Re: draft-matsushima-spring-dmm-srv6-mobile-uplane

Thank you Dan, Sri,

I agree with Dan in the all points, I’ll capture those in the next revision.

> Folks – Please review and provide your feedback on this document.

Yes, that’s really appreciated. 

Cheers,
--satoru



> 2017/10/14 1:17、Sri Gundavelli (sgundave) <[email protected]>のメール:
> 
> Thanks Daniel for your reviews.
> 
> Folks – Please review and provide your feedback on this document.
> 
> 
> Sri
> 
> From: dmm <[email protected]> on behalf of "Voyer, Daniel" <[email protected]>
> Date: Friday, October 13, 2017 at 8:09 AM
> To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
> Subject: [DMM] draft-matsushima-spring-dmm-srv6-mobile-uplane
> 
> Hi,
> This is very good proposal.
>  
> On Section 4. Mobile user plane
> The core network doesn’t require to be SRv6 – it could be IPv6 only. This demonstrate SRv6 flexibility.
>  
> On Section 5.2. Layer-2 Anchor segment
> Can you add more explanation to “In downlink, there's no difference between the uplink behavior.”
>  
> On section 7. Control plane considerations
> The centralized controller should be marked as out-of-scope of this document.
>  
> Thx
> dan
>  
>  
> _______________________________________________
> dmm mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm

_______________________________________________
dmm mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm