Hi Michael, This applies to any node. There is no distinction between ABR/non-ABR. It is also a generic rule and not specific to M-flag.
Thanks, Ketan On Mon, Apr 24, 2023 at 7:35 PM Michael Gorokhovsky < [email protected]> wrote: > Adding the workgroup > > > > *From:* Michael Gorokhovsky > *Sent:* Monday, April 24, 2023 5:03 PM > *To:* [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; > [email protected]; [email protected] > *Cc:* Alexander Vainshtein <[email protected]> > *Subject:* IGP Flexible Algorithm (RFC 9350) - clarifications > > > > Hello, > > I would like to clarify the exact meaning of the following definition > provided in section 6.4: > > “If a node is configured to participate in a particular Flexible > Algorithm, but the selected Flex-Algorithm Definition includes a bit in the > IS-IS FADF sub-TLV that is not supported by the node, *it MUST stop > participating in such Flexible Algorithm*” > > > > · Does this requirement related to the node that is not ABR/ASBR. > In other words shall non-ABR/ASBR node stop its participation in such > flexible algorithm if it does not support M-flag ? > > · May ABR/ASBR in any case continue to calculate *intra-domain* > flexible algorithm paths using the selected FAD and simply ignore M-flag. > What I am missing here ? > > > > Thanks in advance Michael > > Notice: This e-mail together with any attachments may contain information > of Ribbon Communications Inc. and its Affiliates that is confidential > and/or proprietary for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review, > disclosure, reliance or distribution by others or forwarding without > express permission is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended > recipient, please notify the sender immediately and then delete all copies, > including any attachments. >
_______________________________________________ Lsr mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr
