Peter, Please share the updated text that you plan to use with the WG, since this is a reasonably significant clarification.
Thanks, Chris -----Original Message----- From: Peter Psenak [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, August 16, 2016 10:02 AM To: Chris Bowers <[email protected]>; OSPF List <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [OSPF] OSPFv2 SR draft Hi Chris, I'll update the draft along those lines. thanks, Peter On 16/08/16 16:02 , Chris Bowers wrote: > Peter, > > I suggest changing the paragraph to read as below to make this clearer. > > ===== > The SR-Algorithm Sub-TLV is optional. It MAY only be advertised once > in the Router Information Opaque LSA. If the SID/Label Range TLV, as > defined in Section 3.2, is advertised, then the SR-Algorithm TLV MUST > also be advertised. If a router C advertises a Prefix-SID sub-TLV for > algorithm X > but does not advertise the SR-Algorithm Sub-TLV with algorithm X, then > a router receiving that advertisement MUST ignore the Prefix-SID > advertisement from router C. If router B does not advertise the > SR-Algorithm TLV for algorithm X, then other routers should not > forward traffic destined for a prefix-SID for algorithm X advertised by > some router D using a path that would require router B to forward traffic > using > algorithm X. > ===== > > Thanks, > Chris > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Peter Psenak [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Monday, August 15, 2016 6:40 AM > To: Chris Bowers <[email protected]>; OSPF List <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [OSPF] OSPFv2 SR draft > > Hi Chris, > > sorry for the delay, I was on PTO during last two weeks. > Please see inline: > > On 03/08/16 16:45 , Chris Bowers wrote: >> Peter, >> >> Taking a looking at the whole paragraph into this sentence was added, >> I am not sure how to interpret it. >> >> The SR-Algorithm Sub-TLV is optional. It MAY only be advertised once >> in the Router Information Opaque LSA. If the SID/Label Range TLV, as >> defined in Section 3.2, is advertised, then the SR-Algorithm TLV MUST >> also be advertised. If the SR-Algorithm TLV is not advertised by the >> node, such node is considered as not being segment routing capable. >> >> Is this sentence intended to imply that if a router does not >> advertise the SR-Algorithm TLV including algorithm X, then any >> prefix-SIDs for algorithm X advertised by that router will be ignored by >> other routers? > > in OSPF we do not have the SR capability TLV. We use SR-Algorithm TLV > for that purpose. So if a router does not advertise the SR-Algorithm > TLV for algorithm X, other routers should not send any SR traffic > using SIDs that were advertised for algorithm X. > > If the router does not advertise any SR Algorithm TLV, then the node > is not SR capable and no SR traffic should be forwarded to such a node. > > thanks, > Peter > > >> >> If this is the intention, then it would be better to state is more >> explicitly. >> >> If not, then the intended meaning should be clarified. >> >> Thanks, >> Chris >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: OSPF [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Peter Psenak >> Sent: Friday, July 22, 2016 3:30 AM >> To: OSPF List <[email protected]> >> Subject: [OSPF] OSPFv2 SR draft >> >> Hi All, >> >> following text has been added in the latest revision of the OSPFv2 SR >> draft, section 3.1. >> >> "If the SR-Algorithm TLV is not advertised by node, such node is >> considered as not being segment routing capable." >> >> Please let us know if there are any concerns regarding this addition. >> >> thanks, >> Peter >> >> _______________________________________________ >> OSPF mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf >> . >> > > . > _______________________________________________ OSPF mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf
