My preference would be to use Capability bits/new TLV for well known applications and Using node-tags for config/policy driven generic applications.
That said there is no-harm in reserving a range of tags in this document and mentioning it's for "future" use. Rgds shraddha -----Original Message----- From: OSPF [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Dhruv Dhody Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2014 9:11 AM To: Hannes Gredler; Dhruv Dhody Cc: [email protected] Subject: Re: [OSPF] Poll for WG adoption of draft-hegde-ospf-node-admin-tag Hi Hannes, > | > | > (2) It should be explicitly stated that - No IANA registry is > | > required to > store the meaning or interpretation of.the tag values. > | > > | > <Shraddha> It's mentioned in the section 4.2 that no well known > | > tag > values will be defined by this document. > | > > | Since in the mailing list there is a discussion about possibility of > | having well known tag value assigned by IANA. This document should > | clarify (based on WG consensus) if admin tags can be assigned by > | IANA in future documents or not. And if the answer is yes, a > | suitable range should be set to avoid conflict. > > i have no concerns with that - > however peter seems in favor of using CAP Bits for well-known > applications; > > would be interesting to hear others' opinion on that. FWIW I prefer CAP bits as well and yes! it would interesting to hear from others! Dhruv _______________________________________________ OSPF mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf _______________________________________________ OSPF mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf
