From nobody Thu Aug 17 00:39:00 2023 Return-Path: X-Original-To: spring@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: spring@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F03F8C15106E for ; Thu, 17 Aug 2023 00:38:58 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.905 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.905 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-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 SsL1292Z4ymE for ; Thu, 17 Aug 2023 00:38:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cmccmta3.chinamobile.com (cmccmta3.chinamobile.com [221.176.66.81]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 58ECAC14CF17 for ; Thu, 17 Aug 2023 00:38:50 -0700 (PDT) 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-app11-12011 (RichMail) with SMTP id 2eeb64ddce83287-26c04; Thu, 17 Aug 2023 15:38:47 +0800 (CST) X-RM-TRANSID: 2eeb64ddce83287-26c04 X-RM-SPAM-FLAG: 00000000 Received: from gongliyan@chinamobile.com ( [172.16.114.1] ) by ajax-webmail-syy-appsvrnew04-11014 (Richmail) with HTTP; Thu, 17 Aug 2023 15:38:46 +0800 (CST) Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2023 15:38:46 +0800 (CST) From: Liyan Gong To: jmh , spring Message-ID: <2b0664ddb6aafbb-000dd.Richmail.00000010099207432451@chinamobile.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_5767_1300776897.1692257926613" X-Priority: 3 X-RM-TRANSID: 2b0664ddb6aafbb-000dd Encrypt-Channel: web X-RM-OA-ENC-TYPE: 0 X-RM-FontColor: 0 X-CLIENT-INFO: X-TIMING=0&X-MASSSENT=0&X-SENSITIVE=0 X-Mailer: Richmail_Webapp(V2.4.25) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [spring] Confimringresolutionofissue#3https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-spring-srv6-srh-compression/ X-BeenThere: spring@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39 Precedence: list List-Id: "Source Packet Routing in NetworkinG \(SPRING\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2023 07:38:59 -0000 ------=_Part_5767_1300776897.1692257926613 Content-Type: text/plain;charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Joel and WG, The definition has been improved in the errata to RFC8754. I think it is ok= to close the issue here. Best Regards, Liyan ----=E9=82=AE=E4=BB=B6=E5=8E=9F=E6=96=87----=E5=8F=91=E4=BB=B6=E4=BA=BA=EF= =BC=9AJoel Halpern =E6=94=B6=E4=BB=B6=E4=BA=BA=EF=BC= =9ASPRING WG List =E6=8A=84=E3=80=80=E9=80=81: (=E6=97=A0= )=E5=8F=91=E9=80=81=E6=97=B6=E9=97=B4=EF=BC=9A2023-08-08 22:59:56=E4=B8=BB= =E9=A2=98=EF=BC=9A[spring] Confimring resolution of issue #3https://datatra= cker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-spring-srv6-srh-compression/ = Issue #3 in the datatracker reads The definition for the SegmentsLeft field of the SRH as currently s= tated in [RFC8754][RFC8200] no longer holds true in the presence of= C-SIDs. This definition needs to be updated to still hold true in = the presence of C-SIDs. The response from the document editors reads: Segments Left: Defined in [RFC8200], Section 4.4. Specifically, for= the SRH, the number of unprocessed 128-bit entries in the Segment = List. =20 Please indicate to the list whether you consider this resolution su= fficient to close the issue, or have further concerns that should b= e addressed. If you have concerns, clarity about them is appreciat= ed. This call is open for two weeks, through August 22. ------=_Part_5767_1300776897.1692257926613 Content-Type: text/html;charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi Joel and WG,

The definition has been improved in the errat= a to RFC8754. I think it is ok to close the issue here.


B= est Regards,

Liyan



----=E9= =82=AE=E4=BB=B6=E5=8E=9F=E6=96=87----
=E5=8F=91=E4=BB=B6=E4=BA= =BA=EF=BC=9AJoel Halpern  <jmh@joelhalpern.com&g= t;
=E6=94=B6=E4=BB=B6=E4=BA=BA=EF=BC=9ASPRING WG&= nbsp;List  <spring@ietf.org>
=E6=8A=84=E3=80=80= =E9=80=81: (=E6=97=A0)
=E5=8F=91=E9=80=81=E6=97=B6=E9= =97=B4=EF=BC=9A2023-08-08 22:59:56
=E4=B8=BB=E9=A2=98= =EF=BC=9A[spring] Confimring resolution of iss= ue #3https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-spring-srv6-srh-compr= ession/

               &n= bsp;    

Issue #3 in the datatracker reads

The definition for the SegmentsLeft    =     field of the SRH as currently stated in [RFC8754][RFC8200] n= o         longer holds true in the presence of C-SIDs. = This definition         needs to be updated to still ho= ld true in the presence of         C-SIDs.

The response from the document edi= tors         reads:

Segments   &nb= sp;     Left: Defined in [RFC8200], Section 4.4. Specifically, fo= r the         SRH, the number of unprocessed 128-bit en= tries in the Segment         List.


     

Please indicate to the list whether        = you consider this resolution sufficient to close the issue, or   &nbs= p;     have further concerns that should be addressed.  If y= ou have         concerns, clarity about them is appreci= ated. This call is open for = two weeks,         through August 22.


------=_Part_5767_1300776897.1692257926613--