Hi Dave,
> The algorithm in draft-allan actually has the notion of upstream, downstream > and both upstream and downstream FT adjacencies. However as a generalized > form is still a WIP and has yet to demonstrate merit against any of the > other approaches on the table, I'd not be looking to suggest a specific > encoding. Thanks. > If at some point it is decided that different classes of FT adjacency are > required, simply using additional types that share the format of the > flooding path TLV would appear to be sufficient....(?) Or perhaps having a separate TLV for a unidirectional path would suffice. That would allow both paths to be encoded most optimally. Tony _______________________________________________ Lsr mailing list Lsr@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr
