IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [spring] draft-ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming: Relativeadvantages of SRv6

程伟强 <chengweiqiang@chinamobile.com> Mon, 30 December 2019 10:33 UTC

Return-Path: <chengweiqiang@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 C23FD120133 for <spring@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 30 Dec 2019 02:33:41 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.339
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.339 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, HTML_OBFUSCATE_05_10=0.26, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id qJI56Ty-B_1M for <spring@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 30 Dec 2019 02:33:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: from cmccmta3.chinamobile.com (cmccmta3.chinamobile.com [221.176.66.81]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E334E12010C for <spring@ietf.org>; Mon, 30 Dec 2019 02:33:37 -0800 (PST)
Received: from spf.mail.chinamobile.com (unknown[172.16.121.11]) by rmmx-syy-dmz-app09-12009 (RichMail) with SMTP id 2ee95e09d252170-4422f; Mon, 30 Dec 2019 18:32:52 +0800 (CST)
X-RM-TRANSID: 2ee95e09d252170-4422f
X-RM-SPAM-FLAG: 00000000
Received: from chengweiqiang@chinamobile.com ( [10.2.53.197] ) by ajax-webmail-syy-appsvr06-11006 (Richmail) with HTTP; Mon, 30 Dec 2019 18:32:52 +0800 (CST)
Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2019 18:32:52 +0800
From: 程伟强 <chengweiqiang@chinamobile.com>
To: rbonica <rbonica@juniper.net>, SPRING WG <spring@ietf.org>
Message-ID: <2afe5e09d0735c7-00013.Richmail.00000020340441210951@chinamobile.com>
References: <BN7PR05MB393899B40E06055BCEE73B13AE270@BN7PR05MB3938.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_135090_1609875975.1577701972122"
X-Priority: 3
X-RM-TRANSID: 2afe5e09d0735c7-00013
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(V2.0.27)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spring/mC2vq9XcLLtuTHqsbkRsm6zG1qg>
Subject: Re: [spring] draft-ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming: Relativeadvantages of SRv6
X-BeenThere: spring@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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, 30 Dec 2019 10:33:42 -0000

Hi,I agree with Ron.



B.R.

Weiqiang Cheng


 
----邮件原文----发件人：Ron Bonica  <rbonica=40juniper.net@dmarc.ietf.org>收件人：SPRING WG  <spring@ietf.org>抄　送: (无)发送时间：2019-12-30 18:07:24主题：[spring] draft-ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming: Relativeadvantages of SRv6
    

Pablo,


 


Would you consider adding a short section to the draft explaining the relative advantages of SRv6 over SR-MPLS? This section would explain why an network operator would deploy SRv6 instead of SR-MPLS.


 


                                                                                         Ron


 

 
Juniper Business Use Only

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email