Re: [Lsr] New Subject: Is Flex-Algo One App or Many (was “RE: IETF13: Comments on The Application Specific Link Attribute (ASLA) Any Application Bit”)

Hi Les, Nope the abbreviation is not confusing. Calling RSVP-TE, SR, LFA or Flex-Algo as "applications" is confusing as those are network forwarding paradigms and not applications. Applications (read user applications which samples I provided) are running on top of them. What you call

Re: [Lsr] New Subject: Is Flex-Algo One App or Many (was “RE: IETF13: Comments on The Application Specific Link Attribute (ASLA) Any Application Bit”)

Robert – The complete name (as reflected in the referenced registry name) is: Link Attribute Application Identifiers In the context of ASLA we tend to abbreviate that as “Application”. If you find that confusing, we can all try to use the more complete name. But whatever name we use, that is

Re: [Lsr] New Subject: Is Flex-Algo One App or Many (was “RE: IETF13: Comments on The Application Specific Link Attribute (ASLA) Any Application Bit”)

Hi Les, What you call "an application" is simply counter intuitive and not what 99.9% of people understand by this term. Application to me is a web server running on the host waiting for user requests, SIP gateway providing VoIP connections, database instance running on some specific port and

[Lsr] I-D Action: draft-ietf-lsr-ospf-srv6-yang-01.txt

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Link State Routing WG of the IETF. Title : YANG Data Model for OSPF SRv6 Authors : Zhibo Hu Xuesong Geng

[Lsr] I-D Action: draft-ietf-lsr-isis-srv6-yang-01.txt

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Link State Routing WG of the IETF. Title : YANG Data Model for IS-IS SRv6 Authors : Zhibo Hu Dan Ye

Re: [Lsr] New Subject: Is Flex-Algo One App or Many (was “RE: IETF13: Comments on The Application Specific Link Attribute (ASLA) Any Application Bit”)

Robert – The defined set of APPs can be seen here : Bit NameReference 0 RSVP-TE (R-bit) [RFC8919] 1 Segment Routing Policy (S-bit)[RFC8919] 2

Re: [Lsr] New Subject: Is Flex-Algo One App or Many (was “RE: IETF13: Comments on The Application Specific Link Attribute (ASLA) Any Application Bit”)

Les, To me what corresponds to network application is effectively a forwarding paradigm/topology build and used to forward corresponding traffic classe. You can overload application name the way you like but it does not change anything. So if this is going to make you more happy let's rename my

[Lsr] New Subject: Is Flex-Algo One App or Many (was “RE: IETF13: Comments on The Application Specific Link Attribute (ASLA) Any Application Bit”)

Robert – I changed the subject – because what you are talking about has nothing to do w the discussion of ANY bit. You have mentioned this before – and been corrected before – but it seems that did not alter your thinking. Flex-Algo is ONE APP. There is not a bit in the SABM assigned per algo

Re: [Lsr] IETF13: Comments on The Application Specific Link Attribute (ASLA) Any Application Bit

Hi Chris, It seems that there is a subtle but important element on which we may have different opinion. You said: "has to deploy new software that contains the new Wizbang feature, right?" IMO however we are dealing with case where software already supports all required functions on a box. It

Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-li-lsr-liveness-00.txt

Peter Psenak writes: On 26/01/2022 10:40, Robert Raszuk wrote: > The pulse solution does not suffer from the scale issues. It shifts that "suffering" to flood the entire domain with information which is not needed on P routers and selectively useful on the remote PEs. yes, but how much