Olivier,

+1 Peter.
There’s has been significant amount of discussions on the topic some time ago, 
mostly with Chris Bowers. Please take a look, should provide more context.

Regards,
Jeff

> On Apr 12, 2019, at 15:27, Peter Psenak <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> Hi Oliver,
> 
> There are two major purposes served by the drafts:
> 
> 1)Support of incongruent topologies for different applications
> 
> 2)Advertisement of application specific values even on links that are in
> use by multiple applications
> 
> These issues are clearly articulated in the Introductions of both
> drafts. LSR WG acknowledged them a while back and decided to address
> them.
> 
> Issue #1 has already had a significant impact on early deployments of
> SRTE in networks where there is partial deployment of SR in the presence
> of RSVP-TE.
> 
> Issue #2 will be seen in deployments where Flex-Algo and SRTE (or
> RSVP-TE) are also present. Early implementers of Flex-Algo can attest to
> this.
> 
> It is simply not possible to address these issues with the existing
> single set of application independent advertisements.
> 
> The solutions we provide in both drafts allow to share the link
> attributes between application as well as keep them separate if that is
> what is required.
> 
> thanks,
> Peter
> 
>> On 11/04/2019 19:43 , [email protected] wrote:
>> Hi,
>> 
>> I'm not in favour of this draft.
>> 
>> As already mention, I don't see the interest to duplicate TE attributes
>> in new Extended Link Opaque LSA. For me, it is only a matter of
>> implementation to look at various place in the OSPF TE Database to take
>> Traffic Engineering information.
>> 
>> From an operator perspective, it is already hard to manage TE attribute
>> and I'm pretty sure that we could not ask network management team to
>> maintain 2 systems for certainly a long period of time as many TE
>> attributes remains in the standard Opaque LSA Traffic Engineering.
>> 
>> Regards
>> 
>> Olivier
>> 
>> 
>>> Le 11/04/2019 à 18:11, Acee Lindem (acee) a écrit :
>>> 
>>> LSR Working Group,
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> This begins a two week  WG last call for the subject document. Please
>>> enter your support or objection to the document before 12:00 AM (EDT)
>>> on Friday, April 27^th , 2019.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Thanks,
>>> Acee
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Lsr mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr
>> 
>> _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
>> 
>> Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations 
>> confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc
>> pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu 
>> ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler
>> a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages 
>> electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,
>> Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou 
>> falsifie. Merci.
>> 
>> This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged 
>> information that may be protected by law;
>> they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.
>> If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and 
>> delete this message and its attachments.
>> As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been 
>> modified, changed or falsified.
>> Thank you.
>> 
> 

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

Reply via email to