On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 9:20 AM, Greg Shepherd <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 8:53 AM, Tony Przygienda <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 8:38 AM, Greg Shepherd <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> For the record, there is no SR Registry. There is only an IGP Algo Type
>>> Registry as defined in draft-ietf-ospr-segment-routing-extensions-24
>>> section 8.5
>>>
>>
>> So is that a good idea, having multiple drafts in flight with fields
>> expecting to have magic couplings to each other while leaving e'thing
>> "unspecified" to "publish RFCs" while we "decide things later"?
>>
>
> That was a pivot, but still; there is no reference, there is no coupling.
>
> Tangental: draft-ietf-ospr-segment-routing-extensions-24 has been around
> for a while, and the IGP Algo registry will be tied to this draft and it's
> fate. If anyone is expecting to use this registry outside of the scope of
> this draft, it would be in their best interest to pull the registry
> description out into a separate draft.
>
>
OK, and I agree that if such a registry is pulled and under a clear charter
of mandating multiple technologies within an independent body then a
discussion starts to make sense and what the size of that should be given
that mandates algorithms over multiple technologies (SR, unicast, mcast,
whatever) and implies a "God's eye view" of all the elements of all the
technologies (and if a computation touches elements from two technologies
they become [optionally] coupled).  We are not talking IGP registry or
multicast computation registry or SR registry then but a "wider scope
registry". Yes, that is an intriguing thought with its own validity but
outside the scope of charter we're under as BIER.  Personally, I consider
multiple, if needed loosely coupled registries for each technology a less
centralized and hence "more Internet like" solution but I see how opinions
on such a thing can diverge ...

thanks

--- tony


>
>
_______________________________________________
Isis-wg mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/isis-wg

Reply via email to