Hi Uma,
please see inline:
On 17/04/18 00:14 , Uma Chunduri wrote:
Dear All,
I am neutral to combining the content of OSPF and IS-IS into a single
draft.
However, I have 2 questions on this draft.
1.
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 | Algorithm | Metric Type |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Alg. Type | Priority |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Sub-TLVs |
+ +
| ... |
| |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
*/ Algorithm: Flex-Algorithm number. Value between 128 and 255/*
*/ inclusive./*
*/ Algorithm Type: Single octet identifying the algorithm type used/*
*/ to compute paths for the Flex-Algoritm. Values are defined in/*
*/ "IGP Algorithm Types" registry defined under "Interior Gateway/*
*/ Protocol (IGP) Parameters" IANA registries./*
Why there are two fields "Algorithm" and "Algorithm Type" ?
these are being renamed in the next update to:
Flex-Algorithm - Single octet value between 128 and 255 inclusive
IGP Alg. Type - Single octet. Value between 0 and 127 inclusive, that
identifies IGP algorithm type used to compute paths for the
Flex-Algoritm. Values are defined in "IGP Algorithm Types" registry
defined under "Interior Gateway Protocol (IGP) Parameters" IANA registries.
While algorithm-type defines currently only 2 algorithms (0-SPF and
1-Strict SPF), that space can be carved out for user defined computation
algorithms (I presume). If yes, then "Algorithm Type" becomes user
defined flexible algorithm.
2. Also some of the sub-tlvs defined in the draft doesn't seem to belong
to Router capabilities; where algorithm description is being advertised.
Flexible Algorithm Exclude Admin Group Sub-TLV
"The Flexible-Algorithm definition can specify 'colors' that are used
by the operator to exclude links during the Flex-Algorithm path
computation.
FAD Sub-TLV is a sub-TLV of the IS-IS Router Capability TLV-242.
Flexible Algorithm Exclude Admin Group Sub-TLV is a sub-TLV of the FAD
Sub-TLV.
thanks,
Peter
--
Uma C.
-----Original Message-----
From: Lsr [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Acee Lindem (acee)
Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2018 2:53 AM
To: Peter Psenak (ppsenak) <[email protected]>; [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Lsr] Flex Algorithms Drafts
Hi Peter,
Ok - we'll decide during whether to merge during the WG adoption call.
It would be a good LSR experiment for a combined draft if there are no
significant differences between the protocols that would make a combined
draft unwieldy.
Thanks,
Acee
On 4/12/18, 3:35 AM, "Peter Psenak (ppsenak)" <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Hi Acee,
On 11/04/18 22:36 , Acee Lindem (acee) wrote:
> In preparation for WG adoption and IANA early code point
allocation, I suggest that we rename the “Flexible Algorithm Definition
TLV Metric Registry” to the “Flexible Algorithm Definition TLV Metric
Type Registry” to avoid confusion as to whether we are defining the
actual metrics here. I know that in the contexts of the drafts, it is
clear but the registries are going to be on their own. Additionally,
while protocol TLV types should not be shared between protocols, it
seems this registry could be common and placed in our "Interior Gateway
Protocol (IGP) Parameters" registry.
sure I can make that change.
>
> Finally, the OSPF version has a typo in section 8.2. The last two
types should be 2 and 3.
right, will fix it.
>
> o 0 - Reserved
>
> o 1 - Flexible Algorithm Exclude Admin Group Sub-TLV
>
> o 1 - Flexible Algorithm Include-Any Admin Group Sub-TLV
>
> o 1 - Flexible Algorithm Exclude-All Group Sub-TLV
>
> Also, how so the authors feel about combining the drafts? I know
the IS-IS version has had more discussion and wouldn't want to hold it
up if there is a possibility. I don't feel strongly one way or another.
I'm fine both ways.
thanks,
Peter
>
> Thanks,
> Acee
>
_______________________________________________
Lsr mailing list
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr
_______________________________________________
Lsr mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr
