Re: [Idr] draft-zhou-idr-bgp-srmpls-elp-06 - Adoption call (1/27/2023 to 2/10/2023

[[e-mail]]

Hi Sue,
I am not aware of any IPR related to this draft.

Yao


------------------Original------------------
From: SusanHares <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail] <[e-mail]>;
Cc: 刘尧00165286;彭少富10053815;
Date: 2023年01月27日 22:26
Subject: draft-zhou-idr-bgp-srmpls-elp-06 - Adoption call  (1/27/2023 to 2/10/2023
" _ue_custom_node_="true">
This adoption begins a two week WG Adoption call for
draft-zhou-idr-bgp-srmpls-elp-06.txt
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-zhou-idr-bgp-srmpls-elp/
The authors should respond to this message with
Email that indicates whether they know of any IPR
related to this draft.
In your discussions please consider if this WG
should approve an  extension to Segment flags defined in the
draft-ietf-idr-segment-routing-te-policy-20.txt .
The existing flags are the following
2.4.4.2.12.  Segment Flags
The Segment Types sub-TLVs described above may contain the following
flags in the "Flags" field defined in Section 6.8:
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|V|A|S|B|       |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 22: Segment Flags
The changes proposed by this draft are the addition
Of an “E” flag to those bits.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|V|A|S|B|E|     |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
E-Flag: This flag, when set, indicates that presence of < ELI, EL>
label pairs which are inserted after this segment.  E-Flag is
applicable to Segment Types A, C, D, E, F, G and H.  If E-Flag
appears with Segment Types B, I, J and K, it MUST be ignored.
Cheerily, Sue