Hi all, This draft attempts to codify existing practice. If you run out of space in a TLV, generate another TLV of the same type and continue. Ditto sub-TLVs and sub-sub-TLVs.
Comments welcome. T > Begin forwarded message: > > From: internet-dra...@ietf.org > Subject: New Version Notification for draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv-00.txt > Date: January 21, 2022 at 4:55:01 PM PST > To: <ant...@ietfa.amsl.com>, "Chris Bowers" <cbo...@juniper.net>, "Les > Ginsberg" <ginsb...@cisco.com>, "Parag Kaneriya" <pkane...@juniper.net>, > "Shraddha Hegde" <shrad...@juniper.net>, <t...@ietfa.amsl.com>, "Tony Li" > <tony...@tony.li>, "Tony Przygienda" <p...@juniper.net> > > > A new version of I-D, draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv-00.txt > has been successfully submitted by Tony Li, and posted to the > IETF repository. > > Name: draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv > Revision: 00 > Title: Multiple TLV Instances in IS-IS > Document date: 2022-01-21 > Group: Individual Submission > Pages: 7 > URL: > https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv-00.txt > Status: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv/ > Htmlized: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-pkaneria-lsr-multi-tlv > > > Abstract: > Emerging technologies are adding information into IS-IS TLVs at a > steady pace while deployment scales are simultaneously increasing. > This causes the contents of many critical TLVs to exceed the > currently supported limit of 255 octets. Extensions such as > [RFC7356] require significant IS-IS changes that could help address > the problem, but a less drastic solution would be beneficial. This > document codifies the common mechanism of extending the TLV space > through multiple TLV instances. > > > > > The IETF Secretariat > >
_______________________________________________ Lsr mailing list Lsr@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr
