Hello SPRING WG,
I'd like to encourage discussion on this thread.
The related questions seem to be:
- Binding SIDs:
- Is there any implementation?
- Is it useful?
- Does it need to be specified?
- Binding SIDs advertised in IGP:
- Is there any implementation?
- Is it useful?
- Does it need to be specified?
As of today, there seem to be multiple SPRING (related) document that make
reference (define/use) to the Binding SIDs. e.g.
- architecture
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-spring-segment-routing-11#section-3.5.2
- MPLS instantiation
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-spring-segment-routing-mpls-08#section-2
- non-protected paths
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-litkowski-spring-non-protected-paths-01#section-3.3
- SR policies:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-filsfils-spring-segment-routing-policy-00#section-7
However, it also seems a priori possible to define Binding SIDs and not
advertised them in the IGP. (e.g. by keeping them local to the PCE)
On a side note, if the Binding SIDs are removed from the IGP, do they need to
be removed from the BGP-LS extensions? [+IDR chairs]
Thanks,
Regards,
--Bruno
> From: OSPF [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Peter Psenak
> Sent: Monday, June 12, 2017 10:18 AM
> To: OSPF WG List; [email protected]; [email protected]
> Cc: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [OSPF] OSPFv2 Segment Routing Extensions ERO Extensions (would
> also effect
> OSPFv3 and IS-IS) - REPLY TO THIS ONE
>
> Hi,
>
> I would like to get some feedback on the usage of the SID/Label Binding TLV.
>
> Is there any implementation that uses SID/Label Binding TLV for
> advertising the SID/Label binding to a FEC as specified in section 6 of
> the draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions-16 or section 2.4 of
> draft-ietf-isis-segment-routing-extensions-12?
>
> If not, do we see this as something we want to preserve in the IGP SR
> drafts?
>
> ISIS uses The SID/Label Binding TLV to advertise
> prefixes to SID/Label mappings, which is known to be supported by
> several implementations and that piece needs to be preserved.
>
> thanks,
> Peter
>
> On 09/06/17 19:04 , Peter Psenak wrote:
> > Acee,
> >
> > my question is whether we need the whole section 6 and the SID/Label
> > Binding Sub-TLV that it specifies. In OSPF Binding SID is not used for
> > SRMS advertisement like in ISIS.
> >
> > thanks,
> > Peter
> >
> >
> >
> > On 09/06/17 16:45 , Acee Lindem (acee) wrote:
> >> Corrected IS-IS WG alias – Please reply to this one.
> >> Thanks,
> >> Acee
> >>
> >> From: Acee Lindem <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
> >> Date: Friday, June 9, 2017 at 10:42 AM
> >> To: OSPF WG List <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>,
> >> "[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>" <[email protected]
> >> <mailto:[email protected]>>, "[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>"
> >> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
> >> Cc: "[email protected]
> >> <mailto:[email protected]>"
> >> <[email protected]
> >> <mailto:[email protected]>>
> >> Subject: OSPFv2 Segment Routing Extensions ERO Extensions (would also
> >> effect OSPFv3 and IS-IS)
> >>
> >> Hi OSPF, ISIS, and SPRING WGs,
> >>
> >> As part of the Alia’s AD review, she uncovered the fact that the ERO
> >> extensions in 6.1 and 6.2 are specified as far as encoding but are
> >> not specified as far as usage in any IGP or SPRING document. As
> >> document shepherd, my proposal is that they simply be removed since
> >> they were incorporated as part of a draft merge and it appears that
> >> no one has implemented them (other than parsing). We could also
> >> deprecate types (4-8) in the OSPFv2 Extended Prefix LSA Sub-TLV
> >> registry to delay usage of these code points for some time (or
> >> indefinitely ;^).
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Acee
> >>
> >
> > .
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> OSPF mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations
confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc
pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce
message par erreur, veuillez le signaler
a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages
electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,
Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou
falsifie. Merci.
This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged
information that may be protected by law;
they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.
If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete
this message and its attachments.
As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been
modified, changed or falsified.
Thank you.
_______________________________________________
OSPF mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf
