Re: [Lsr] OSPF TE Link Local TLV

[Alexander Okonnikov]

Hi Acee,

Yes, RFC 8510 provides alternative mechanism, but link identifier discovery 
mechanism via link-local TE LSA is still valid. Hence, I think that early 
mentioned issues need to be addressed.

Thank you!

> 5 февр. 2019 г., в 21:29, Acee Lindem (acee)  написал(а):
> 
> Hi Alex, 
>  
> From: Alexander Okonnikov  >
> Date: Tuesday, February 5, 2019 at 12:59 PM
> To: Acee Lindem mailto:a...@cisco.com>>, "cc...@ietf.org 
> " mailto:cc...@ietf.org>>, 
> "lsr@ietf.org " mailto:lsr@ietf.org>>
> Subject: Re: [Lsr] OSPF TE Link Local TLV
>  
> Hi Acee,
>  
> Per my understanding Link Local/Remote ID Sub-TLV is to be conveyed in 
> area-scope LSA to uniquely identify link between pair of routers. For 
> link-local scope another Sub-TLV was introduced, for discovery of link IDs by 
> two neighbors.
>  
> The context is completely different – see 
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8510.txt 
> 
>  
> May be, it is possible to reuse Link Local/Remote ID Sub-TLV (with Remote ID 
> = 0) of Link TLV in link-local scope LSA, but the RFC follows another 
> approach - to use another Sub-TLV and another TLV. I am not sure that we 
> needed dedicated top-level TLV, though idea to use separate Sub-TLV seems to 
> be reasonable.
>  
> It is also possible to use a sledge hammer to crack a nut…. 
>  
> Acee 
>  
> Thank you!
>  
> Best regards,
> Alexander Okonnikov
>  
> От: Acee Lindem (acee) mailto:a...@cisco.com>>
> Отправлено: вторник, февраля 5, 2019 20:21
> Кому: Alexander Okonnikov; cc...@ietf.org ; 
> lsr@ietf.org 
> Тема: Re: [Lsr] OSPF TE Link Local TLV 
>  
> Hi Alex, 
>  
>  
> From: Lsr mailto:lsr-boun...@ietf.org>> on behalf of 
> Alexander Okonnikov  >
> Date: Tuesday, February 5, 2019 at 7:48 AM
> To: "cc...@ietf.org "  >, "lsr@ietf.org "  >
> Subject: [Lsr] OSPF TE Link Local TLV
>  
> Hi,
>  
> I have question regarding RFC 4203, Section 3. That section introduces 
> top-level TLV type 4 (Link Local TLV) and, at the same time, describes Link 
> Local Identifier TLV. I guess that latter in fact is Sub-TLV of Link Local 
> TLV. Also, IANA Considerations section doesn't mention that Sub-TLV, but only 
> introduction of Link Local TLV. IANA has no corresponding registry  - "Types 
> for Sub-TLVs of Link Local TLV (Value 4)".
>  
> I believe this example is actually wrong and section 3 should refer to the 
> top-level Link TLV (value 2) defined in RFC 3630. The Link Local Identifier 
> is the one advertised in Link Local/Remote Identifiers Sub-TLV (type 11) 
> defined in RFC 4203 section 1.1. 
>  
> Hope this helps, 
> Acee
>  
> Thanks in advance.
>  
> Best regards,
> Alexander Okonnikov

___
Lsr mailing list
Lsr@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr

Re: [Lsr] OSPF TE Link Local TLV

[Acee Lindem (acee)]

Hi Alex,

From: Alexander Okonnikov 
Date: Tuesday, February 5, 2019 at 12:59 PM
To: Acee Lindem , "cc...@ietf.org" , 
"lsr@ietf.org" 
Subject: Re: [Lsr] OSPF TE Link Local TLV

Hi Acee,

Per my understanding Link Local/Remote ID Sub-TLV is to be conveyed in 
area-scope LSA to uniquely identify link between pair of routers. For 
link-local scope another Sub-TLV was introduced, for discovery of link IDs by 
two neighbors.

The context is completely different – see 
https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8510.txt

May be, it is possible to reuse Link Local/Remote ID Sub-TLV (with Remote ID = 
0) of Link TLV in link-local scope LSA, but the RFC follows another approach - 
to use another Sub-TLV and another TLV. I am not sure that we needed dedicated 
top-level TLV, though idea to use separate Sub-TLV seems to be reasonable.

It is also possible to use a sledge hammer to crack a nut….

Acee

Thank you!

