Hi Les, On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 10:37 AM, Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) < ginsb...@cisco.com> wrote:
> Folks – > > > > > > The conflict for SRMS Preference sub-TLV in https://tools.ietf.org/html/ > draft-ietf-isis-segment-routing-extensions-13#section-3.4 has already > been noted and has been eliminated in the new version of the IS-IS SR draft > which I expect to publish tomorrow. Note that although the IS-IS SR draft > was given early allocation of some code points, a couple more sub-TLVs have > been defined since then and these values have not yet been assigned by > IANA. SRMS preference was one of them – though at the time of the writing > of the version which added this the early allocation for MSD had not yet > happened. > Fine - but this is the exact issue with having "suggested" values that aren't allocated in drafts. I am really not happy with such text. I have been pushing and happy to approve early allocations. > Alia - I believe the MSD draft already is using the code points which have > been assigned by early allocation – so I do not know what further update > you believe is required in that document. > > ??? > In the IANA section, it should refer to the values as allocated - not suggested or potential. > Les > > > > > > *From:* Isis-wg [mailto:isis-wg-boun...@ietf.org] *On Behalf Of *Alia > Atlas > *Sent:* Thursday, December 14, 2017 7:01 AM > *To:* Harish R Prabhu <harish.r.pra...@gmail.com> > *Cc:* draft-ietf-isis-segment-routing-extensi...@ietf.org; > isis-wg@ietf.org; draft-ietf-isis-segment-routing-...@ietf.org > *Subject:* Re: [Isis-wg] TLV conflict > > > > Hi Harish, > > > > Please take a look at > > https://www.iana.org/assignments/isis-tlv-codepoints/isis-tlv- > codepoints.xhtml#isis-tlv-codepoints-242 > > where it is clear that draft-ietf-isis-segment-routing-msd has an early > temporary registration for type 23. > > > draft-ietf-isis-segment-routing-msd-02 should be updated to clearly state > the IANA allocations that have already happened. > > > > draft-ietf-isis-segment-routing-extensions-13 MUST be updated to clearly > state the IANA allocations > that have already happened for it (e.g. values 2 & 19) and to STOP > SQUATTING on already allocated > code-points. > > > > Thank you for bringing this to our attention! > > > > Regards, > > Alia > > > > > > On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 9:41 AM, Harish R Prabhu < > harish.r.pra...@gmail.com> wrote: > > While going through the I-Ds pertaining to SR attributes, it was found > that the following 2 TLVs have been assigned the same Type number > > SRMS Preference Sub-TLV : > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-isis-segment- > routing-extensions-13#section-3.4 > > Node MSD Advertisement : > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-isis-segment-routing-msd-02#page-4 > > Both these sections talk about different sub tlvs under > router_capabilities TLV, but type value assigned is 23 for both. > > Request to address this. > > Thanks, > -- > Harish R Prabhu > Bangalore, India. > mailtp:harish.r.pra...@gmail.com > > _______________________________________________ > Isis-wg mailing list > Isis-wg@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/isis-wg > > >
_______________________________________________ Isis-wg mailing list Isis-wg@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/isis-wg
