> On Mar 4, 2022, at 8:50 AM, Peter Psenak <[email protected]> wrote: > > not at all. > > I just don't want to get into business of merging info from several FAD's > sub-TLVs of the same type unless there is a compelling reason to do so? So > far I have not seen any. Asking for 100s of excluded SRLGs in the FAD does > not seem like a realistic case to me.
Then how do we deal with subTLV overflow? T
_______________________________________________ Lsr mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr
