Adam - Thanx for the review.
Responses inline. > -----Original Message----- > From: Adam Roach via Datatracker <[email protected]> > Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2019 10:03 PM > To: The IESG <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected]; Christian Hopps > <[email protected]>; Uma Chunduri <[email protected]>; > [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; > [email protected] > Subject: Adam Roach's No Objection on draft-ietf-isis-segment-routing- > extensions-24: (with COMMENT) > > Adam Roach has entered the following ballot position for > draft-ietf-isis-segment-routing-extensions-24: No Objection > > When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all > email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this > introductory paragraph, however.) > > > Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html > for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. > > > The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-isis-segment-routing-extensions/ > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > COMMENT: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > Thanks for the work everyone has put into this document. I have only a small > number of minor comments. > > --------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > §2.4: > > > o 1 octet of RESERVED > > For the sake of making this byte potentially usable in the future, consider > adding text specifying something like "MUST be set to 0 on transmission, > and MUST be ignored on reception." > [Les:] Will do. > --------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > §2.4.6: > > > 10.1.1/24, Prefix-SID: Index 51 > > 10.1.2/24, Prefix-SID: Index 52 > > 10.1.3/24, Prefix-SID: Index 53 > > 10.1.4/24, Prefix-SID: Index 54 > > 10.1.5/24, Prefix-SID: Index 55 > > 10.1.6/24, Prefix-SID: Index 56 > > 10.1.7/24, Prefix-SID: Index 57 > > Please change these addresses to ranges reserved by IANA for > documentation purposes rather than those reserved for private use. > [Les:] Sorry, but this is not possible. :-) Example 2 is trying to show: 1)What the TLV encoding looks like when the prefix length is /24 or less. In such a case all four bytes of the prefix are not included in the encoded address - only the number of bytes necessary to fully specify the significant bits of the prefix are encoded. 2)With a range greater than 1, what is the prefix to SID mappings which result from the advertisement. This necessitates showing that it is the usable bits of the prefix that are incremented when mapping to the next SID in the range - in this example adding "0.0.1.0" to the prefix. RFC 5737 only reserves three disjoint /24 ranges - so this example cannot be supported using just the reserved addresses. > --------------------------------------------------------------------------- > §2.4.6: > > > 2001:DB8:1/48, Prefix-SID: Index 151 > > 2001:DB8:2/48, Prefix-SID: Index 152 > > 2001:DB8:3/48, Prefix-SID: Index 153 > > 2001:DB8:4/48, Prefix-SID: Index 154 > > Please change these IPv6 addresses to use lowercase hex digits. > See https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5952#section-4.3 > [Les:] Will do. Les _______________________________________________ Lsr mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr
