Hi Aijun, > We are trying to reuse the existing mechanism to solve such problem, but as > mentioned in > https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lsr/kTWLct7VgEfOxexdwzwcFS3Ctqc/:
This link doesn’t work. > "[WAJ] Reuse the Link TLV that defined in inter-AS-TE-v2/v3 to contain such > information is possible, but we should still to define the link type(as that > in RFC3630) to identify the stub-link, also the prefixes related sub-TLV. > Comparing the two different approaches, we select to define one new sub-TLV > to contain the above information in one place together." > > And as mentioned in Les, there are strict requirement for the inclusion of > "Remote-AS", "IPv4/IPv6 Remote ASBR ID" sub-TLV in RFC5316(similar for > RFC5292). In almost all of the inter-AS scenario(numbered inter-as links), > these information needn't be configured and transferred. > > Then redefine the new stub-link TLV is the reasonable way, it also provides > the container for other possible information. It would seem to me that if you re-used existing TLVs, you could be adding subTLVs to carry any additional information. This would probably be a lot cleaner. T _______________________________________________ Lsr mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr
