[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Shared Transition Space VS. BGP Next Hop [was: Re: Best practices IPv4/IPv6 BGP (dual stack)]
- Subject: Shared Transition Space VS. BGP Next Hop [was: Re: Best practices IPv4/IPv6 BGP (dual stack)]
- From: adam.vitkovsky at swan.sk (Vitkovský Adam)
- Date: Tue, 6 May 2014 10:50:39 +0000
- In-reply-to: <[email protected]>
- References: <CAC1-dtkp2rjm=7tARPJNCXjky11u0S_R7xtumSzJ-M4tiNz=vg@mail.gmail.com> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
> From: Mark Tinka [mailto:mark.tinka at seacom.mu]
>
> On Tuesday, May 06, 2014 11:27:09 AM Rajiv Asati (rajiva)
> wrote:
>
> > Segment routing (SR) could/would certainly work with single-stack v6
> > and enable MPLS forwarding.
>
> Certainly, but based on the Paris meeting, it was not high up on the agenda.
>
> So we will, likely, have to rely on other solutions and wait for SR to catch up
> later.
>
> At the moment, it seems SR is being pushed hard for PCEP as well as SDN.
>
> Mark.
I think the most revolutionary SR use case is the:
3.2. Protecting a node segment upon the failure of its advertising node.
Of the now expired: draft-filsfils-rtgwg-segment-routing-use-cases-02.
It's the first, complete and elegant FRR solution for the hierarchical MPLS implementations.
adam