Hi Les, thank you for your quick and thorough review of the changes. I'll work on applying your suggestions and will share results shortly.
Regards, Greg On Mon, Jan 30, 2017 at 1:11 PM, Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) <[email protected] > wrote: > Loa - > > > > The change for IS-IS encoding to utilize a sub-TLV of TLV 22 et al to > advertise RTM capability is a better solution than the previous proposal > and this has my support. > > However, there are some details as regards the proposed sub-TLV that > should be revised. > > > > 1)Rather than use a fixed 16 bit field for the flags I suggest you utilize > the encoding style introduced in RFC 7794 (see Section 2.1) which allows > for a variable length flags field. This addresses two issues: > > > > o You need never worry that the size of the flags field will be too > small for future extensions > > o It minimizes the number of bytes required to be sent > > > > The latter point is something IS-IS has always been more conservative > about than OSPF because of the fixed size of an LSP set which can be > advertised by a single router. > > > > 2)In the IANA considerations you have limited the sub-TLV to being used in > TLV 22 only, but there is no reason to do so. This does not allow MT to be > supported and it needlessly prevents use of the sub-TLV by the RFC 5311 > extensions (however unpopular those may be). I can understand why the > sub-TLV may not be useful in TLV 141, therefore I suggest the table in > Section 7.5 be revised to be: > > > > > > | Type | Description | 22 | 23 | 141 | 222 | 223 | Reference > | > > +------+-------------+----+----+-----+-----+-----+---------------+ > > | TBA3 | RTM | y | y | n | y | y | This document > | > > +------+-------------+----+----+-----+-----+-----+---------------+ > > > > > i.e. "y" for all but TLV 141 (in case the ASCII art doesn't translate well > in your mailer). > > > > You should also remove the reference to RFC 5305 in Section 4.5 as it is > too limiting. Simply referencing the IANA registry http://www.iana.org/ > assignments/isis-tlv-codepoints/isis-tlv-codepoints.xhtml#isis-tlv- > codepoints-22-23-141-222-223 should be sufficient. All necessary > references can be found there. > > > > 3)An editorial correction: > > > > Introduction 3rd paragraph: > > > > s/ Althugh/ Although > > > > Les > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: OSPF [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Loa Andersson > > > Sent: Monday, January 30, 2017 8:02 AM > > > To: [email protected]; TEAS WG; [email protected]; Isis-wg > > > Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; > TEAS > > > WG Chairs; [email protected]; [email protected] > > > Subject: [OSPF] Working group last call on draft-ietf-mpls-residence-time > > > > > > Working Groups, > > > > > > This is to initiate a two week working group last call in four working > groups on > > > draft-ietf-mpls-residence-time-13. > > > > > > The MPLS working group has done an earlier working group last call and a > > > request for publication has been made. > > > > > > The changes to the document were such that we decided to do a new > > > working group last call and extend it to MPLS, TEAS, OSPF and IS-IS. > > > > > > There are three major changes between the version of the document for > > > which publication was requested are: > > > > > > (1) that section 7 " One-step Clock and Two-step Clock Modes" has been > > > moved up to become section 2.1. > > > (2) that a sub-TLV for TLV 22 instead of TLV 251 is used to RTM > > > Capability when IS-IS used advertise RTM capabilities > > > (3) BGP-LS has been added as a RTM capability advertisement method > > > > > > A side-by-side diff between version -12 and -13 is available at: > > > https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-mpls-residence-time-13 > > > > > > Please send your comments to the mpls wg mailing list ([email protected]), > if > > > you are not subscribed to the mpls wg list, send to "your own" > > > working group mailing list, and we'll make sure they are posted to the > MPLS > > > wg list. > > > > > > There were one IPR disclosure against this document. > > > > > > All the authors and contributors have stated on the working group > mailing list > > > that they are not aware of any other IPRs that relates to this document. > > > > > > This working group last call ends February 13, 2017. > > > > > > > > > /Loa > > > MPLS wg co-chairs > > > -- > > > > > > > > > Loa Andersson email: [email protected] > > > Senior MPLS Expert [email protected] > > > Huawei Technologies (consultant) phone: +46 739 81 21 64 > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > OSPF mailing list > > > [email protected] > > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf > > _______________________________________________ > OSPF mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf > >
_______________________________________________ OSPF mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf
