Hi Chris,
On 07/03/2020 15:46, Christian Hopps wrote:
1) I think we should have an IANA registry instead of just a table defined in
section 10 of draft-ietf-lsr-isis-srv6-extensions-06.
The registry could be cross-referenced by and to "SRv6 Endpoint Behaviors" for
each protocol carrying these behaviors (IS-IS, OSPFv3, ...). If/when new behaviors are
added they could then update where they are supposed to be advertised in the underlying
protocols.
why do we need a protocol specific registry to advertise values that are
defined in another protocol independent registry? I have never seen such
a duplication. Looks completely redundant to me.
2) It's odd that we are referring to the section as "Legal Behaviors" in the TLV definitions, and then in the actual section
using "MAY" terms and no "MUST"/"MUST NOT", but then using "Yes" and "No" in the table.
a) Legal Behavior - refers to the set of values defined in the
[I-D.ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming] which can be advertised in a
particular TLV
b) We can not use MUST in section 10, as all these TLVs are optional
c) Yes/No means whether the particular behavior is allowed in the
particular END-SID TLV.
Are these suggestions or are they documenting the required behavior?
these are limitations as to which behavior is allowed to be advertised
in which TLV.
thanks,
Peter
Thanks,
Chris.
_______________________________________________
Lsr mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr
