Hi Acee,
Within Open Source Free Range Routing project, https://frrouting.org, we
simply skip this RESERVED byte and use standard TLV header of 4 bytes
only like the other TE metric Extensions parameters.
Detail are here:
https://github.com/FRRouting/frr/blob/master/isisd/isis_te.h lines 216
to 221
So, this errata is fine for me. Adding extra byte will add extra code as
this TLV becomes not standard regarding the other ones.
Regards,
Olivier
Le 22/03/2018 à 11:20, Acee Lindem (acee) a écrit :
Hi Jeff, et al,
Speaking as a WG member:
I agree there should be an Errata here but the interpretation taken by at least
one implementation is to update the length to 5 rather than remove the RESERVED
octet. I'd like to hear what other implementations have done.
Thanks,
Acee
On 3/22/18, 6:49 AM, "Lsr on behalf of RFC Errata System" <[email protected]
on behalf of [email protected]> wrote:
The following errata report has been submitted for RFC7810,
"IS-IS Traffic Engineering (TE) Metric Extensions".
--------------------------------------
You may review the report below and at:
http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid5293
--------------------------------------
Type: Editorial
Reported by: Jeffrey Haas <[email protected]>
Section: 4.5-4.7
Original Text
-------------
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Type | Length | RESERVED |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Residual Bandwidth |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
where:
Type: 37
Length: 4
RESERVED: This field is reserved for future use
Corrected Text
--------------
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Type | Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Residual Bandwidth |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
where:
Type: 37
Length: 4
Notes
-----
In sections 4.5, 4.6 and 4.7, a RESERVED field is in the diagram and the
text. However, the length field of each of these TLVs is 4. The RESERVED
field is thus not present and should be removed in future editions of this
document.
Instructions:
-------------
This erratum is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, please
use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or
rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party
can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary.
--------------------------------------
RFC7810 (draft-ietf-isis-te-metric-extensions-11)
--------------------------------------
Title : IS-IS Traffic Engineering (TE) Metric Extensions
Publication Date : May 2016
Author(s) : S. Previdi, Ed., S. Giacalone, D. Ward, J. Drake, Q.
Wu
Category : PROPOSED STANDARD
Source : IS-IS for IP Internets
Area : Routing
Stream : IETF
Verifying Party : IESG
_______________________________________________
Lsr mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr
_______________________________________________
Lsr mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr
--
logo Orange <http://www.orange.com>
Olivier Dugeon
Senior research engineer in QoS and network control
Open Source Referent
Orange/IMT/OLN/WTC/IEE/OPEN
fixe : +33 2 96 07 28 80
mobile : +33 6 82 90 37 85
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
_______________________________________________
Lsr mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr
