Hi Veeru, I think that changes to Prefix/Link Attribute LSAs must be considered as a topology change for purposes of RestartHelperStrictLSAChecking. If this were to be covered, it should have been in RFC 7684. Although RFC 3623 doesn’t really specify what constitutes a topology change.
However, perhaps we could add a note in this draft. Thanks, Acee From: OSPF <ospf-boun...@ietf.org<mailto:ospf-boun...@ietf.org>> on behalf of Veerendranatha Reddy Vallem <veerendranath...@huawei.com<mailto:veerendranath...@huawei.com>> Date: Monday, May 29, 2017 at 5:41 AM To: "draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensi...@ietf.org<mailto:draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensi...@ietf.org>" <draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensi...@ietf.org<mailto:draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensi...@ietf.org>> Cc: OSPF WG List <ospf@ietf.org<mailto:ospf@ietf.org>> Subject: [OSPF] [OSPF-SR] Regarding graceful restart behavior with change in SR informaiotn carrying LSAs Dear Authors, In OSPFv2: I am requesting for your clarification regarding change in Opaque Type 7 and Opaque Type 8 LSAs (LSA origination/flush or modify) need to consider for OSPFv2 GR exit case or not. As per my understanding these LSAs will not be topology LSAs for OSPF, so it may not require to consider these LSAs for GR case. I am requesting for your confirmation. Also in OSPFv3: SR information is carried in new extension LSAs, which can carry both topology and attribute information. In this case, whether we need to consider LSA change for Graceful restart or not. I am requesting for your confirmation. Regards, Veerendranath
_______________________________________________ OSPF mailing list OSPF@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf
