Hi, Tony: -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Tony Li Sent: Wednesday, January 12, 2022 4:24 AM To: Aijun Wang <[email protected]> Cc: lsr <[email protected]>; [email protected]; Christian Hopps <[email protected]>; [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call for draft-wang-lsr-stub-link-attributes-02
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] I checked the above link again and it work from my side. Anyway, I have copied the key points of the above link in the following sentences. > "[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. [WAJ] Then we should update RFC5316, RFC5292, RFC3630 etc. It may also influence the existing deployment. There are also other situations that the RFC5316 and RFC5292 does not cover, for example, for the associated information that the edge computing wants to utilize etc. Start from the clean slate will be more acceptable? T _______________________________________________ Lsr mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr _______________________________________________ Lsr mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr
