First, to be clear, what I am describing is NOT an error in RFC 9352.
Thus, I don't think an erratum is the appropriate way to document for
future readers this additional aspect of the intent of certain maximum
segment depth advertisements for SRv6.
RFC 9352 talks about the maximum number of SIDs. However, when SIDs are
carried in compressed SID containers, the number that matters for some
(maybe all?) of the maximum segment depths is the number of 128 bit
pieces, not the number of SIDs. Apparently, several implementations
are consistent with that. It seems a bit odd to write another RFC just
to say that. Is there some document in process that could sensibly
capture this.
(As RFC 9352 predates the Compressed SID RFC it makes sense that this
case is not disucssed there.)
Yours,
Joel
_______________________________________________
Lsr mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
