Hi Alvaro,
done.
Have some issues posting the new ospfv2 draft, so requested manual posting.
thanks,
Peter
On 16/11/18 22:40 , Alvaro Retana wrote:
[Took the ops-dir and the ietf@ietf lists off.]
Hi!
Joe makes a really good point below about the TLV types and RFC7770. It
looks like we all missed it! :-(
To quote Peter (from a message in this thread), "I don't think it is
good to specify the behavior which is described somewhere else.”
Looking at -18, Section 4
(draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment-routing-extensions) has the exact same
text [*] as Section 3 in draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions.
Given that the IANA allocation is done
in draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions, and
that draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment-routing-extensions refers back to
it, then I would like to see the following changes:
(1) In draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions, Section 3:
<OLD>
These SR capabilities are advertised in the Router Information Opaque
LSA (defined in [RFC7770]).
<NEW>
These SR capabilities are advertised in the Router Information Opaque
LSA (defined in [RFC7770]). The TLVs defined below are applicable to
both OSPFv2 and OSPFv3; see also
[ID.ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment-routing-extensions].
…and add an Informative reference to
draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment-routing-extensions.
(2) In draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment-routing-extensions, replace the
entire Section 4 with:
"
Segment Routing requires some additional router capabilities to be
advertised to other routers in the area.
These SR capabilities are advertised in the OSPFv3 Router Information
Opaque LSA (defined in [RFC7770]), and specified in
[ID.ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions].
“
Even though draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions is already with
the RFC Editor, it is waiting
for draft-ietf-spring-segment-routing-mpls, so we can still make
changes. Please submit a new version (and send an update of the XML to
the rfc-editor).
I am scheduling draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment-routing-extensions on the
Dec/6 IESG Telechat. Please submit an update before the end of this month.
Thanks!!
Alvaro.
[*] Except for the OSPFv3 being specifically called out, and a couple of
other minor points.
On October 30, 2018 at 8:05:27 AM, Peter Psenak (ppse...@cisco.com
<mailto:ppse...@cisco.com>) wrote:
> With respect to TLV types 8, 9, 14, and 15, they are defined in
> draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions, and it took me a while to figure
> out where you were getting those values and why they weren't spelled out in
the
> IANA considerations. You have a normative reference to this, which is good,
> but you only mention it with respect to the algorithm parameters. I think
> another mention is required.
>
> I'm going to be pedantic here. According to RFC7770, when a new OSPF Router
> Information LSA TLV is defined, the spec needs to explicitly state if it's
> applicable to OSPFv2, v3, or both. While you reference the TLVs from
> draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions, I didn't see that either document
> _explicitly_ states that they are applicable to both.
##PP
added the following to each of the values:
Type: X as defined in [I-D.ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions] and
aplicable to OSPFv3.
_______________________________________________
Lsr mailing list
Lsr@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr
