nanog mailing list archives
Re: Segment Routing
From: Saku Ytti <saku () ytti fi>
Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 17:59:34 +0300
On 22 May 2018 at 17:43, steve ulrich <sulrich () botwerks org> wrote: Hey,
sorry, yes. i was referring to SRTE wrt the pop operation.
Yup RSVP=>SR is more ambiguous and debatable than LDP=>SR which is unambiguous win.
not labels but they are encoded as labels. i hope operators have the option to configure common/consistent label ranges, but i don't necessarily assume it. tooling to resolve this will be required just as in the LDP world.
I've not had this tooling in LDP world, and not anticipating to need it in SR world. But maybe I'm missing something, what kind of information do you need in LDP world which you need to develop tooling for, and how does the problem+solution translate to SR world? -- ++ytti
Current thread:
- Re: Segment Routing, (continued)
- Re: Segment Routing Mark Tinka (May 22)
- Re: Segment Routing Matt Geary (May 22)
- Re: Segment Routing Mark Tinka (May 22)
- Re: Segment Routing Saku Ytti (May 22)
- Re: Segment Routing steve ulrich (May 22)
- Re: Segment Routing Saku Ytti (May 22)
- Re: Segment Routing Matt Geary (May 22)
- Re: Segment Routing Saku Ytti (May 22)
- Re: Segment Routing Matt Geary (May 22)
- Re: Segment Routing steve ulrich (May 22)
- Re: Segment Routing Saku Ytti (May 22)
- Re: Segment Routing steve ulrich (May 22)
- Re: Segment Routing Saku Ytti (May 22)
- Re: Segment Routing Scott Whyte (May 22)