Well takeMSDs ... I would think remote PE may find useful to know them (ie. what is the capability of egress PE). Why those would not be needed outside of an area I do not get.
Thx, R. On Tue, Aug 29, 2023 at 10:38 AM Peter Psenak <[email protected]> wrote: > Robert, > > On 28/08/2023 14:19, Robert Raszuk wrote: > > Daniel, > > > > > [DV] No, there’s no need to leak and advertise > > > > You mean there is no need for RFC9352 in your network. If so - great. > > > > I was however asking the question: if network needs to advertise any of > > the information defined in RFC9352 would it still benefit from UPA ? > > ISIS SIDs are not needed outside of its area. Service SIDs are > advertised by BGP. > > thanks, > Peter > > > > Thx, > > R. > > > > > > > > On Mon, Aug 28, 2023 at 11:05 PM Voyer, Daniel <[email protected] > > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > > > Hi Robert, inlines____ > > > > __ __ > > > > __ __ > > > > *From: *Lsr <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> on > > behalf of Robert Raszuk <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected] > >> > > *Date: *Monday, August 28, 2023 at 12:00 PM > > *To: *"Hassan, Shehzad" <[email protected] > > <mailto:[email protected]>>, Daniel Bernier > > <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> > > *Cc: *lsr <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>, > > "[email protected] > > <mailto:[email protected]>" > > <[email protected] > > <mailto:[email protected]>> > > *Subject: *[EXT]Re: [Lsr] Working Group Adoption of "IGP Unreachable > > Prefix Announcement" - > > draft-ppsenak-lsr-igp-ureach-prefix-announce-04 (Fixed draft > name)____ > > > > __ __ > > > > Hi Shehzad & Daniel,____ > > > > ____ > > > > I support this work as it is key for summarization in an > > SRv6/IPv6 network.____ > > > > __ __ > > > > Are you not going to advertise and leak across your IGP domain any > > of the SRv6 extensions as described in > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc9352/ > > <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc9352/> for the PEs ? ____ > > > > [DV] No, there’s no need to leak and advertise. For an SRv6 network, > > we are summarizing locators and loopback (should be derived from > > locator 0). This makes the routing domain “opaque”.____ > > > > __ __ > > > > And if you do, is there still some use case for UPA ? ____ > > > > __ __ > > > > Perhaps I am missing something but how would those extensions > > survive summarization ? ____ > > > > __ __ > > > > __ __ > > > > Thx, > > Robert____ > > > > Cheers,____ > > > > Dan____ > > > > __ __ > > > > > On Aug 23, 2023, at 4:07 PM, Acee Lindem <[email protected] > > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > > > > > LSR Working Group, > > > > > > This begins the working group adoption call for “IGP > > Unreachable Prefix Announcement” - > > draft-ppsenak-lsr-igp-unreach-prefix-announce-04. > > > Please indicate your support or objection on this list prior > > to September 7th, 2023. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Acee > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > External Email: Please use caution when opening links and > > attachments / Courriel externe: Soyez prudent avec les liens et > > documents joints > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Lsr mailing list > > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr > > <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr>____ > > > >
_______________________________________________ Lsr mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr
