Hi Aijun, Since you bring up vagueness and interoperability, please refer to my suggestion here: https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lsr/U3ImXcT5yDgvFCb3VLa5t9C4As4/
HTH Thanks, Ketan On Fri, 25 Oct, 2024, 4:32 am Aijun Wang, <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, Acee and Ketan: > > Then, the proposed MP-TLV draft should state clearly that it clarifies the > “what constitutes a key” for two TLVs only and such definition(“what > constitutes a key”) for other TLVs are left for further studies or > clarification. > > Even done so, the declaration of “MP-TLV capabilities” has still some > vagueness: because such declaration is IS-IS TLV type independent, the > communication peers can’t decide the other side has which one of the MP-TLV > supported? The interoperability issues will be arose also. > > Given there are potential other big IS-IS TLVs > are emerging, the road to solve such problems will be an dead end. > > Aijun Wang > China Telecom > > > On Oct 25, 2024, at 00:57, 【外部账号】Acee Lindem <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > Speaking as WG member: > > > > I agree totally with Ketan and, at least in my case, stems from the fact > that I’m less familiar with IS-IS than OSPF. > > > > If there are WG participants who have both the IS-IS expertise and > bandwidth, this might be a good topic for an informational draft. > > > > We certainly shouldn’t stale this work as documenting the vagaries of > IS-IS wasn’t within original purpose or scope of this document. > > > > Thanks, > > Acee > > > >> On Oct 24, 2024, at 12:28, Ketan Talaulikar <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> > >> FWIW those were the reasons why I am supporting publication of this > >> document after raising the same question originally. > >> > >> I think those that are still raising Qs about the "lack of clarity" on > >> keys should look over the specific TLVs/sub-TLVs and identify what is > >> not clear. I did that for a good chunk (what I felt were important and > >> with potential to "grow large") to satisfy myself and I encourage > >> others that have doubts to do the same. > >> > >> If there is something really unclear, we can solve those individual > >> issues rather than stalling this work. > >> > >> Thanks, > >> Ketan > >> > >>> On Thu, Oct 24, 2024 at 9:27 PM Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) > >>> <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> > >>> Changwang – > >>> > >>> > >>> > >
_______________________________________________ Lsr mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
