Hi Gunter,
On 06/08/2020 18:31, Van De Velde, Gunter (Nokia - BE/Antwerp) wrote:
Hi Authors, All,
My understanding is that for new LSR applications we should select
either “ASLA encoding” or select “legacy encoding” for all Link attributes.
Not a mixture of both. There is a clear long term technology benefit of
using all ASLA encoding.
In draft-ietf-lsr-flex-algo-08 “Section 11: Advertisement of Link
Attributes for Flex-Algorithm” we find that use of ASLA is mandated
“
Link attribute advertisements that are to be used during Flex-
Algorithm calculation MUST use the Application Specific Link
Attribute (ASLA) advertisements defined in [I-D.ietf-isis-te-app] or
[I-D.ietf-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse].
“
This is a ‘normative’ instruction that link attributes MUST use ASLA
encoding.
Hence link attributes like (e)ag, te-metric and delay MUST be ASLA encoded.
Is that correct understanding?
yes, for any link attributes used for flex-algo.
If yes, it is odd that some attributes are new ASLA and some other are
non-future proof ‘LEGACY’ encodings
* Example#1: section 5.1 “ISIS Flexible Algorithm Definition Sub-TLV”
and section 5.2 “OSPF Flexible Algorithm Definition TLV” point
towards legacy encodings RFC7810 and RFC5305 (idnit RFC7810 is
obsoleted by RFC8570).
* Example#2: section 5.2 “OSPF Flexible Algorithm Definition TLV” the
normative references are missing
ASLA is link-attributes related (Application Specific Link Attributes).
ASLA can only be used to encode link attributes. FAD is not a link
attribute, so it can not use ASLA.
thanks,
Peter
Sections 5.1 and 5.2 should update the link attribute encoding
references to reflect ASLA encoding as specified in section 11.
The text referencing legacy encodings should be removed
G/
_______________________________________________
Lsr mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr
