It does thank you -éric
From: chen....@zte.com.cn <chen....@zte.com.cn> Date: Tuesday, 8 April 2025 at 12:40 To: Eric Vyncke (evyncke) <evyn...@cisco.com> Cc: i...@ietf.org <i...@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-lsr-ospf-prefix-extended-fl...@ietf.org <draft-ietf-lsr-ospf-prefix-extended-fl...@ietf.org>, lsr-cha...@ietf.org <lsr-cha...@ietf.org>, lsr@ietf.org <lsr@ietf.org>, acee.i...@gmail.com <acee.i...@gmail.com> Subject: Re: [Lsr] Éric Vyncke's No Objection on draft-ietf-lsr-ospf-prefix-extended-flags-06: (with COMMENT) Hi Eric， Thanks a lot for your review. Please find updated version attached based on your comments and other ADs/DIR comments. Could you kindly review the changes and confirm whether they address your concerns? If there are any remaining issues, please let us know. We appreciate your time and feedback. Best Regards， Ran Original From: 陈然00080434 To: ÉricVynckeviaDatatracker <nore...@ietf.org>; Cc: The IESG <i...@ietf.org>;draft-ietf-lsr-ospf-prefix-extended-fl...@ietf.org <draft-ietf-lsr-ospf-prefix-extended-fl...@ietf.org>;lsr-cha...@ietf.org <lsr-cha...@ietf.org>;lsr@ietf.org <lsr@ietf.org>;acee.i...@gmail.com <acee.i...@gmail.com>; Date: 2025年04月02日 11:19 Subject: Re: [Lsr] Éric Vyncke's No Objection on draft-ietf-lsr-ospf-prefix-extended-flags-06: (with COMMENT) Hi Eric, Thank you for your review and support of this work. Please see inline... Best Regards， Ran From: ÉricVynckeviaDatatracker <nore...@ietf.org> To: The IESG <i...@ietf.org>; Cc: draft-ietf-lsr-ospf-prefix-extended-fl...@ietf.org <draft-ietf-lsr-ospf-prefix-extended-fl...@ietf.org>;lsr-cha...@ietf.org <lsr-cha...@ietf.org>;lsr@ietf.org <lsr@ietf.org>;acee.i...@gmail.com <acee.i...@gmail.com>; Date: 2025年04月01日 20:01 Subject: [Lsr] Éric Vyncke's No Objection on draft-ietf-lsr-ospf-prefix-extended-flags-06: (with COMMENT) Éric Vyncke has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-lsr-ospf-prefix-extended-flags-06: No Objection When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/handling-ballot-positions/ for more information about how to handle DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-lsr-ospf-prefix-extended-flags/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Thanks for the work done in this document, simple but efficient and needed ! Two COMMENTs about section 2: ``` Length: Variable, dependent on the included Prefix Attribute Flags. This indicates the length of the value portion in bytes. The length MUST be a multiple of 4 octets. If the length is not a multiple of 4 octets, the LSA MUST be considered malformed. ``` While I can guess what the "value portion" is, why not clearly specifying the "prefix attributes flags" ? Also, why not being consistent and using "octet" only (i.e., no "byte"). Ran：We will clearly specifying the "prefix attributes flags" and will consistently use "octet" throughout the document. Do both OSPFv2 and OSPFv3 specify what to do with malformed TLV ? Ran：Yes. For extended LSAs for OSPFv3, see https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc8362, and for OSPFv2, see https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc3630. _______________________________________________ Lsr mailing list -- lsr@ietf.org To unsubscribe send an email to lsr-le...@ietf.org
_______________________________________________ Lsr mailing list -- lsr@ietf.org To unsubscribe send an email to lsr-le...@ietf.org
