Robert, On 23/08/2021 11:00, Robert Raszuk wrote:
Peter,> Question: Can I use UDABM to set bits in metrics for use with selective > flex-algo topologies ? no, all flex-algo constraints are defined in the flex-algo draft. That's news to me. And from what I am seeing not only to me.So I ask vendor X & Y to allow me to set 2 bits in UDABM (that already is not user defined but vendor defined, but ok). Then I signal some of the existing metric with bits set only in UDABM. And I specify to run Dijkstra on it. As a result I build a new topology and start forwarding traffic via it.
above would not be interoperable with any standard flex-algo implementation that follows the existing spec.
So the only practical difference this topology has vs identical one buildl with flex-algo SABM bit is that I used a different bit to propagate the metric selectively for this topology (rather then sending it with X-bit and applying affinities all over the place).
1. using X-bit and affinities is standardized and as such interoperable. Using IDABM is not.
2. I don't see why setting a UDABM bits on set of links is any better to setting affinities.
It seems that the current version of flex-algo draft has a bunch of hidden assumptions - maybe it is past WG last call - but I do ask to state explicitly there a sentence indicating that UDABM bits can not be used to signal metrics for it.
as I said previously, constraints are defined there, and usage of UDABM is not there. And even if you want to add it to the spec, it would not be possible because of the nature of the UDABM itself.
I don't think this requires a new WG last call as this is purely clarification not a major change.
no, usage of UDABM is outside of IETF specification as specified in RFC8919. thanks, Peter
Thx for sharing it ... Robert
_______________________________________________ Lsr mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr
