.1 would benefit from
     o S01: To what is the ARG actually set? --> Flow ID and Sequence
       number I guess?
     o S04: Outer Next Header Value should always be set to IPv6 right?
 * Section 5: How many bits are there for the Flow ID, and for the
   sequence number? Should this maybe be defined here as well, or is
   that intentionally open?

Best, Fabian

-----Original Message-----
From: Alvaro Retana via Datatracker<[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, June 19, 2026 6:30 PM
To:[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected]
Cc:[email protected]
Subject: WG Last Call: draft-ietf-spring-sr-redundancy-protection-07 (Ends 
2026-07-06)

This message starts a WG Last Call for:
draft-ietf-spring-sr-redundancy-protection-07

This Working Group Last Call ends on 2026-07-06

Abstract:
    Redundancy Protection is a generalized protection mechanism to
    achieve high reliability for service provided in Segment Routing
    networks.  The mechanism uses the "Live-Live" methodology, i.e.,
    multiple copies of the data packets are sent on different paths to
    provide protection.  This document introduces one new SRv6 Segment
    Endpoint Behavior to provide replication and elimination functions on
    specific network nodes by leveraging SRv6 Network Programming
    capabilities.

File can be retrieved from:

Please review and indicate your support or objection to proceed with the 
publication of this document by replying to this email [email protected] 
in copy. Objections should be explained and suggestions to resolve them are 
highly appreciated.

Authors, and WG participants in general, are reminded of the Intellectual 
Property Rights (IPR) disclosure obligations described in BCP 79 [1].
Appropriate IPR disclosures required for full conformance with the provisions 
of BCP 78 [1] and BCP 79 [2] must be filed, if you are aware of any.
Sanctions available for application to violators of IETF IPR Policy can be 
found at [3].

Thank you.

[1]https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/bcp78/
[2]https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/bcp79/
[3]https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc6701/

The IETF datatracker status page for this Internet-Draft is:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-spring-sr-redundancy-protection/

There is also an HTMLized version available at:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-spring-sr-redundancy-protection-07

A diff from the previous version is available at:
https://author-tools.ietf.org/iddiff?url2=draft-ietf-spring-sr-redundancy-protection-07

--
Fabian Ihle
Universität Tübingen
Fachbereich Informatik Lehrstuhl Kommunikationsnetze
Wilhelm-Schickard-Institut für Informatik
Sand 13, 72076 Tübingen

Raum: B303
Telefonnr.: +49 7071 29-70545
E-Mail:[email protected]
Internet: uni-tuebingen.de

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature

_______________________________________________
spring mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to