Best regards,
Alexander Okonnikov


От: Acee Lindem (acee) 
Отправлено: вторник, февраля 5, 2019 20:21
Кому: Alexander Okonnikov; cc...@ietf.org; lsr@ietf.org
Тема: Re: [Lsr] OSPF TE Link Local TLV

Hi Alex,


From: Lsr  on behalf of Alexander Okonnikov 

Date: Tuesday, February 5, 2019 at 7:48 AM
To: "cc...@ietf.org" , "lsr@ietf.org" 
Subject: [Lsr] OSPF TE Link Local TLV

Hi,

I have question regarding RFC 4203, Section 3. That section introduces 
top-level TLV type 4 (Link Local TLV) and, at the same time, describes Link 
Local Identifier TLV. I guess that latter in fact is Sub-TLV of Link Local TLV. 
Also, IANA Considerations section doesn't mention that Sub-TLV, but only 
introduction of Link Local TLV. IANA has no corresponding registry  - "Types 
for Sub-TLVs of Link Local TLV (Value 4)".

I believe this example is actually wrong and section 3 should refer to the 
top-level Link TLV (value 2) defined in RFC 3630. The Link Local Identifier is 
the one advertised in Link Local/Remote Identifiers Sub-TLV (type 11) defined 
in RFC 4203 section 1.1.

Hope this helps,
Acee

Thanks in advance.

Best regards,
Alexander Okonnikov

___
Lsr mailing list
Lsr@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr

Re: [Lsr] OSPF TE Link Local TLV

[Okonnikov Alexander]

Hi Acee,

Per my understanding Link Local/Remote ID Sub-TLV is to be conveyed in 
area-scope LSA to uniquely identify link between pair of routers. For 
link-local scope another Sub-TLV was introduced, for discovery of link IDs by 
two neighbors.

May be, it is possible to reuse Link Local/Remote ID Sub-TLV (with Remote ID = 
0) of Link TLV in link-local scope LSA, but the RFC follows another approach - 
to use another Sub-TLV and another TLV. I am not sure that we needed dedicated 
top-level TLV, though idea to use separate Sub-TLV seems to be reasonable.

Thank you!

Best regards,
Alexander Okonnikov


От: Acee Lindem (acee) 
Отправлено: вторник, февраля 5, 2019 20:21
Кому: Alexander Okonnikov; cc...@ietf.org; lsr@ietf.org
Тема: Re: [Lsr] OSPF TE Link Local TLV

Hi Alex,


From: Lsr  on behalf of Alexander Okonnikov 

Date: Tuesday, February 5, 2019 at 7:48 AM
To: "cc...@ietf.org" , "lsr@ietf.org" 
Subject: [Lsr] OSPF TE Link Local TLV

Hi,

I have question regarding RFC 4203, Section 3. That section introduces 
top-level TLV type 4 (Link Local TLV) and, at the same time, describes Link 
Local Identifier TLV. I guess that latter in fact is Sub-TLV of Link Local 
TLV.. Also, IANA Considerations section doesn't mention that Sub-TLV, but only 
introduction of Link Local TLV. IANA has no corresponding registry  - "Types 
for Sub-TLVs of Link Local TLV (Value 4)".

I believe this example is actually wrong and section 3 should refer to the 
top-level Link TLV (value 2) defined in RFC 3630. The Link Local Identifier is 
the one advertised in Link Local/Remote Identifiers Sub-TLV (type 11) defined 
in RFC 4203 section 1.1.

Hope this helps,
Acee

Thanks in advance.

Best regards,
Alexander Okonnikov


___
Lsr mailing list
Lsr@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr

Re: [Lsr] OSPF TE Link Local TLV

[Acee Lindem (acee)]

Hi Alex,


From: Lsr  on behalf of Alexander Okonnikov 

Date: Tuesday, February 5, 2019 at 7:48 AM
To: "cc...@ietf.org" , "lsr@ietf.org" 
Subject: [Lsr] OSPF TE Link Local TLV

Hi,

I have question regarding RFC 4203, Section 3. That section introduces 
top-level TLV type 4 (Link Local TLV) and, at the same time, describes Link 
Local Identifier TLV. I guess that latter in fact is Sub-TLV of Link Local TLV. 
Also, IANA Considerations section doesn't mention that Sub-TLV, but only 
introduction of Link Local TLV. IANA has no corresponding registry  - "Types 
for Sub-TLVs of Link Local TLV (Value 4)".

I believe this example is actually wrong and section 3 should refer to the 
top-level Link TLV (value 2) defined in RFC 3630. The Link Local Identifier is 
the one advertised in Link Local/Remote Identifiers Sub-TLV (type 11) defined 
in RFC 4203 section 1.1.

Hope this helps,
Acee

Thanks in advance.

Best regards,
Alexander Okonnikov


___
Lsr mailing list
Lsr@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr

[Lsr] OSPF TE Link Local TLV

[Alexander Okonnikov]

Hi,

I have question regarding RFC 4203, Section 3. That section introduces 
top-level TLV type 4 (Link Local TLV) and, at the same time, describes Link 
Local Identifier TLV. I guess that latter in fact is Sub-TLV of Link Local TLV. 
Also, IANA Considerations section doesn't mention that Sub-TLV, but only 
introduction of Link Local TLV. IANA has no corresponding registry  - "Types 
for Sub-TLVs of Link Local TLV (Value 4)".

Thanks in advance.

Best regards,
Alexander Okonnikov

___
Lsr mailing list
Lsr@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr