# Gunter Van de Velde, RTG AD, comments for draft-ietf-lsr-ospf-admin-tags-22
# The referenced line numbers are derived from the idnits tool: https://author-tools.ietf.org/api/idnits?url=https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-lsr-ospf-admin-tags-22.txt # Many thanks for this write-up. The document is well written and was a pleasure to read. # idnits tool comes up clean # Many thanks to Christian Hopps for the Shepherd write-up, Russ White for the RTGDIR review and Qiufang Ma for the YANGDOCTORS review #DETAILED COMMENTS #================== 139 Type A 16-bit field set to TBD. GV> From readability, maybe call out that there is a: TBD1: "OSPF Extended Prefix TLV Sub-TLV" Registry TBD2: "OSPFv3 Extended-LSA Sub-TLV" Registry TBD3: "OSPFv3 SRv6 Locator LSA Sub-TLVs" Registry 210 action. Whether or not tag A precedes or succeeds tag B SHOULD NOT 211 change the meaning of the tag set. The number of tags supported MAY GV> the "tag set" wording may be unclear and confusing. Is it the "tag that is set" or the "set of tags". What about: " Regardless of whether tag A precedes or follows tag B, the meaning of the tag SHOULD NOT be affected. " 211 change the meaning of the tag set. The number of tags supported MAY 212 limit the number of tags that are propagated. When propagating GV> I suspect that this is referencing to the number of tags on the ABR and/or the router originating the prefix with its associated tags? Is this something that can be further accurately explained? What about: " The number of supported tags on the router originating the prefix or on an ABR MAY limit the number of tags that are ultimately propagated. " 217 For configured area ranges, NSSA ranges, and configured aggregation 218 of redistributed routes, tags from component routes SHOULD NOT be 219 propagated to the summary. Implementations SHOULD provide a 220 mechanism to configure multiple tags for area ranges, NSSA ranges, 221 and redistributed route summaries. GV> Why is this a SHOULD NOT instead of a MUST NOT? What breaks or causes issues if tags would be propagated to a summary? 226 these LSAs will all have different tags. In this situation, the OSPF 227 router MUST associate the tags from one of the LSAs contributing a 228 path and, if the implementation supports multiple tags, MAY associate 229 tags from multiple contributing LSAs up to the maximum number of tags 230 supported. It is RECOMMENDED that tags from LSAs are added to the GV> It displays "multiple tags supported", however it is unclear by which router this observation must be applied 247 However, the default behavior SHOULD be to advertise or propagate the 248 lesser number of all the tags associated with the prefix or the 249 maximum number of tags supported by the implementation. GV> I managed to get confused with what the "lesser number" exactly means? is this the number of tags according to the policy? GV> Would it be allowed for ABRs to impose additional tags upon prefixes for management reasons? Or can only the router that originates a specific prefix set one or multiple tags 251 Both the support of this specification and the number of tags 252 supported by OSPF routers within an OSPF routing domain will limit 253 the usefulness and deployment of applications utilizing tags. GV> Is it expected that all routers in the routing domain support the same number of tags? 742 9. IANA Considerations 743 744 The following values should be allocated from the "OSPF Extended 745 Prefix TLV Sub-TLV" Registry [RFC7684]: 746 747 * TBD - Administrative Tag Sub-TLV 748 749 The following values should be allocated from the "OSPFv3 Extended- 750 LSA Sub-TLV" Registry [RFC8362]: 751 752 * TBD - Administrative Tag Sub-TLV 753 754 The following values should be allocated from the "OSPFv3 SRv6 755 Locator LSA Sub-TLVs" Registry [RFC9513]: 756 757 * TBD - Administrative Tag Sub-TLV GV> maybe call out that there are three TBDs (TBD1, TBD2 and TBD3) as seen from section 2 Brgds, G/ _______________________________________________ Lsr mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
