nanog mailing list archives
Re: Segment Routing
From: Mark Tinka <mark.tinka () seacom mu>
Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 14:17:16 +0200
On 22/May/18 14:10, Ca By wrote:
Well look at how many authors are on this rfc, that means it is super good right? More authors, more brains https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-6man-segment-routing-header-07 Actually it is just an embarasssing marketing technique. Sad!
Let's hope it doesn't suffer the same fate as LDPv6 did, whose implementation across all platforms within one specific vendor is very poor, meaning you can't really use it in real life, never mind a multi-vendor network. Mark.
Current thread:
- Segment Routing Matt Geary (May 21)
- Re: Segment Routing dip (May 21)
- Re: Segment Routing Matt Geary (May 22)
- Re: Segment Routing Mark Tinka (May 22)
- Re: Segment Routing Matt Geary (May 22)
- Re: Segment Routing Mark Tinka (May 22)
- Re: Segment Routing James Bensley (May 22)
- Re: Segment Routing Mark Tinka (May 22)
- Re: Segment Routing Ca By (May 22)
- Re: Segment Routing Mark Tinka (May 22)
- Re: Segment Routing Saku Ytti (May 22)
- Re: Segment Routing Mark Tinka (May 22)
- Re: Segment Routing Saku Ytti (May 22)
- Re: Segment Routing Mark Tinka (May 22)
- Re: Segment Routing Saku Ytti (May 22)
- Re: Segment Routing Mark Tinka (May 22)
- Re: Segment Routing Saku Ytti (May 22)
- Re: Segment Routing Mark Tinka (May 22)
- Re: Segment Routing Matt Geary (May 22)
- Re: Segment Routing dip (May 21)
- Re: Segment Routing Matt Geary (May 22)
- Re: Segment Routing Mark Tinka (May 22)