Hi Gyan and Jie,
I am not entirely sure if the suggestions from Ketan in previous email can address these two concerns. If not fully addressed, please feel free to let us know. Overall, this feature is applicable to all FAs, including FA0. The next version will further elaborate on the relationships between new features and FAs, as well as optimize the use-case descriptions and corresponding name to reflect "Unreachable" in a way that is easier to understand. Appreciate everyone39s discussion. It is very helpful. Best Regards, Liyan ----邮件原文----发件人：Gyan Mishra <[email protected]>收件人："Dongjie (Jimmy)" <[email protected]>抄 送: Yingzhen Qu <[email protected]>,lsr <[email protected]>,lsr-chairs <[email protected]>发送时间：2024-03-01 11:27:32主题：Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call - draft-gong-lsr-ospf-unreachable-link(02/23/24 - 03/08/24)Hi Jie Some answers in-line On Thu, Feb 29, 2024 at 2:31 AM Dongjie (Jimmy) <[email protected]> wrote: Hi Yingzhen, I’ve read the latest version of this document and support its adoption. It is a useful feature in general to exclude some of the links from SPF computation. I also have some comments for the authors to consider, they can be solved after the adoption. 1. I’m not sure the purpose is to advertise an unreachable link in OSPF, from the use cases in the draft, the link is still reachable and can be used for some services, just it needs be excluded from normal SPF calculation. If this is correct, it is better the title of the draft and the name of the new capability Flag need to be updated to reflect this. Gyan> I agree with you and that is as well stated in the draft that MaxLinkMetric (0xFFFF) does not exclude the link from SPF and thus requires RI LSA with capability bit set for MaxLinkMetric (0xFFFF) for link to be excluded from SPF. Maybe “OSPF RI Capability LSA”. 2. In the Flex-Algo use case, if the metric of a link is set to MaxLinkMetric (0xFFFF) to exclude it from normal SPF computation, while a Flex-Algo is defined to use the same metric type for path calculation, will it cause the link also be excluded from the Flex-Algo path computation? If not, will metric value 0xFFFF be used in the Flex-Algo computation? In other word, the interaction between this new feature and Flex-Algo needs to be further elaborated. Gyan> I agree that the RI LSA capability flag for MaxLinkMetric (0xFFFF) is applicable to base Algo 0 and any Algo. However AFAIK you would have to explicitly set the RI flag the particular Algo. The use case described in this draft is when you are using flex algo for network slicing meaning you have both algo 0 and 128 on the same links and not a separate sub topology and in that case in order to avoid best effort traffic from going over the same link used for algo 128 you would need to use this RI capability flag. This concept we have talked about comes into play of degree of network slicing and isolation to meet SLO SLE requirements. Best regards, Jie From: Lsr [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Yingzhen Qu Sent: Friday, February 23, 2024 1:28 PM To: lsr <[email protected]> lsr-chairs <[email protected]> Subject: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call - draft-gong-lsr-ospf-unreachable-link (02/23/24 - 03/08/24) Hi, This email begins a 2 week WG adoption poll for the following draft: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-gong-lsr-ospf-unreachable-link/ Please review the document and indicate your support or objections by March 8th, 2024. Authors and contributors, please respond to the list indicating whether you are aware of any IPR that applies to the draft. Thanks, Yingzhen _______________________________________________ Lsr mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr -- Gyan Mishra Network Solutions Architect Email [email protected] M 301 502-1347
_______________________________________________ Lsr mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr
