Hi Aijun,
And the BIS changes are more clarifications than changes to the existing RFC
8919 and RFC 8920 RFCs.
Thanks,
Acee
On 8/9/22, 5:57 AM, "Peter Psenak" <ppse...@cisco.com> wrote:
Aijun,
On 09/08/2022 05:35, Aijun Wang wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am wondering why we are so hurry to obsolete RFC8919, given that only
the
> minor parts are updated (mainly the zero length SABM/UABM, and other
> interoperability issues).
> There may be other methods to advertise the application specific
attributes.
>>From my POV, the rules, implementation of ASLA are still complex, the
> deployment of them are challenging.
>
> Is there any real deployment for RFC8919 until now?
sure there are deployments of it. Flex-algo is built around RFC8919, so
any network where flex-algo is used with ISIS is using RFC8919.
Peter
>
> Best Regards
>
> Aijun Wang
> China Telecom
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: lsr-boun...@ietf.org <lsr-boun...@ietf.org> On Behalf Of Christian
> Hopps
> Sent: Monday, August 8, 2022 6:17 PM
> To: lsr@ietf.org
> Cc: cho...@chopps.org; lsr-cha...@ietf.org; lsr-...@ietf.org
> Subject: [Lsr] WG adoption call for draft-ginsberg-lsr-rfc8919bis-02
>
>
> Hi Folks,
>
> This begins a 2 week WG Adoption Call for the following draft:
>
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ginsberg-lsr-rfc8919bis/
>
> Please indicate your support or objections by August 22nd, 2022.
>
> Authors, please respond to the list indicating whether you are aware of
any
> IPR that applies to these drafts.
>
> Thanks,
> Chris.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Lsr mailing list
> Lsr@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr
>
_______________________________________________
Lsr mailing list
Lsr@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr
