This discussion is interesting, but please do not ignore the considerable feedback from multiple folks indicating that this advertisement does not belong in the IGP at all (regardless of scope). My opinion on that has not changed.
Thanx. Les From: Lsr <lsr-boun...@ietf.org> On Behalf Of Tianran Zhou Sent: Monday, April 06, 2020 7:48 AM To: Greg Mirsky <gregimir...@gmail.com>; draft-wang-lsr-ifit-node-capability-advertisem...@ietf.org; lsr@ietf.org; draft-song-opsawg-ifit-framew...@ietf.org; ops...@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Lsr] I,Scope of FIT Capability: a node or a link? Hi Greg, Thanks very much for your interest on both IFIT framework and IFIT capability draft. And thanks for your review comments. Your perspective on both drafts are correct. On the node or link capability, thanks for your suggestion. I agree with both you and Jeff. The link capability can make the information more clear and accurate for different scenarios. Why we only considered the node capability? That’s the trade off to reduce complexity. We just want to start from simple cases. If the WG think link capability is necessary, we would like to add link capabilities to the update. Cheers, Tianran 发件人: Greg Mirsky [mailto:gregimir...@gmail.com] 发送时间: 2020年4月5日 10:33 收件人: draft-wang-lsr-ifit-node-capability-advertisem...@ietf.org<mailto:draft-wang-lsr-ifit-node-capability-advertisem...@ietf.org>; lsr@ietf.org<mailto:lsr@ietf.org>; draft-song-opsawg-ifit-framew...@ietf.org<mailto:draft-song-opsawg-ifit-framew...@ietf.org>; ops...@ietf.org<mailto:ops...@ietf.org> 主题: I,Scope of FIT Capability: a node or a link? Dear All, I've read these two drafts with interest. In light of the discussion on the LSR WG list, I've been thinking about the scenarios where IFIT is being used. draft-song-opsawg-ifit-framework defines the overall IFIT architecture that, as I understand it, applicable to different methods of collecting and transporting telemetry information. draft-wang-lsr-ifit-node-capability-advertisement is based on the view that IFIT is a node-wide capability advertised as a binary flag for each listed method of collecting telemetry information (Option-Type enabled Flag). On-path telemetry collection is performed in the fast path, i.e., at a link layer. But a node might include ports with different capabilities. How such a heterogeneous, IFIT-wise, node will advertise IFIT Capability? To better use available resources for telemetry information collection, it might be helpful to advertise IFIT as a capability of a link, not of a node? What do you think? Regards, Greg
_______________________________________________ Lsr mailing list Lsr@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr
