Hi Acee, Per my understanding Link Local/Remote ID Sub-TLV is to be conveyed in area-scope LSA to uniquely identify link between pair of routers. For link-local scope another Sub-TLV was introduced, for discovery of link IDs by two neighbors.
May be, it is possible to reuse Link Local/Remote ID Sub-TLV (with Remote ID = 0) of Link TLV in link-local scope LSA, but the RFC follows another approach - to use another Sub-TLV and another TLV. I am not sure that we needed dedicated top-level TLV, though idea to use separate Sub-TLV seems to be reasonable. Thank you! Best regards, Alexander Okonnikov ________________________________ От: Acee Lindem (acee) <[email protected]> Отправлено: вторник, февраля 5, 2019 20:21 Кому: Alexander Okonnikov; [email protected]; [email protected] Тема: Re: [Lsr] OSPF TE Link Local TLV Hi Alex, From: Lsr <[email protected]> on behalf of Alexander Okonnikov <[email protected]> Date: Tuesday, February 5, 2019 at 7:48 AM To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Subject: [Lsr] OSPF TE Link Local TLV Hi, I have question regarding RFC 4203, Section 3. That section introduces top-level TLV type 4 (Link Local TLV) and, at the same time, describes Link Local Identifier TLV. I guess that latter in fact is Sub-TLV of Link Local TLV.. Also, IANA Considerations section doesn't mention that Sub-TLV, but only introduction of Link Local TLV. IANA has no corresponding registry - "Types for Sub-TLVs of Link Local TLV (Value 4)". I believe this example is actually wrong and section 3 should refer to the top-level Link TLV (value 2) defined in RFC 3630. The Link Local Identifier is the one advertised in Link Local/Remote Identifiers Sub-TLV (type 11) defined in RFC 4203 section 1.1. Hope this helps, Acee Thanks in advance. Best regards, Alexander Okonnikov
_______________________________________________ Lsr mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr
