+1 IGP is NOT an AD scope generic L3 broadcast mechanism ;-) BGP is NOT an world scope generic L3 broadcast mechanism ;-)
--- tony On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 8:06 AM Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) <ginsberg= 40cisco....@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote: > 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 <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; > lsr@ietf.org; draft-song-opsawg-ifit-framew...@ietf.org; 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 >
_______________________________________________ Lsr mailing list Lsr@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr
