Tony,
ok, seems like Gunter and you share the same concerns. Will clarify the
two points discussed.
thanks,
Peter
On 07/08/2020 17:30, tony...@tony.li wrote:
Peter,
. The existing description in section 5.1 indicate that legacy encoding
(RFC7810 and RFC5305) is used for link attributes. That is not correct based
upon section 11. To avoid ambiguity can an explicit reference be added for
[I-D.ietf-isis-te-app]?
well, section 5.1. is correct. The Min Unidirectional Link Delay and TE Default
metric respectively were defined in RFC7810 and RFC5305. The fact that we
advertise them in ASLA does not change their origin.
Could we please get a clarification in section 5.1 then? The references there
to 7810 and 5305 without any qualification strongly suggest that the encoding
from those RFCs should be used.
Could in section 11 be explicit reference to (e)ag, te-metric and delay link
attributes MUST be encoded using ASLA..
Section 11 already says:
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].
I'm not sure what else can we say. Listing the ones we use today wold be
dangerous, because we may define additional ones later and we want the ASLA to
be mandatory for all of them.
You could add a sentence that says:
In particular, the Min Unidirectional Link Delay, TE Default Metric,
Administrative Group, Extended Administrative Group, Shared Risk Link Group
Value TLVs are all to be encoded iin the ASLA advertisements for use with
FlexAlgo.
Please add any I missed.
Regards,
Tony
_______________________________________________
Lsr mailing list
Lsr@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr
