> On May 21, 2018, at 11:46 AM, Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) <ginsb...@cisco.com> > wrote: > > I fail to see any difference from the IGP algorithm case, which you agreed > with. > > > SR Algorithm container: > - distributed as a TLV inside Router Information Opaque LSA > - distributed as a sub-TLV inside Router Capability TLV > > IGP Algorithm: The container content which is defined using a common > registry. > > [Les:] The SR Algorithm “container identifier” is NOT managed by the IGP > Algorithm Registry. It is only the algorithm identifiers– which are > advertised inside the protocol specific containers – which are managed by the > shared registry. > > Here, however, you are proposing to manage the identifier for the container > (not its contents) in a shared registry. That I object to.
Unfortunately, you are incorrect here, I never made that proposal. I presented various options we might choose to share commonality, none of them had to do with sharing top-level code-points, all of them had to do strictly with the content of the FAD [sub-]TLV which is being entirely defined by the document in question. > TLV/sub-TLV codepoints are a protocol property. That is why they are managed > in protocol specific registries. > You are now proposing to take “some” protocol specific identifiers and manage > them in a protocol independent registry. This is wrong. I'm talking about the content of the FAD [sub-]TLV only, just like IGP Algorithm registry is defining the content for the SR Algorithm [sub-]TLV, they are completely analogous. > > You think it makes sense to go to > https://www.iana.org/assignments/isis-tlv-codepoints/isis-tlv-codepoints.xhtml > > <https://www.iana.org/assignments/isis-tlv-codepoints/isis-tlv-codepoints.xhtml> > to find all the IS-IS TLV/sub-TLV codepoints EXCEPT for a few which you want > to put into a shared IS-IS/OSPF registry? This is silly, perhaps not intended but it's very close to a straw man. I know I wrote in an early mail explicitly that my intent had nothing to do with back over anything, so no. Thanks, Chris. > I don’t. > > Les > > Thanks, > Chris. > > Les >
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
_______________________________________________ Lsr mailing list Lsr@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr
