Hi Peng,
On 29/02/2020 07:41, [email protected] wrote:
Hi Peter
Please see the difference rules of TE metric in Flex-algo draft and RFC5305.
For the link without TE metric attribute, in Flex-algo draft it will be
excluded from FA plane that configured TE metric type, but in RFC5305
the IGP metric of the link can be as replacement.
Please see if they can be consistent ?
no, we do not want to fallback from one metric to other in case of
flex-algo. RFC5305 is irrelevant in this case, as flex-algo is a
completely different application.
thanks,
Peter
Flex-algo draft:
section 12. Calculation of Flexible Algorithm Paths
Rule-5:
5. If the Flex-Algorithm definition uses other than IGP metric
(Section 5), and such metric is not advertised for the particular
link in a topology for which the computation is done, such link
MUST be pruned from the computation. A metric of value 0 MUST NOT
be assumed in such case.
RFC5305:
section 3.7. Sub-TLV 18: Traffic Engineering Default Metric
This sub-TLV is optional. This sub-TLV SHOULD appear once at most in
each extended IS reachability TLV. If a link is advertised without
this sub-TLV, traffic engineering SPF calculations MUST use the
normal default metric of this link, which is advertised in the fixed
part of the extended IS reachability TLV.
_______________________________________________
Lsr mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr
