Tom -
Thanx for the comments. Please see inline. >-----Original Message----- >From: tom petch <[email protected]> >Sent: Saturday, August 8, 2026 7:12 AM >To: [email protected]; [email protected]; >[email protected]; [email protected] >Subject: Re: [Lsr] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-lsr-l2-bundle-member-remote-id-03 >(Ends 2026-08-19) > >From: Acee Lindem via Datatracker <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> >Sent: 05 August 2026 16:54 > >This message starts a WG Last Call for: >draft-ietf-lsr-l2-bundle-member-remote-id-03 > ><tp> > >TBA in Section 4 would appear to have a different meaning to TBA in Section 5 >while both appear to differ from TBA in Section 6. > [LES:] Correct. The code points are protocol specific. See the IANA considerations section for the list of the requested codepoints and the corresponding registries. >' Remote Interface ID: Remote identifier of interface, 4 octets.' >Well yes, but what is the format, what are the semantics, has it any >relationship >to the Interface ID as used in the remote box to identify what will be to the >remote box a local interface identifer. > [LES:] Interface IDs are as defined in RFC 4202. We will add a reference. Yes - of course - the remote ID is the local ID assigned by the router at the Remote end. See Section 7. >Section 3 I lose track of when I read >'OSPFv2 Extended Link TLV, or OSPFv3 Router-Link TLV, for L3 Link' >What is an L3 Link? [LES:] The L3 link is the logical link directly operated on by the Layer 3 protocol. See the referenced IEEE802.1AX for more discussion. > >Section 3 might be clearer were it divided into three, seperate subsections for >the different protocols (but I would still lose track of it). > [LES:] I would agree that sub-sections would be helpful here - we will do that - though it seems it won’t help you. 😊 >Having lost track, I do not understand >L2 Bundle Member Attributes TLV: >How does that relate to >L2 Bundle Member Attributes sub-TLV of RFC9356? >(Note that lower case 'sub-' is correct, in that RFC). > [LES:] First, we should use lower case "sub-TLV" throughout. This is consistent with the referenced RFCs. We will make that correction. Section 3 is meant to be descriptive - not normative. Normative definition of the format of the L2Bundle Member Attributes TLVs is found in the normative references. Deliberately not duplicated here to avoid ambiguity. We will add some text that clarifies that. Les >Tom Petch > > > >This Working Group Last Call ends on 2026-08-19 > >Abstract: > In networks where Layer 2 (L2) interface bundles (such as a Link > Aggregation Group (LAG) as defined in IEEE 802.1AX) are deployed, a > controller may need to collect the connectivity relationships between > bundle members for traffic engineering (TE) purposes. For example, > when performing topology management and bidirectional path > computation for TE, it is essential to know the connectivity > relationships among bundle members. > > This document describes how OSPF and IS-IS would advertise the remote > interface identifiers for Layer 2 bundle members. The corresponding > extension of BGP-LS is also specified. > >File can be retrieved from: >https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-lsr-l2-bundle-member-remote-id-<https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-lsr-l2-bundle-member-remote-id-03.txt> >03.txt<https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-lsr-l2-bundle-member-remote-id-03.txt> > >Please review and indicate your support or objection to proceed with the >publication of this document by replying to this email keeping >[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> >in copy. Objections should be explained and suggestions to resolve them are >highly appreciated. > >Authors, and WG participants in general, are reminded of the Intellectual >Property Rights (IPR) disclosure obligations described in BCP 79 [1]. >Appropriate IPR disclosures required for full conformance with the provisions >of BCP 78 [1] and BCP 79 [2] must be filed, if you are aware of any. >Sanctions available for application to violators of IETF IPR Policy can be >found at [3]. > >Thank you. > >[1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/bcp78/ >[2] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/bcp79/ >[3] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc6701/ > >The IETF datatracker status page for this Internet-Draft is: >https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-lsr-l2-bundle-member-remote-id/ > >There is also an HTML version available at: >https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-lsr-l2-bundle-member-remote-id-<https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-lsr-l2-bundle-member-remote-id-03.html> >03.html<https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-lsr-l2-bundle-member-remote-id-03.html> > >A diff from the previous version is available at: >https://author-tools.ietf.org/iddiff?url2=draft-ietf-lsr-l2-bundle-member-<https://author-tools.ietf.org/iddiff?url2=draft-ietf-lsr-l2-bundle-member-remote-id-03> >remote-id-03<https://author-tools.ietf.org/iddiff?url2=draft-ietf-lsr-l2-bundle-member-remote-id-03> > >_______________________________________________ >Lsr mailing list -- [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> >To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
_______________________________________________ Lsr mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
