Re: [spring] WG adoption call for draft-hegde-spring-node-protection-for-sr-te-paths

Robert Raszuk <> Fri, 14 August 2020 08:21 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5EF843A0DF2 for <>; Fri, 14 Aug 2020 01:21:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.098
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id xWfgubiW_QVD for <>; Fri, 14 Aug 2020 01:21:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::52c]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 726373A0DEE for <>; Fri, 14 Aug 2020 01:21:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id df16so6197734edb.9 for <>; Fri, 14 Aug 2020 01:21:02 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=MXYcA4P1lHzx50CRnaRt4YGmn4KWGjYNThaExTE7ElE=; b=crlsf7iV+6/7qNucDPcgwbgUKq6vd8UIuGnfpgFgE4+9W6rEMfcyVI08rDcK8xp+ed ZAKcCTm5hXFJ6LZwdoZXpNj82iZU6a9mpqnJeIeZyHmCwSRu458+4bKF4CfpGgWBRdZ/ TPrsvJjTficH/lZfDqLpVwfplEIsiGPExQVP65dtwrnOfMVzfTD9vYxQ5QID0pgcgJLe 1rBL2MaXt1TsZaEAcrXB1pCOCaFPlPp/iAUZbpHxtHz/GOW3Bv4Z/2gcgAnYrP8o68zt rXLPFl7DQj07V+JvxIZi83CbV3Tk81rpqa5zAkJ3uQ0s7YFApXKPsFb7AK5c74ZRlJ3T pJmQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=MXYcA4P1lHzx50CRnaRt4YGmn4KWGjYNThaExTE7ElE=; b=aLG5khJ86w7GC0aBzRJ2ekbZzIZLFcSE/ly+3r89lx9DP1fHmx8bT+yjraUwnqkFZ/ Hj7SCCgnh60Np0LuaD17iNnuxj7M6m1OwBVmJsKVf4IJVHyA+tWQQtgNSNt6w+4JWASX dFHV0en7Ctv85h1VYyPdVNv0d//DgBMpPtmZvuMahOCbLf0+mI7qOVh7aGsMgJpA5n3v Va3uR/KgEaU4IapVHbGyRe8ego08vR28hd9SUAHmTgzPQLOsxSwKCpFYWDNlUWlwLl+D +ZbC4D34sgxg7o4iXKOLuXC4Jlr4ypAPbMoRn2yHBSUT0BVCaksDOc0KSQMQpOKGGqQA g+5w==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5304Xk5NL/JJIJ7GwQadLqG6TNPS/ZN/AEvoxxyUY4hgncn7USIB AvZ31izP1216AdMTexOQ2emxhF/nJFLK14UhSgXKPQ==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyZUOJvhWumw3gDbsf7Mq/oZWIMSsAutjp54eShZp6Mim4AnKwtXw+BiyDOT/xJgWu+Xm0Zaoo2yPbOv0mClYk=
X-Received: by 2002:aa7:c70b:: with SMTP id i11mr1136797edq.272.1597393260949; Fri, 14 Aug 2020 01:21:00 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <3815_1596111875_5F22BC03_3815_57_2_53C29892C857584299CBF5D05346208A48F028F5@OPEXCAUBM43.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup>
In-Reply-To: <3815_1596111875_5F22BC03_3815_57_2_53C29892C857584299CBF5D05346208A48F028F5@OPEXCAUBM43.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup>
From: Robert Raszuk <>
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2020 10:20:50 +0200
Message-ID: <>
To: Bruno Decraene <>
Cc: "" <>, "" <>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000e2c58705acd21980"
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [spring] WG adoption call for draft-hegde-spring-node-protection-for-sr-te-paths
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Source Packet Routing in NetworkinG \(SPRING\)" <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2020 08:21:04 -0000

I support the adoption of this draft. It is Informational and provides set
of guidance to implementations.

Reading it quickly I think I am not seeing a section or exception in
handling cases where next sid is a binding sid.Skipping it may break the

Also section 2.3 is IMO debatable. I know some which would prefer to drop
rather then go direct between R3 & R4 as there can be already much more
important traffic taking that link. So just always applying node protection
based on processing of next SID may not always be a desired behaviour. I
think to some level Joel's recent messages discussed similar concerns.

Thx a lot,

On Thu, Jul 30, 2020 at 2:24 PM <> wrote:

> Authors of draft-hegde-spring-node-protection-for-sr-te-paths  [1] have
> asked for WG adoption.
> Please indicate your support, comments, or objection, for adopting this
> draft as a working group item by August 20th 2020. (*)
> Could those who are willing to work on this document, please notify the
> list. That gives us an indication of the energy level in the working group
> to work on this.
> Thanks,
> Regards,
> Bruno, Jim, Joel
> [1]
> (*) 3 weeks to account for the IETF meeting week and the august/summer
> period.
> _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
> Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc
> pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler
> a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,
> Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci.
> This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law;
> they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.
> If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments.
> As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified.
> Thank you.
> _______________________________________________
> spring mailing list