IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

"易昕昕(联通集团中国联通研究院- 本部)" <yixx3@chinaunicom.cn> Fri, 10 February 2023 08:31 UTC

Return-Path: <yixx3@chinaunicom.cn>
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 D40DCC1879BB for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 10 Feb 2023 00:31:48 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.317
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.317 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, INVALID_MSGID=0.568, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_KAM_HTML_FONT_INVALID=0.01, 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 UXQZh5Ngm3Et for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 10 Feb 2023 00:31:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: from sendb.mailex.chinaunicom.cn (sendb.mailex.chinaunicom.cn [123.138.59.137]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D9337C14CEE5 for <idr@ietf.org>; Fri, 10 Feb 2023 00:31:44 -0800 (PST)
Received: from M10-XA-MLCEN04.MailSrv.cnc.intra (unknown [10.236.3.200]) by sendb.mailex.chinaunicom.cn (SkyGuard) with ESMTPS id 4PCn6Y5C85z3v8PB for <idr@ietf.org>; Fri, 10 Feb 2023 16:32:37 +0800 (CST)
Received: from smtpbg.qq.com (10.237.2.95) by M10-XA-MLCEN04.MailSrv.cnc.intra (10.236.3.200) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 15.0.1497.42; Fri, 10 Feb 2023 16:31:38 +0800
X-QQ-mid: Ymail-xx24b003-t1676017897tl9
Received: from yixx-PC (unknown [10.2.108.208]) by smtp.qq.com (ESMTP) with id ; Fri, 10 Feb 2023 16:31:36 +0800 (CST)
X-QQ-SSF: 01900000000000C0H510000A0000000
X-QQ-GoodBg: 0
From: "易昕昕(联通集团中国联通研究院- 本部)" <yixx3@chinaunicom.cn>
To: shares <shares@ndzh.com>
CC: idr <idr@ietf.org>
Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2023 16:31:37 +0800
References: <202302090951225066527@zte.com.cn>
X-Priority: 3
X-Has-Attach: no
X-Mailer: Foxmail 7.2.23.119[cn]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <202302101631366296724@chinaunicom.cn>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_001_NextPart442107763448_=----"
X-QQ-SENDSIZE: 520
Feedback-ID: Ymail-xx:chinaunicom.cn:mail-xx:mail-xx24b003-zhyw43w
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/JUOYpZQZzF5TfGqZZLb9pt1_6QA>
Subject: Re: [Idr] 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: Fri, 10 Feb 2023 08:31:48 -0000

Hi Sue,
      I support the adoption of this draft and I think this draft is reasonable when the controller is used to perform the TE path computation as well as the Entropy Label Position which is useful for inter-domain scenarios.

     Thanks.

________________________________
Xinxin Yi



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


如果您错误接收了该邮件，请通过电子邮件立即通知我们。请回复邮件到 hqs-spmc@chinaunicom.cn，即可以退订此邮件。我们将立即将您的信息从我们的发送目录中删除。 If you have received this email in error please notify us immediately by e-mail. Please reply to hqs-spmc@chinaunicom.cn ,you can unsubscribe from this mail. We will immediately remove your information from send catalogue of our.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email