Re: [spring] WG Adoption Call - draft-cheng-rtgwg-srv6-multihome-egress-protection (02/09/24 - 02/24/24)

Feng Yang <yangfeng@chinamobile.com> Mon, 19 February 2024 08:51 UTC

Return-Path: <yangfeng@chinamobile.com>
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 12090C14F6AB for <spring@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 19 Feb 2024 00:51:16 -0800 (PST)
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 YWtRy0VTDCIk for <spring@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 19 Feb 2024 00:51:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: from cmccmta1.chinamobile.com (cmccmta4.chinamobile.com [111.22.67.137]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 535FCC14F6A9 for <spring@ietf.org>; Mon, 19 Feb 2024 00:51:08 -0800 (PST)
X-RM-TagInfo: emlType=0
X-RM-SPAM-FLAG: 00000000
Received: from spf.mail.chinamobile.com (unknown[10.188.0.87]) by rmmx-syy-dmz-app04-12004 (RichMail) with SMTP id 2ee465d31595ac7-76398; Mon, 19 Feb 2024 16:47:19 +0800 (CST)
X-RM-TRANSID: 2ee465d31595ac7-76398
X-RM-TagInfo: emlType=0
X-RM-SPAM-FLAG: 00000000
Received: from [10.2.147.2] (unknown[10.2.147.2]) by rmsmtp-syy-appsvr10-12010 (RichMail) with SMTP id 2eea65d31597e1f-132e4; Mon, 19 Feb 2024 16:47:19 +0800 (CST)
X-RM-TRANSID: 2eea65d31597e1f-132e4
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------46n72h1cZWmlfB8LVbRYorJa"
Message-ID: <ec78ef21-3f29-477d-97aa-0439146f4abf@chinamobile.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2024 16:47:18 +0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
To: spring@ietf.org
References: <CABY-gOMQ=LaECWJsJHsdKX7i+BUsiX=LF5b5ZPMVp=3qQjZ8Mg@mail.gmail.com> <c47be394-e524-4c82-a777-61178abbd393@chinamobile.com> <CABY-gOMS7eEysXuRqvH5+5rKJEKxTrBmEDP=aJh5L-5iDb_EyA@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Language: en-US
From: Feng Yang <yangfeng@chinamobile.com>
In-Reply-To: <CABY-gOMS7eEysXuRqvH5+5rKJEKxTrBmEDP=aJh5L-5iDb_EyA@mail.gmail.com>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spring/1O5hVqrROMMwuZXD1dlxX1-jbog>
Subject: Re: [spring] WG Adoption Call - draft-cheng-rtgwg-srv6-multihome-egress-protection (02/09/24 - 02/24/24)
X-BeenThere: spring@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Source Packet Routing in NetworkinG \(SPRING\)" <spring.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/spring>, <mailto:spring-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/spring/>
List-Post: <mailto:spring@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:spring-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring>, <mailto:spring-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2024 08:51:16 -0000

Hi Yingzhen,

The verified solution here I stated based on the lab test of several 
routers, e.g. H3C, ZTE.

在 2024-02-19 07:45, Yingzhen Qu 写道:
> Hi,
>
> You mentioned "verified solution", are you aware of any implementation 
> or deployment?
>
> Thanks,
> Yingzhen
>
> On Sun, Feb 18, 2024 at 12:35 AM Feng Yang <yangfeng@chinamobile.com> 
> wrote:
>
>     Hi,
>
>     Support.
>
>     This is a simple, fast, verified solution for tail end protection.
>
>     在 2024-02-10 03:30, Yingzhen Qu 写道:
>>     Hi, This email begins a 2 week WG adoption poll for the following
>>     draft: draft-cheng-rtgwg-srv6-multihome-egress-protection-05 -
>>     SRv6 Egress Protection in Multi-homed scenario (ietf.org)
>>     <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-cheng-rtgwg-srv6-multihome-egress-protection/>
>>     Please review the document and indicate your support or
>>     objections by Feb 24th, 2024.
>>     Please note that there is an existing WG
>>     document:draft-ietf-rtgwg-srv6-egress-protection-16 - SRv6 Path
>>     Egress Protection
>>     <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-rtgwg-srv6-egress-protection/>
>>     Which proposes fast protections for the egress node and link of
>>     an SRv6 path through extending IGP and using Mirror SID. As you
>>     discuss adopting
>>     draft-cheng-rtgwg-srv6-multihome-egress-protection, please also
>>     consider:
>>
>>       * Do we need these different solutions?
>>       * Technical merits and drawbacks of each solution
>>       * If there is any implementation of the proposals, please voice it.
>>     Authors, please respond to the list indicating whether you are
>>     aware of any IPR that applies to the draft.
>>     Also copying SPRING WG.
>>     Thanks, Yingzhen (RTGWG Co-chair)
>>
>>     _______________________________________________
>>     spring mailing list
>>     spring@ietf.org
>>     https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring
>
>     -- 
>     BR,
>     Feng Yang (杨锋)
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     spring mailing list
>     spring@ietf.org
>     https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> spring mailing list
> spring@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring

-- 
BR,
Feng Yang (杨锋)