Hi Dale,

Thanks for the catch. I just started working on updating the draft. I will 
include it in the next version.


From: Greg Mirsky <gregimir...@gmail.com>
Date: Sunday, April 8, 2018 at 5:53 PM
To: "Dale R. Worley" <wor...@ariadne.com>
Cc: NVO3 <nvo3@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-bier-p...@ietf.org" 
<draft-ietf-bier-p...@ietf.org>, BIER WG <b...@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [nvo3] BIER OAM (was: IETF101 NVO3 draft minutes posted)
Resent-From: <alias-boun...@ietf.org>
Resent-To: Nagendra Kumar Nainar <naiku...@cisco.com>, <cpign...@cisco.com>, 
<nobo.akiya....@gmail.com>, <vero.zh...@huawei.com>, <mach.c...@huawei.com>, 
Resent-Date: Sunday, April 8, 2018 at 5:53 PM

Hi Dale,
great catch, thank you. Will correct to match the size of the Proto field, 6 
bits-long, as defined in RFC 8296 in the next update of our draft.


On Fri, Apr 6, 2018 at 7:52 PM, Dale R. Worley 
<wor...@ariadne.com<mailto:wor...@ariadne.com>> wrote:
Greg Mirsky <gregimir...@gmail.com<mailto:gregimir...@gmail.com>> writes:
> you may be surprised to check BIER OAM, section 3.1 of draft-ietf-bier-ping
> <https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-bier-ping-03> to be precise, as it
> defines the header for active BIER OAM.

Interesting.  But I note that in RFC 8296, the next protocol field
("Proto") is 6 bits, and the "BIER Next Protocol Identifiers" is defined
to match.  But in draft-ietf-bier-ping-03, the "Proto" field is only 4
bits, although it seems to intend that the values be taken fromn "BIER
Next Protocol Identifiers".


nvo3 mailing list

nvo3 mailing list

Reply via email to