Subject: [spring] Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on draft-ietf-spring-ipv6-use-cases-11: (with COMMENT)

From: Mirja Kühlewind <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2017 04:35:09 -0800

Mirja Kühlewind has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-spring-ipv6-use-cases-11: No Objection

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)

Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-spring-ipv6-use-cases/

----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Minor question regarding SPRING in Core networks (section 2.5): Why is SR here
bettter than MPLS (which I guess is used today for this use case)? In general
it would probably have been nice to also talk a bit about how this is
better/different than existing technologies.

---

From: Alvaro Retana <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2017 04:47:02 -0800

On December 14, 2017 at 7:35:10 AM, Mirja Kühlewind ([email-masked])
wrote:

Mirja:

Hi!

Minor question regarding SPRING in Core networks (section 2.5): Why is SR
here
bettter than MPLS (which I guess is used today
<http://airmail.calendar/2017-12-14 12:00:00 EST> for this use case)? In
general
it would probably have been nice to also talk a bit about how this is
better/different than existing technologies.

In reality that part is not about SRv6 vs MPLS.  Instead, it’s about the
fact that people do use IP-only (no MPLS) infrastructure in some cases.
IOW, the use cases in this document should provide justification for
functionality needed above a plain IP network.

Thanks!

Alvaro.