Subject: [spring] FW: Last Call: <draft-ietf-teas-sr-rsvp-coexistence-rec-02.txt> (Recommendations for RSVP-TE and Segment Routing LSP co-existence) to Informational RFC

From: <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 7 Apr 2018 09:09:44 +0000

Hi all,

For information, the following document in under IETF Last Call, for Informational RFC

Recommendations for RSVP-TE and Segment Routing LSP co-existence
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-teas-sr-rsvp-coexistence-rec

Regards,
--Bruno

-----Original Message-----
From: IETF-Announce [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of The IESG
Sent: Friday, April 06, 2018 9:01 PM
To: IETF-Announce
Cc: [email-masked]; [email-masked]; [email-masked]; [email-masked]
Subject: Last Call: <draft-ietf-teas-sr-rsvp-coexistence-rec-02.txt> (Recommendations for RSVP-TE and Segment Routing LSP co-existence) to Informational RFC

The IESG has received a request from the Traffic Engineering Architecture and
Signaling WG (teas) to consider the following document: - 'Recommendations
for RSVP-TE and Segment Routing LSP co-existence'
  <draft-ietf-teas-sr-rsvp-coexistence-rec-02.txt> as Informational RFC

The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits final
comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the
[email-masked] mailing lists by 2018-04-20. Exceptionally, comments may be
sent to [email-masked] instead. In either case, please retain the beginning of
the Subject line to allow automated sorting.

Abstract

   Operators are looking to introduce services over Segment Routing (SR)
   LSPs in networks running Resource Reservation Protocol (RSVP-TE)
   LSPs.  In some instances, operators are also migrating existing
   services from RSVP-TE to SR LSPs.  For example, there might be
   certain services that are well suited for SR and need to co-exist
   with RSVP-TE in the same network.  In other cases, services running
   on RSVP-TE might be migrated to run over SR.  Such introduction or
   migration of traffic to SR might require co-existence with RSVP-TE in
   the same network for an extended period of time depending on the
   operator's intent.  The following document provides solution options
   for keeping the traffic engineering database (TED) consistent across
   the network, accounting for the different bandwidth utilization
   between SR and RSVP-TE.

The file can be obtained via
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-teas-sr-rsvp-coexistence-rec/

IESG discussion can be tracked via
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-teas-sr-rsvp-coexistence-rec/ballot/

The following IPR Declarations may be related to this I-D:

   https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/2827/

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc
pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler
a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,
Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci.

This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law;
they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.
If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments.
As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified.
Thank you.