Hi Ran, Tony,
I believe the primary use case for algorithm specific adj-SID is for the
protected Adj-SID. The backup path of such Adj-SID follows the algo
specific constraints.
thanks,
Peter
On 11/03/2021 09:51, [email protected] wrote:
Hi Tony,
Thanks for your comments. The reason why this draft is proposed is that:
Currently, the current FA draft only defines that the algorithm
identifier is included as part of a Prefix-SID advertisement,that maybe
not satisfy some scenarios where multiple algorithm share the same link
resource.
For example, an SR-TE policy may be instantiated within specific
Flex-algo plane, i.e.,the SID list requires to include algorithm related
SIDs. An algorithm-unware Adjacency-SID included in the SID list can
just steer the packet towards the link, but can not apply different QoS
policy for different algorithm.
Another example is that the TI-LFA backup path computed in
Flex-algo plane may also contain an algorithm-unware Adjacency-SID,
which maybe also used in other SR-TE instance that carries other service.
This document complement that the algorithm identifier can be also
included as part of an Adjacency-SID advertisement for SR-MPLS.
Best Regards,
Ran
_______________________________________________
Lsr mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr
