Ben - Sorry - there was a typo - correct specification number is ISO 10589. It is freely available here: https://standards.iso.org/ittf/PubliclyAvailableStandards/index.html
Les > -----Original Message----- > From: Benjamin Kaduk <ka...@mit.edu> > Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2020 1:01 PM > To: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) <ginsb...@cisco.com> > Cc: The IESG <i...@ietf.org>; draft-ietf-isis-te-...@ietf.org; lsr- > cha...@ietf.org; lsr@ietf.org; Acee Lindem (acee) <a...@cisco.com>; > aretana.i...@gmail.com > Subject: Re: Benjamin Kaduk's Discuss on draft-ietf-isis-te-app-14: (with > DISCUSS and COMMENT) > > Hi Les, > > On Thu, Jun 11, 2020 at 04:48:00PM +0000, Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) wrote: > > Benjamin - > > > > > > > > Thanx for your review. > > > > Responses inline. > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > From: Benjamin Kaduk via Datatracker <nore...@ietf.org> > > > > > Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2020 12:42 AM > > > > > To: The IESG <i...@ietf.org> > > > > > Cc: draft-ietf-isis-te-...@ietf.org; lsr-cha...@ietf.org; lsr@ietf.org; > > > Acee > > > > > Lindem (acee) <a...@cisco.com>; aretana.i...@gmail.com; Acee Lindem > > > > > (acee) <a...@cisco.com> > > > > > Subject: Benjamin Kaduk's Discuss on draft-ietf-isis-te-app-14: (with > DISCUSS > > > > > and COMMENT) > > > > > > > > > > Benjamin Kaduk has entered the following ballot position for > > > > > draft-ietf-isis-te-app-14: Discuss > > > > > > > > > > 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-te-app/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > DISCUSS: > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > > > > > My apologies if this is super-obvious and I'm just missing it ... but > > > > > Section 4.3 dictates that part of the value for the application-specific > > > > > SRLG TLV is a "Neighbor System-ID + pseudo-node ID (7 octets)". Where > > > > > are these defined? (We don't exactly say that we're reusing the > structure > > > > > from, e.g., TLV 138, which I note refers to the seventh octet as > > > > > "pseudonode number", not "pseudo-node ID". Similarly for the > > > > > interpretation of the SRLG value(s). Do we just need to reference that > > > > > we're reusing the encoding from RFC 5307 (or similar) or are some > > > > > changes needed? > > > > > > > > > [Les:] “system ID” and “pseudo-node ID” derive from the IS-IS base > specification [ISO 19589] > > Ah, so definitely "super-obvious", and just a consequence of my never > actually getting my hands on a copy of ISO 19589 (obvious paths seem to ask > for 200 CHF). > > Sorry for the noise; I will go clear now (and will respond to the comment > section later). > > -Ben _______________________________________________ Lsr mailing list Lsr@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr
