Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang-lsr-prefix-unreachable-annoucement-03.txt

2020-08-04 Thread Aijun Wang
Hi, Robert: From: lsr-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:lsr-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Robert Raszuk Sent: Friday, July 31, 2020 6:21 PM To: Aijun Wang Cc: Peter Psenak ; Huzhibo ; Aijun Wang ; lsr ; Acee Lindem (acee) ; Xiaoyaqun Subject: Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for

Re: [Lsr] draft-ietf-lsr-isis-area-proxy-02

2020-08-04 Thread bruno.decraene
Les, Please see inline. From: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) [mailto:ginsb...@cisco.com] Sent: Tuesday, August 4, 2020 4:50 PM To: DECRAENE Bruno TGI/OLN ; lsr@ietf.org Subject: RE: draft-ietf-lsr-isis-area-proxy-02 Bruno - Please see inline. From: Lsr mailto:lsr-boun...@ietf.org>> On Behalf Of

Re: [Lsr] draft-ietf-lsr-isis-area-proxy-02

2020-08-04 Thread Tony Li
Hi Bruno, > > [Bruno] Agreed so far. > Do we agree that draft-ietf-lsr-isis-area-proxy uses the SID/Label sub-TLV? > We both agree that this sub-TLV has no mention of the global flag nor the > routing algoto be used. So far, we do NOT have agreement on that. Your argument yesterday

Re: [Lsr] draft-ietf-lsr-isis-area-proxy-02

2020-08-04 Thread Les Ginsberg (ginsberg)
Bruno - Please see inline. From: Lsr On Behalf Of bruno.decra...@orange.com Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2020 5:45 AM To: lsr@ietf.org Subject: [Lsr] draft-ietf-lsr-isis-area-proxy-02 Hi, I may be missing something but the SR Binding SID TLV extension is not clear to me. 1. It does not

[Lsr] draft-ietf-lsr-isis-area-proxy-02

2020-08-04 Thread bruno.decraene
Hi, I may be missing something but the SR Binding SID TLV extension is not clear to me. 1) It does not seem compliant with RFC 8667 Draft says that the advertisement has: T-flag set, M & A flags cleared, SID/Label sub-TLV present, Prefix-SID sub-TLV NOT present The following