Suresh, I believe draft-ietf-bess-mvpn-expl-track-13 addresses your issues. Please let me know.
Eric On 10/25/2018 9:14 AM, Suresh Krishnan wrote: > Hi Martin, > > >> On Oct 25, 2018, at 4:31 AM, Vigoureux, Martin (Nokia - FR/Paris-Saclay) >> <martin.vigour...@nokia.com> wrote: >> >> Hello Suresh, >> >> thank you for your review. >> This NLRI is in fact defined in 6514 and the determination of the length >> of the IP address field is clarified in 6515, section 2 item 3. > That makes more sense but this is not clear from the draft at all. The only > prelude to the format says > > "The "route key" field of the NLRI will have the following format:” > > with no further explanations that this format is simply repeated from > RFC6514(I am guessing it is the S-PMSI A-D Route defined in Section 4.3). > Additionally, the draft does not even have a reference to RFC6515. I think it > would be really good to put some pointers into this draft. Suggest something > like this > > OLD: > > The "route key" field of the NLRI will have > the following format: > > NEW: > > The "route key" field of the NLRI uses > the following format as defined in Section 4.3 of [RFC6514]: > > > OLD: > > o The "ingress PE" address is taken from the "originating router" > field of the NLRI of the S-PMSI A-D route that is the match for > tracking. > > NEW: > > o The "ingress PE" address is taken from the "originating router" > field of the NLRI of the S-PMSI A-D route that is the match for > tracking. The length of the Ingress PE's IP address is computed > using the procedure described in Section 2 Item 3 of [RFC6515] > > Thanks > Suresh > _______________________________________________ BESS mailing list BESS@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess
