Hi,
I have a few comments. Sorry to send these so late in the process. I
support publication of this draft regardless of whether any action is
taken on my comments.
1. Since there are non-allocation actions, I suggest that the first
sentence of Section 6 be more like "IANA is requested to take the
following actions."
2. It should be called out as an explicit IANA action to replace all
References to "[RFC5316]" on the IANA IS-IS TLV Codepoints web page
with References to "[this document]".
3. Use of "new" throughout the document for codepoints that were
assigned for RFC 5316 more than a decade ago should be eliminated.
4. I generally think it is better for implementation requirements to
be in the main text rather than the IANA Considerations, so I suggest
moving "Note that all four sub-TLVs SHOULD NOT appear in TLVs 22, 23,
25, 222, or 223 and MUST be ignored if they are included in any of
these TLVs." up to near the end of Section 3.1.
2. I like diagrams and enjoy doing ASCII art, so I suggest replacing
the prose table at the beginning of 3.1 with the following. In any
case note that the usual IETF admonition regarding the reserved bits,
that they MUST be sent as zero and ignored on receipt, seems to be
missing in the document.
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Router ID (4 octets) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| default metric | (3 octets)
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|S|D| Rsvd | (1 octet)
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|sub-TLVs length| (1 octet)
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-
| sub-TLVs ... (0-246 octets)
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-
- S, D: Flooding-scope and up/down information discussed below.
- Rsvd: 6 reserved bits that MUST be sent as zero and ignored
on receipt.
- sub-TLVs length: gives the total number of octets of sub-TLVs,
which is variable from zero to 246 octets, as an unsigned
integer. sub-TLVs are structured as shown below. sub-TLVs
with an unknown type MUST be ignored. If the value of the
sub-TLVs length field is larger than 246, or the last
sub-TLV extends beyond the sub-TLVs length, the TLV is
malformed and MUST be ignored.
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| sub-type | (1 octet)
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| sub-TLV length| (1 octet)
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-
| sub-TLV value ... (variable)
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-
Thanks,
Donald
===============================
Donald E. Eastlake 3rd +1-508-333-2270 (cell)
2386 Panoramic Circle, Apopka, FL 32703 USA
d3e...@gmail.com
On Wed, Feb 17, 2021 at 10:30 AM Christian Hopps <cho...@chopps.org> wrote:
>
> Hi LSR and TEAS,
>
> This begins a joint WG last call for:
>
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-lsr-isis-rfc5316bis/
>
> Please discuss any issues on the LSR mailing list. The WGLC will end March 3,
> 2021.
>
> Authors, please indicate wether you are aware of any IPR related to this
> document to the list.
>
> Thanks,
> Chris, Acee, (Lou and Pavan).
_______________________________________________
Lsr mailing list
Lsr@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr
