Dear Authors, Gentle remainder, We are planning to implement the "identification of IPv6 prefix for segment routings (SRH) by setting the flag in option field" as described in below mail. Please provide your valuable opinion whether it is ok as per Extension draft.
Regards, Veerendranath From: Veerendranatha Reddy Vallem Sent: 14 February 2017 13:08 To: '[email protected]' <[email protected]> Cc: [email protected] Subject: [OSPFv3 IPv6 SR] Regarding prefixes identification for IPv6 Segment Routing Dear Authors, While adverting prefixes for IPv6 Segment Routing (SRH support), the IPv6 prefixes may not require to carry additional sub TLVs related to SRH some times. So to identify prefixes are using for IPv6 Segment Routing, it may be helpful we add one option bit in prefix options like 'N' bit added for Node identification. Please provide your opinion for adding new bit for IPv6 segment routing in prefix options. 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 +--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+ | | | N|DN| P| x|LA|NU| +--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+ Regards, Veerendranath
_______________________________________________ OSPF mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf
