Chris,
what about this to be added in the Section 3.1:
"A router receiving a Prefix-SID (defined in section 5) from a remote
node and with an SR algorithm value that such remote node has not
advertised in the SR-Algorithm sub-TLV MUST ignore the Prefix-SID sub-TLV."
thanks,
Peter
On 19/08/16 23:33 , Chris Bowers wrote:
Peter,
Please share the updated text that you plan to use with the WG, since this is a
reasonably significant clarification.
Thanks,
Chris
-----Original Message-----
From: Peter Psenak [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Tuesday, August 16, 2016 10:02 AM
To: Chris Bowers <[email protected]>; OSPF List <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [OSPF] OSPFv2 SR draft
Hi Chris,
I'll update the draft along those lines.
thanks,
Peter
On 16/08/16 16:02 , Chris Bowers wrote:
Peter,
I suggest changing the paragraph to read as below to make this clearer.
=====
The SR-Algorithm Sub-TLV is optional. It MAY only be advertised once
in the Router Information Opaque LSA. If the SID/Label Range TLV, as
defined in Section 3.2, is advertised, then the SR-Algorithm TLV MUST
also be advertised. If a router C advertises a Prefix-SID sub-TLV for
algorithm X
but does not advertise the SR-Algorithm Sub-TLV with algorithm X, then
a router receiving that advertisement MUST ignore the Prefix-SID
advertisement from router C. If router B does not advertise the
SR-Algorithm TLV for algorithm X, then other routers should not
forward traffic destined for a prefix-SID for algorithm X advertised by
some router D using a path that would require router B to forward traffic
using
algorithm X.
=====
Thanks,
Chris
-----Original Message-----
From: Peter Psenak [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Monday, August 15, 2016 6:40 AM
To: Chris Bowers <[email protected]>; OSPF List <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [OSPF] OSPFv2 SR draft
Hi Chris,
sorry for the delay, I was on PTO during last two weeks.
Please see inline:
On 03/08/16 16:45 , Chris Bowers wrote:
Peter,
Taking a looking at the whole paragraph into this sentence was added,
I am not sure how to interpret it.
The SR-Algorithm Sub-TLV is optional. It MAY only be advertised once
in the Router Information Opaque LSA. If the SID/Label Range TLV, as
defined in Section 3.2, is advertised, then the SR-Algorithm TLV MUST
also be advertised. If the SR-Algorithm TLV is not advertised by the
node, such node is considered as not being segment routing capable.
Is this sentence intended to imply that if a router does not
advertise the SR-Algorithm TLV including algorithm X, then any
prefix-SIDs for algorithm X advertised by that router will be ignored by other
routers?
in OSPF we do not have the SR capability TLV. We use SR-Algorithm TLV
for that purpose. So if a router does not advertise the SR-Algorithm
TLV for algorithm X, other routers should not send any SR traffic
using SIDs that were advertised for algorithm X.
If the router does not advertise any SR Algorithm TLV, then the node
is not SR capable and no SR traffic should be forwarded to such a node.
thanks,
Peter
If this is the intention, then it would be better to state is more explicitly.
If not, then the intended meaning should be clarified.
Thanks,
Chris
-----Original Message-----
From: OSPF [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Peter Psenak
Sent: Friday, July 22, 2016 3:30 AM
To: OSPF List <[email protected]>
Subject: [OSPF] OSPFv2 SR draft
Hi All,
following text has been added in the latest revision of the OSPFv2 SR
draft, section 3.1.
"If the SR-Algorithm TLV is not advertised by node, such node is
considered as not being segment routing capable."
Please let us know if there are any concerns regarding this addition.
thanks,
Peter
_______________________________________________
OSPF mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf
.
.
.
_______________________________________________
OSPF mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf
