Hi Alvaro,

done.

Have some issues posting the new ospfv2 draft, so requested manual posting.

thanks,
Peter

On 16/11/18 22:40 , Alvaro Retana wrote:
[Took the ops-dir and the ietf@ietf lists off.]

Hi!

Joe makes a really good point below about the TLV types and RFC7770.  It
looks like we all missed it! :-(

To quote Peter (from a message in this thread), "I don't think it is
good to specify the behavior which is described somewhere else.”

Looking at -18, Section 4
(draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment-routing-extensions) has the exact same
text [*] as Section 3 in draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions.
Given that the IANA allocation is done
in draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions, and
that draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment-routing-extensions refers back to
it, then I would like to see the following changes:

(1) In draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions, Section 3:

<OLD>
These SR capabilities are advertised in the Router Information Opaque
LSA (defined in [RFC7770]).

<NEW>
These SR capabilities are advertised in the Router Information Opaque
LSA (defined in [RFC7770]).  The TLVs defined below are applicable to
both OSPFv2 and OSPFv3; see also
[ID.ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment-routing-extensions].

…and add an Informative reference to
draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment-routing-extensions.

(2) In draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment-routing-extensions, replace the
entire Section 4 with:

"
Segment Routing requires some additional router capabilities to be
advertised to other routers in the area.

These SR capabilities are advertised in the OSPFv3 Router Information
Opaque LSA (defined in [RFC7770]), and specified in
[ID.ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions].
“


Even though draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions is already with
the RFC Editor, it is waiting
for draft-ietf-spring-segment-routing-mpls, so we can still make
changes.  Please submit a new version (and send an update of the XML to
the rfc-editor).

I am scheduling draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment-routing-extensions on the
Dec/6 IESG Telechat.  Please submit an update before the end of this month.

Thanks!!

Alvaro.



[*] Except for the OSPFv3 being specifically called out, and a couple of
other minor points.

On October 30, 2018 at 8:05:27 AM, Peter Psenak (ppse...@cisco.com
<mailto:ppse...@cisco.com>) wrote:

> With respect to TLV types 8, 9, 14, and 15, they are defined in
> draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions, and it took me a while to figure
> out where you were getting those values and why they weren't spelled out in 
the
> IANA considerations. You have a normative reference to this, which is good,
> but you only mention it with respect to the algorithm parameters. I think
> another mention is required.
>
> I'm going to be pedantic here. According to RFC7770, when a new OSPF Router
> Information LSA TLV is defined, the spec needs to explicitly state if it's
> applicable to OSPFv2, v3, or both. While you reference the TLVs from
> draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions, I didn't see that either document
> _explicitly_ states that they are applicable to both.

##PP
added the following to each of the values:

Type: X as defined in [I-D.ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions] and
aplicable to OSPFv3.

_______________________________________________
Lsr mailing list
Lsr@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr

Reply via email to