Hi Aijun, > > 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?
Yes, I’m suggesting that you consider a way of using existing TLVs and adding subTLVs to them in order to convey the information. A big point of using TLV encoding in the first place is to provide extensibility. It would be a design error not to use it, when appropriate. Creating a new entity every time you add a feature leads to more complexity in the design and in the resulting code. Tony
_______________________________________________ Lsr mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr
