IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

chen.ran@zte.com.cn Mon, 19 February 2024 08:33 UTC

Return-Path: <chen.ran@zte.com.cn>
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 139AAC14F6A6; Mon, 19 Feb 2024 00:33:21 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.205
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.205 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=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 c-b_ud_JY9Rk; Mon, 19 Feb 2024 00:33:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mxhk.zte.com.cn (mxhk.zte.com.cn [63.216.63.35]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4305CC14F6A5; Mon, 19 Feb 2024 00:33:17 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mse-fl2.zte.com.cn (unknown [10.5.228.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mxhk.zte.com.cn (FangMail) with ESMTPS id 4TdbQf3bmKz5B102; Mon, 19 Feb 2024 16:33:14 +0800 (CST)
Received: from njy2app08.zte.com.cn ([10.40.13.206]) by mse-fl2.zte.com.cn with SMTP id 41J8X6qE016851; Mon, 19 Feb 2024 16:33:06 +0800 (+08) (envelope-from chen.ran@zte.com.cn)
Received: from mapi (njy2app04[null]) by mapi (Zmail) with MAPI id mid203; Mon, 19 Feb 2024 16:33:08 +0800 (CST)
Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2024 16:33:08 +0800
X-Zmail-TransId: 2afc65d31244ffffffffdbc-97776
X-Mailer: Zmail v1.0
Message-ID: <202402191633089679670@zte.com.cn>
In-Reply-To: <CABY-gOMQ=LaECWJsJHsdKX7i+BUsiX=LF5b5ZPMVp=3qQjZ8Mg@mail.gmail.com>
References: CABY-gOMQ=LaECWJsJHsdKX7i+BUsiX=LF5b5ZPMVp=3qQjZ8Mg@mail.gmail.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
From: chen.ran@zte.com.cn
To: rtgwg@ietf.org, rtgwg-chairs@ietf.org
Cc: spring@ietf.org, draft-cheng-rtgwg-srv6-multihome-egress-protection@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="=====_001_next====="
X-MAIL: mse-fl2.zte.com.cn 41J8X6qE016851
X-Fangmail-Gw-Spam-Type: 0
X-Fangmail-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-Fangmail-MID-QID: 65D3124A.000/4TdbQf3bmKz5B102
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spring/IrcQ6LqmpG-2YwYp-si-yBNpxmE>
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 08:33:21 -0000

Hi Yingzhen & WG，

I support the adoption of this draft.
It introduces a simplified protection mechanism for the SRv6 egress node，and ZTE has completed the prototype verification of draft-cheng-rtgwg-srv6-multihome-egress-protection-05.

Best Regards，
Ran


Original


From: YingzhenQu <yingzhen.ietf@gmail.com>
To: RTGWG <rtgwg@ietf.org>;spring@ietf.org <spring@ietf.org>;rtgwg-chairs <rtgwg-chairs@ietf.org>;draft-cheng-rtgwg-srv6-multihome-egress-protection <draft-cheng-rtgwg-srv6-multihome-egress-protection@ietf.org>;
Date: 2024年02月10日 03:31
Subject: [spring] WG Adoption Call - draft-cheng-rtgwg-srv6-multihome-egress-protection (02/09/24 - 02/24/24)

_______________________________________________
spring mailing list
spring@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring







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) 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 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)

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email