Re: [Lsr] Working Group Last Call for draft-ietf-lsr-ip-flexalgo-04 - "IGP Flexible Algorithms (Flex-Algorithm) In IP Networks"

Mixing data plan using same TLV may lead to forwarding issue. if you do so it is required to upgrade all the node in the network which is practically not possible. Hence Different TVL for IP flex algo required. Regards Parag -Original Message- From: Peter Psenak Sent: Tuesday, May

Re: [Lsr] Working Group Last Call for draft-ietf-lsr-ip-flexalgo-04 - "IGP Flexible Algorithms (Flex-Algorithm) In IP Networks"

Aijun – I am not an author of the draft – and so cannot speak on behalf of the draft authors. But here is my response as WG member. You need to focus on the dataplane. Suppose a node advertises 1.1.1.1/32 in (IS-IS) TLV 135. If a packet addressed to 1.1.1.1 arrives unlabeled, it can be

Re: [Lsr] Working Group Last Call for draft-ietf-lsr-ip-flexalgo-04 - "IGP Flexible Algorithms (Flex-Algorithm) In IP Networks"

Hi, Peter and Les: Prefix Segment Identifier sub-TLV and FAPM sub-TLV are two independent sub-TLVs for TLV135, 235,236 and 237. They are not required to be exist at the same time. FAPM just describes the metrics that associated with different Flex-Algo. Isn’t it more straightforward to associate

Re: [Lsr] Working Group Last Call for draft-ietf-lsr-ip-flexalgo-04 - "IGP Flexible Algorithms (Flex-Algorithm) In IP Networks"

Peter - I am in agreement. However, the IANA section of the draft is missing some necessary information. The new top level TLVs in IS-IS - I am assuming you want these to share the sub-TLV space defined in

Re: [Lsr] Working Group Last Call for draft-ietf-lsr-ip-flexalgo-04 - "IGP Flexible Algorithms (Flex-Algorithm) In IP Networks"

Aijun, On 03/05/2022 15:52, Aijun Wang wrote: Hi, Peter: I think the logic is the following: FAPM is the sub-TLV of TLV 135,235,236 and 237, then it extends these TLVs for advertising prefixes in algorithm 0 to other Flexible Algorithm. Then I see no reason to define the new top-TLV to

Re: [Lsr] Working Group Last Call for draft-ietf-lsr-ip-flexalgo-04 - "IGP Flexible Algorithms (Flex-Algorithm) In IP Networks"

Hi, Peter: I think the logic is the following: FAPM is the sub-TLV of TLV 135,235,236 and 237, then it extends these TLVs for advertising prefixes in algorithm 0 to other Flexible Algorithm. Then I see no reason to define the new top-TLV to encoding the similar information. Aijun Wang China

Re: [Lsr] Working Group Last Call for draft-ietf-lsr-ip-flexalgo-04 - "IGP Flexible Algorithms (Flex-Algorithm) In IP Networks"

Hi Aijun, On 03/05/2022 11:57, Aijun Wang wrote: Hi, Peter： Different data planes use different Flex-Algorithm and associated metric, they can’t be mixed. Or, would you like to point out why the following scenarios can’t be achieved via the FAPM? 1) The PE router has three loopback

Re: [Lsr] Working Group Last Call for draft-ietf-lsr-ip-flexalgo-04 - "IGP Flexible Algorithms (Flex-Algorithm) In IP Networks"

Hi, Peter： Different data planes use different Flex-Algorithm and associated metric, they can’t be mixed. Or, would you like to point out why the following scenarios can’t be achieved via the FAPM? 1) The PE router has three loopback addresses(Lo1-Lo3), each associated with different

Re: [Lsr] Working Group Last Call for draft-ietf-lsr-ip-flexalgo-04 - "IGP Flexible Algorithms (Flex-Algorithm) In IP Networks"

Aijun, On 03/05/2022 09:59, Aijun Wang wrote: Hi, Peter: The definition of FAPM for IS-IS and OSPF doesn’t prevent from it is used for the intra-area prefixes. If we advertise the different loopback addresses via the FAPM, associate them to different Flex-Algo and related metrics, and does

Re: [Lsr] Working Group Last Call for draft-ietf-lsr-ip-flexalgo-04 - "IGP Flexible Algorithms (Flex-Algorithm) In IP Networks"

Hi, Peter: The definition of FAPM for IS-IS and OSPF doesn’t prevent from it is used for the intra-area prefixes. If we advertise the different loopback addresses via the FAPM, associate them to different Flex-Algo and related metrics, and does not allocate the MPLS SID, we can achieve the

Re: [Lsr] Working Group Last Call for draft-ietf-lsr-ip-flexalgo-04 - "IGP Flexible Algorithms (Flex-Algorithm) In IP Networks"

Aijun, On 03/05/2022 00:47, Aijun Wang wrote: Hi, Acee: The questions raised at https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lsr/RlHphXCwxMbgGvcBV_m24xiDzS0/  has not been answered. IS-IS Flexible Algorithm Prefix Metric