[Idr] Re: WG adoption call for draft-lin-idr-sr-epe-over-l2bundle-07 (8/2 to 8/16)

[王亚蓉 <[e-mail]>]

Hi WG, 




I support the adoption of this document . 




I think this is good as it stands. 



The response to the issue is as follows: 



    1. Does this BGP-LS addition help SR Egress Peering points 



in operational networks? 

Yes. 



    1. Does this draft handle the BUM traffic in a way that 



Prevents looping? 

(Broadcast, Unknown Unicast, and Multicast (BUM)) 

Yes. 

The existing looping mechanisms apply to this document. 



    1. Are there any problems in the technology described? 



No. 



Thanks, 

Yarong 





发件人 : Susan Hares < [ mailto:[e-mail] | [e-mail] ] > 
发送时间 : 2024 年 8 月 2 日 22:12 
收件人 : [ mailto:[e-mail] | 
[e-mail] ] 
主题 : [Idr] WG adoption call for draft-lin-idr-sr-epe-over-l2bundle-07 (8/2 to 8/16) 




IDR WG: 



This begins a 2 week WG adoption call for 

draft-lin-idr-sr-epe-over-l2bundle-07.txt 

[ https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-lin-idr-sr-epe-over-l2bundle/ | https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-lin-idr-sr-epe-over-l2bundle/ ] 





The authors should reply to this email with an 

IPR statement indicating whether they know of an intellectual property. 



This document describes how to support Segment Routing 

BGP Egress Peer Engineering over Layer 2 bundle members. 

This document updates [RFC9085] to allow the L2 Bundle Member 

Attributes TLV to be added to the BGP-LS Attribute 

associated with the Link NLRI of BGP peering link. 





In your comments regarding adoption, please consider 



    1. Does this BGP-LS addition help SR Egress Peering points 


in operational networks? 

    1. Does this draft handle the BUM traffic in a way that 


Prevents looping? 

(Broadcast, Unknown Unicast, and Multicast (BUM)) 

    1. Are there any problems in the technology described? 




Cheerily, Sue Hares