Venkat – First, you really should be looking at RFC 7794 – the use of R,N flags in prefix-sid sub-tlv only exists for backwards compatibility with early implementation of SR-MPLS. The proper place to set/read these flags is in the prefix-attributes sub-TLV as they have meaning even when SR is not deployed.
Yes – N flag can be set for a prefix that has been redistributed from another routing protocol – but implementations need to have a way to know that the redistributed prefix qualifies as a node prefix in the source protocol. The means of determining that is outside the scope of the RFC. The state of the R flag has no impact on the state on the N flag. Les From: Lsr <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Venkataratnam Naidu Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2022 12:45 AM To: [email protected] Subject: [Lsr] Clarification needed on N-flag in “prefix-sid” sub-tlv for redistributed routes Hello experts, Could you please help me to clarify the points below ? 1. Is it valid to set N-Flag in "prefix-sid" sub-tlv for redistributed routes. 2. if not valid, then what should be the receiver behavior when it receives a prefix with R&N set in "prefix-sid" sub-tlv Regards, Venkat.
_______________________________________________ Lsr mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr
