Mahend –

In regards to IPv4/IPv6, in IS-IS there are two ways to support this:

1)Multi-topology mode

Here there are topology specific neighbor advertisements and therefore topology 
specific link attribute advertisements. Hence no benefit from having 
afi-specific bits.

2)Single topology mode

Both address-families are supported on a single topology. Every link in the 
topology MUST support both address families for this configuration to work.
So although we do not have afi specific neighbors, the topology congruence 
argues against any need for AFI specific link attribute advertisements.

As regards SR-MPLS/SRv6, I expect that – other than as a transition strategy – 
we won’t have deployments where both technologies are in use for IPv6.  (You 
certainly could have SR-MPLS for IPv4 and SRv6 for IPv6.) Therefore, in 
combination with MT, there does not seem to be a use case for different 
advertisements for SR-MPLS/SRv6.

(BTW, the same arguments hold for OSPF – and even more so because there would 
be different instances of the protocol for each address family.)

   Les


From: Mahend Negi <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, June 09, 2018 7:35 PM
To: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) 
<[email protected]>; [email protected]
Subject: Gentle Reminder!!!Re: draft-ietf-isis-te-app: Clarification on 
Application Identifier bits

Dear Authors,

Could you please help me with the query.

Please confirm about the new bit for SRv6-TE applications.
We are working on this draft implementation.

Regards,
Mahendra
On Wed, Jun 6, 2018, 11:49 Mahend Negi 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:

Dear Authors,
I seek few clarifications on "Application Identifier bits".

As defined in the draft:


R-bit: RSVP-TE

S-bit: Segment Routing Traffic Engineering

F-bit: Loop Free Alternate

X-bit: Flex-Algo



Am I right, when I say:

R-bit: For RSVP-TE on IPv6 and IPv4 networks.

S-bit: For SR MPLS and SRv6-TE applications.



I think a bit to be allocated for SRv6-TE applications?

Not sure about RSVP-TE IPv6 case.

If you please your opinion.



Regards,

Mahendra
_______________________________________________
Lsr mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr

Reply via email to