Hi Les,



On 8/26/15, 7:13 AM, "Les Ginsberg (ginsberg)" <[email protected]> wrote:

>[Les:] Topology specific SRGBs requires a specification change for the IGPs. 
>The new advertisements are NOT backwards compatible w existing 
>implementations. So we cannot simply say "do what you please". 
>Peter has repeatedly made this point - and also pointed out that since the 
>prefix advertisements as currently defined in the IGP drafts includes topology 
>identifiers including the topology identifier in the SRGB advertisement is 
>redundant.
[Pushpasis] Why not add a MT-SR_Capability Sub/TLV then? That way it won’t 
break backward compatibility? 

Thanks
-Pushpasis
_______________________________________________
spring mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring

Reply via email to