Veerendranatha,
On 19/08/2020 11:19, Veerendranatha Reddy V wrote:
Hi Peter,
Thanks for the reply.
For OSPFv2 Extended Prefix TLV (defined in RFC 7684) has route type and it
supports NSSA External Prefixes to carry SID information.
In the same way, if Range TLV has Route-Type , we can extend to support for
NSSA ASBR to send Range TLVs for redistributed prefixes.
no. NSSA route type is used for redistribution of prefixes to NSSA
areas. There is no such thing as redistribution of SRMS entries. So
using NSSA type with SRMS advertisement is not valid.
Peter
Thanks & Regards,
Veerendranath
-----Original Message-----
From: Peter Psenak <ppsenak=40cisco....@dmarc.ietf.org>
Sent: Wednesday, August 19, 2020 1:39 PM
To: Veerendranatha Reddy V <veerendranatha.redd...@ericsson.com>; lsr@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Lsr] Regarding OSPF Extended Prefix Range TLV usage for
External/NSSA prefixes defined in RFC 8665
Veerendranath,
On 19/08/2020 10:03, Veerendranatha Reddy V wrote:
Hi Peter,
It is not related to SRMS.
If there exist ISIS/OSPF or two instances of OSPF in same device, and all are
supporting ST, then I can redistribute SR Prefix information to OSPF from other
OSPF instance or from ISIS.
yes, you can.
In this case, I may use range TLV to reduce the number of Prefix TLVs, by using
Range TLV, if prefixes and SID are able to convert to Range TLV.
you would have to generate one somewhere (on ABR?), but it would not be of NSSA
type.
Peter
Thanks & Regards,
Veerendranath
-----Original Message-----
From: Peter Psenak <ppsenak=40cisco....@dmarc.ietf.org>
Sent: Wednesday, August 19, 2020 1:23 PM
To: Veerendranatha Reddy V <veerendranatha.redd...@ericsson.com>;
lsr@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Lsr] Regarding OSPF Extended Prefix Range TLV usage for
External/NSSA prefixes defined in RFC 8665
Hi Veerendranatha,
On 19/08/2020 06:23, Veerendranatha Reddy V wrote:
Hi Peter,
While redistributing prefix Sid for the prefixes from other protocols (Ex: from
ISIS or other OSPF instances), we can consider as range TLV for the prefixes
which are advertised in the range TLV in that protocol.
I don't follow. Are you talking about redistribution of SRMS advertisement
between protocols? Such thing has not been defined.
thanks,
Peter
If it is NSSA, then we need to advertise these redistributed prefixes as area
scope, so Range TLV also need to be part of area scope Opaque LSA.
Thanks & Regards,
Veerendranath
-----Original Message-----
From: Peter Psenak <ppsenak=40cisco....@dmarc.ietf.org>
Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2020 11:06 PM
To: Veerendranatha Reddy V <veerendranatha.redd...@ericsson.com>;
lsr@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Lsr] Regarding OSPF Extended Prefix Range TLV usage for
External/NSSA prefixes defined in RFC 8665
Veerendranath,
On 18/08/2020 16:40, Veerendranatha Reddy V wrote:
Hi Authors, All,
OSPF Extended Prefix Range TLV defined in RFC 8665 has IA flag to
distinguish between Intra and Inter Area scope prefixes.
Whether any restrictions to not to use Prefix Range TLV for
external/NSSA prefixes ?
I don't see how you can use OSPF Extended Prefix Range TLV for NSSA, the usage
of OSPF Extended Prefix Range TLV has only been defined in the context of RFC
8665.
thanks,
Peter
For External Prefixes, we can able to use Prefix Range TLV by
using LSA type (based on AS scope Opaque Type , so the TLV is for
External
Prefixes)
But If we need to use the Prefix Range TLV for NSSA prefixes
(Type-7) , which are in area scope, there is no flag/route-type
field in this TLV to distinguish between Intra or NSSA prefixes( as
IA flag will not be set anyway).
Thanks & Regards,
Veerendranath
_______________________________________________
Lsr mailing list
Lsr@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr
