Re: [Lsr] "OSPF Routing with Cross-Address Family Traffic Engineering Tunnels" - draft-ietf-ospf-xaf-te-05

2019-02-27 Thread Anton Smirnov
Hi Alexander, see some answers inline. --- Anton On 02/08/19 11:25, Alexander Okonnikov wrote: Hi Acee, For me current version doesn't change the solution. My comments are follow: 1.  Introduction "TE Extensions to OSPFv2 [RFC3630] and OSPFv3 [RFC5329] have been described to support

Re: [Lsr] Working Group Adoption Poll for "OSPF Extension for PrefixOriginator" - draft-wang-lsr-ospf-prefix-originator-ext-01

2019-02-27 Thread Huaimo Chen
Support. Best Regards, Huaimo From: Lsr [mailto:lsr-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Huzhibo Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2019 5:09 AM To: lsr@ietf.org; a...@cisco.com Subject: Re: [Lsr] Working Group Adoption Poll for "OSPF Extension for PrefixOriginator" -

Re: [Lsr] Working Group Adoption Poll for "OSPF Extension for PrefixOriginator" - draft-wang-lsr-ospf-prefix-originator-ext-01

2019-02-27 Thread Huzhibo
Support.It is useful for collect cross-area IGP topologies Ths Zhibo Hu From: Lsr [mailto:lsr-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of peng.sha...@zte.com.cn Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2019 4:36 PM To: a...@cisco.com Cc: lsr@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Lsr] Working Group Adoption Poll for "OSPF Extension

Re: [Lsr] Working Group Adoption Poll for "OSPF Extension for PrefixOriginator" - draft-wang-lsr-ospf-prefix-originator-ext-01

2019-02-27 Thread peng.shaofu
Support, as this draft provide useful originial source router-id of prefix, as the same as RFC7794. For topology deducing, it seems too hard to work according to current description in the document. For example, It is hard to represent mulptile links between two nodes if we only know two