i>
Cc: lsr@ietf.org<mailto:lsr@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Lsr] Fwd: I-D Action: draft-ietf-lsr-isis-area-proxy-03.txt
Hi Tony,
I've read the diff for -03 and -04.
The new encoding of the Area SID is good for me.
And thank you for listening to my use case and suggestion.
Thanks,
--Bruno
F
uno
From: Lsr [mailto:lsr-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
bruno.decra...@orange.com<mailto:bruno.decra...@orange.com>
Sent: Friday, September 4, 2020 2:29 PM
To: tony...@tony.li<mailto:tony...@tony.li>
Cc: lsr@ietf.org<mailto:lsr@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Lsr] Fwd: I-D Action: draft-ietf-l
Subject: [Lsr] Fwd: I-D Action: draft-ietf-lsr-isis-area-proxy-03.txt
Hi folks,
This updated draft has been published for a few weeks now. We would like to
solicit your opinion on this. In particular, we have changed the encoding of
the Area SID. Do you find this encoding adequate
ext.
One way to mitigate this is to have the IERs advertise a LAN Priority of 0 in
their IIHs so as to avoid this case.
Les
From: Lsr On Behalf Of tony...@tony.li
Sent: Monday, August 24, 2020 10:02 AM
To: lsr@ietf.org
Subject: [Lsr] Fwd: I-D Action: draft-ietf-lsr-isis-area-proxy-03.txt
Hi Tony & WG,
The changes which went into sections 4.3.2 & 4.4.13 do address my
suggestions made earlier to the list. So I do support the current version.
With the option of having a configurable area prefix this delivers quite a
powerful extension.
Also the current text says:
"Other uses of
Hi folks,
This updated draft has been published for a few weeks now. We would like to
solicit your opinion on this. In particular, we have changed the encoding of
the Area SID. Do you find this encoding adequate and appropriate?
Thanks,
Tony
> Begin forwarded message:
>
> From:
