[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       ipng
Subject:    Re: New Version Notification for draft-voyer-6man-extension-header-insertion-08.txt
From:       Fred Baker <fredbaker.ietf () gmail ! com>
Date:       2019-11-28 20:10:24
Message-ID: A786E9FB-B014-4883-A66F-A76BBBB1DE23 () gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

I'm using my phone for email, so fancy selection of text isn't very practical. \
However, it seems to me that a lot of the confusion in the thread (and the document?) \
relates to assumptions made by various speakers - "an SR domain is [or is not] \
bounded by AS boundaries" and so on.

I would suggest that it be clearly stated, not in terms of the operator of the \
equipment, but the configurations of the routers in question. Something like "a \
packet containing an SR header may only traverse routers that are consistently \
configured for segment routing." Wordsmith to taste. The point is that if it ever \
finds itself in a router that is implemented or configured differently (whether or \
not it's in the same AS or etc), it has left that SR domain. Note that it may be in a \
                different SR domain...
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
ipv6@ietf.org
Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]