IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

qinfengwei <qinfengwei@chinamobile.com> Thu, 09 February 2023 02:10 UTC

Return-Path: <qinfengwei@chinamobile.com>
X-Original-To: idr@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: idr@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F95EC15152F for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 8 Feb 2023 18:10:58 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.895
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.895 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id cbi6lMQYG4_5 for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 8 Feb 2023 18:10:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: from cmccmta2.chinamobile.com (cmccmta2.chinamobile.com [221.176.66.80]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9BC07C14CE27 for <idr@ietf.org>; Wed, 8 Feb 2023 18:10:49 -0800 (PST)
X-RM-TagInfo: emlType=0
X-RM-SPAM-FLAG: 00000000
Received: from spf.mail.chinamobile.com (unknown[172.16.121.87]) by rmmx-syy-dmz-app07-12007 (RichMail) with SMTP id 2ee763e456263fb-abdc5; Thu, 09 Feb 2023 10:10:46 +0800 (CST)
X-RM-TRANSID: 2ee763e456263fb-abdc5
X-RM-TagInfo: emlType=0
X-RM-SPAM-FLAG: 00000000
Received: from cmccPC (unknown[10.2.49.206]) by rmsmtp-syy-appsvrnew04-12029 (RichMail) with SMTP id 2efd63e45625709-4877e; Thu, 09 Feb 2023 10:10:46 +0800 (CST)
X-RM-TRANSID: 2efd63e45625709-4877e
From: qinfengwei <qinfengwei@chinamobile.com>
To: shares@ndzh.com
Cc: idr@ietf.org
References: BYAPR08MB48725B762B56D0ABE9710E77B3CC9@BYAPR08MB4872.namprd08.prod.outlook.com <202302090951225066527@zte.com.cn>
In-Reply-To: <202302090951225066527@zte.com.cn>
Date: Thu, 09 Feb 2023 10:10:49 +0800
Message-ID: <011901d93c2b$bc627650$352762f0$@com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_011A_01D93C6E.CA85B650"
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0
Thread-Index: Adk8Koykl/ZCpJRSQyWWQJ7XOdvYowAAPQcQ
Content-Language: zh-cn
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/h-LLsPxh57jCnl5YIPk5amEgiNU>
Subject: [Idr] 答复: draft-zhou-idr-bgp-srmpls-elp-06 - Adoption call (1/27/2023 to 2/10/2023
X-BeenThere: idr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: Inter-Domain Routing <idr.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/idr>, <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/idr/>
List-Post: <mailto:idr@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr>, <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 09 Feb 2023 02:10:58 -0000

Hi,

Have read the draft and support the adoption.

 

 

 

 

Thanks,

Fengwei Qin

 

Original

From: SusanHares <shares@ndzh.com>

To: idr@ietf.org <idr@ietf.org>;

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

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

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email