I support the adoption of the document.

I have below comments

1. It is not clear whether " OSPFv2 Prefix Attributes Sub-TLV" and "OSPFv3 
Prefix Attributes Sub-TLV"
Would allow other sub-tlvs under them in future. If so, the flags should be a 
separate sub-sub-TLV under Prefix attributes sub-TLV. If it does not allow 
other attributes, pls rename it as " OSPFv2 Prefix flags Sub-TLV"

2. section 3 has below statement
" This  document does not define any flags."
For OSPFv3 this document defines 2 new bits. This text needs to be updated and 
IANA section
Needs to be updated.

Rgds
Shraddha


Juniper Business Use Only
-----Original Message-----
From: Lsr <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Acee Lindem
Sent: Friday, November 17, 2023 9:27 PM
To: Lsr <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call for "Prefix Flag Extension for OSPFv2 and 
OSPFv3" - draft-chen-lsr-prefix-extended-flags-03

[External Email. Be cautious of content]


LSR WG,

This starts the Working Group adoption call for 
draft-chen-lsr-prefix-extended-flags-03. Please send your support or objection 
to this list before December 2nd, 2023. The extra week is to allow for the US 
Thanksgiving holiday.


Thanks,
Acee
_______________________________________________
Lsr mailing list
[email protected]
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!DGBre12MrjIxWhX5kt5kFUqEsrj_psPbViIAnrBl4i9-7wff2Fyrg5EIgKXtJdujJ3xKN4aYAomnS4NXOHM$

_______________________________________________
Lsr mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr

Reply via email to