Hi authors,


I have reviewed the document and agree with Les.

Please remove the mechanisms that haven't been defined in the existing 
Flex-algo based on draft-ietf-lsr-flex-algo, including using algorithm related 
IGP-Adjacency SID to allocate resource/select queue/distinguish 
traffic/determine Qos Policy, which will make the readers confused and blur the 
theme of document.



Best

Xuesong



-----Original Message-----
From: Lsr [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Les Ginsberg (ginsberg)
Sent: Wednesday, June 2, 2021 1:04 PM
To: Christian Hopps <[email protected]>; [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Lsr] LSR WG Adoption Call for "Algorithm Related IGP-Adjacency 
SID Advertisement"



I support adoption of this draft.



I believe that there are use cases for algorithm specific adjacency-sids - 
primarily (and non-controversially) to provide algorithm specific repair paths.



As others have commented, other use cases mentioned in this draft involve 
introducing significant new functionality which has not been discussed or 
accepted by the WG (e.g., resource allocation). This topic deserves to be 
reviewed by the WG on its own merit in a separate draft.



This draft should confine itself to defining the new advertisements required to 
support algorithm specific adjacency-sids and discussing the repair path use 
case.



I would also like to see some discussion of deployment considerations including:



a)When to allocate/advertise algorithm specific adjacency-sids vs when to 
continue to use algorithm independent adjacency sids.

b)Strict-SID algo-sids are not useful

c)Use case should drive the type(s) of algorithm specific adjacency-sids 
allocated/advertised. For example,  if primary use case is for algorithm 
specific repair paths, then only sids with B flag set ("eligible for 
protection") are required.



Simply allocating algorithm specific adjacency SIDs for all supported 
algorithms all the time is a recipe for bloating the protocol link 
advertisements unnecessarily.



   Les



> -----Original Message-----

> From: Lsr <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> On Behalf Of 
> Christian Hopps

> Sent: Wednesday, May 26, 2021 1:57 PM

> To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>

> Cc: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>

> Subject: [Lsr] LSR WG Adoption Call for "Algorithm Related

> IGP-Adjacency SID Advertisement"

>

>

> Hi Folks,

>

> This begins a 2 week WG Adoption Call for the following draft:

>

> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-peng-lsr-algorithm-related-adja

> cency-

> sid/

>

> Please indicate your support or objections by June 9th, 2021

>

> Authors, please respond to the list indicating whether you are aware

> of any IPR that applies to this draft.

>

> Thanks,

> Acee and Chris.

>

> _______________________________________________

> Lsr mailing list

> [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>

> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr



_______________________________________________

Lsr mailing list

[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>

https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr
_______________________________________________
Lsr mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr

Reply via email to