Re: [mpls] MPLS-RT Review of draft-gandhi-mpls-ioam-sr-04

Oooopps!

the list was already copied, well fine. Please comment!

/Loa

Sent from my iPhone

> On 19 Jan 2021, at 10:58, Loa Andersson <loa.pi.nu@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Rskesh,
> 
> I agree making it mpls generic. Actually looking at it is pretty close to that, with minor edits it is possible to read the references to SR as examples. 
> 
> We should move this discussion to the working group mailing list. 
> 
> Rakesh, 
> Can send a mail to the list, outlining what we agreed to and ask for comments?
> 
> /Loa
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
>>> On 19 Jan 2021, at 05:52, Rakesh Gandhi (rgandhi) <rgandhi=40cisco.com@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
>>> 
>> 
>> Hi Stewart,
>>  
>> Thanks for the suggestion. Agree with making this generic to MPLS and not specific to SR-MPLS.
>>  
>> Thanks,
>> Rakesh
>>  
>>  
>> From: Stewart Bryant <stewart.bryant@gmail.com>
>> Date: Monday, January 18, 2021 at 10:39 AM
>> To: Mach Chen <mach.chen@huawei.com>
>> Cc: Stewart Bryant <stewart.bryant@gmail.com>, Eric Gray <eric.gray@ericsson.com>, loa Andersson <loa@pi.nu>, Greg Mirsky <gregimirsky@gmail.com>, mpls <mpls@ietf.org>, Rakesh Gandhi (rgandhi) <rgandhi=40cisco.com@dmarc.ietf.org>, mpls-chairs <mpls-chairs@ietf.org>, draft-gandhi-mpls-ioam-sr@ietf.org <draft-gandhi-mpls-ioam-sr@ietf.org>
>> Subject: Re: [mpls] MPLS-RT Review of draft-gandhi-mpls-ioam-sr-04
>> 
>> Hi Mach
>> 
>> It is as much a question for the WG given that this is up for adoption.
>> 
>> In all other aspects MPLS-SR inherits everything from MPLS so why would it not do so here?
>> 
>> Also given that we want iOAM for SR why would we not want it for MPLS and associated technologies such as PW and VPN as well?
>> 
>> So my view is not to make a special case for SR and then have the complexity of introducing it to base MPLS, but instead solve this for MPLS and use it everywhere.
>> 
>> Is there something special about the SR case that I am missing here?
>> 
>> - Stewart
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> > On 12 Jan 2021, at 03:18, Mach Chen <mach.chen@huawei.com> wrote:
>> > 
>> > Hi Stewart,
>> > 
>> > I guess your questions are for the authors of the draft, I will let the authors to answer the questions :-)
>> > 
>> > Best regards,
>> > Mach
>> > 
>> >> -----Original Message-----
>> >> From: Stewart Bryant [mailto:stewart.bryant@gmail.com]
>> >> Sent: Tuesday, January 12, 2021 3:29 AM
>> >> To: Mach Chen <mach.chen@huawei.com>
>> >> Cc: Eric Gray <eric.gray@ericsson.com>; Loa Andersson <loa@pi.nu>; Greg
>> >> Mirsky <gregimirsky@gmail.com>; mpls <mpls@ietf.org>; Rakesh Gandhi
>> >> (rgandhi) <rgandhi=40cisco.com@dmarc.ietf.org>; mpls-chairs
>> >> <mpls-chairs@ietf.org>; draft-gandhi-mpls-ioam-sr@ietf.org
>> >> Subject: Re: [mpls] MPLS-RT Review of draft-gandhi-mpls-ioam-sr-04
>> >> 
>> >> I have a slightly more fundamental question.
>> >> 
>> >> Why are we specifying this for sr?
>> >> 
>> >> Surely we should specify it for MPLS  and have SR inherit that?
>> >> 
>> >> Also what happens if the MPLS payload is a PW or Detnet or something else
>> >> defined to be immediately below the bottom label?
>> >> 
>> >> Stewart
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> mpls mailing list
>> mpls@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls