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

[高芳 <[e-mail]>]

Hi 



I read the drafts and my understanding is as follows:

·        Technical merits and drawbacks of each solution

draft-ietf-rtgwg-srv6-egress-protection-16

- a table/space/process is required to store and learn the mapping info between Remote-VPN-SID and VPN;

- function on forwarding plane is easy to achieve

draft-cheng-rtgwg-srv6-multihome-egress-protection-05

- A new flavor，provide a clean and more fundamental design/solution on  the forwarding plane capabilities;

-statically setting for the primary/backup relationship is not mandatory.




·        Do we need these different solutions?

      Yes, i think these two do not provide an alternative solution, when considering the existence of network with different scale and device with different capability.

 

I support the adoption, with take the similar point of view to Li Hao




B.R

Fang Gao



| |
gaofang
|
|
[e-mail]
|
---- Replied Message ----
| From | Feng Yang<[e-mail]> |
| Date | 2/19/2024 16:51 |
| To | <[e-mail]> |
| Subject | Re: [spring] WG Adoption Call - draft-cheng-rtgwg-srv6-multihome-egress-protection (02/09/24 - 02/24/24) |

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 <[e-mail]> 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) 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)


_______________________________________________
spring mailing list [e-mail]://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring
-- 
BR,
Feng Yang （杨锋）
_______________________________________________
spring mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring



_______________________________________________
spring mailing list [e-mail]://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring
-- 
BR,
Feng Yang （杨锋）