Hi Sharddha，
Thanks for your comments. Will rename them according with your comments. Thanks!
Best Regards,
Ran
Original
From: ShraddhaHegde <[email protected]>
To: Peter Psenak <[email protected]>;Acee Lindem
<[email protected]>;Lsr <[email protected]>;
Cc: [email protected]
<[email protected]>;
Date: 2023年11月23日 00:16
Subject: Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call for "Prefix Flag Extension for OSPFv2 and
OSPFv3" - draft-chen-lsr-prefix-extended-flags-03
> 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"
no sub0sub-TLVs, the value portion is just a bitstring like ISIS
IPv4/IPv6 Extended Reachability Attribute Flags (rfc7794).
Pls rename the " OSPFv2 Prefix Attributes Sub-TLV" to "OSPFV2 Prefix Attribute
Flags Sub-TLV"
Similarly for OSPFv3 as well.
Rgds
Shraddha
Juniper Business Use Only
-----Original Message-----
From: Peter Psenak <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, November 22, 2023 6:04 PM
To: Shraddha Hegde <[email protected]>; Acee Lindem <[email protected]>;
Lsr <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [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]
Hi Shraddha,
On 22/11/2023 12:58, Shraddha Hegde wrote:
> 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"
no sub0sub-TLVs, the value portion is just a bitstring like ISIS
IPv4/IPv6 Extended Reachability Attribute Flags (rfc7794).
>
> 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
U/UP-flags have been moved here by mistake, they are defined in the UPA dratf.
Will be fixed.
thanks,
Peter
> 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_psPbViIAnrBl4i9-7wff2Fyrg5
> EIgKXtJdujJ3xKN4aYAomnS4NXOHM$
>
> _______________________________________________
> Lsr mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr_
> _;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!CHZKllXRW53oZBGLQM6OMuuD4hNd4LBdpKiUSSdltPg2q6Vgit95so
> Gd81oq6wmPRzmzejKflaSIFyUS0ZtvOpizQWibXZ4G$
>
_______________________________________________
Lsr mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr
_______________________________________________
Lsr mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr
