Hi Alavaro,
On 20/03/2020 19:23, Alvaro Retana wrote:
On March 20, 2020 at 10:34:59 AM, Peter Psenak wrote:
Peter:
I don't really see why one would affect the other.
I agree. BMI-MSD is an egress capability and ERLD-MSD is an ingress
capability. While they may be related in the internal ASIC implementation,
they are independent from a capability perspective.
Please write that then.
there are many MSDs defined already, are we going to write that the new
MSD type is not interacting with any other MSD each time we define a new
one?
Yes, when they could be related, we are. More importantly, the reason
why the will not interact, which is what Acee’s text points to.
honestly I do not see a reason to say that they do not interact. Because
if I use your logic I would have to mention hundred other node
capabilities that ERLD-MSD is not interacting with. My logic is that if
something interacts it needs to be specified, if it does not, it does
not need to be.
BTW, according to the registry there are only 2 MSDs defined:
https://www.iana.org/assignments/igp-parameters/igp-parameters.xhtml#igp-msd-types
there are more defined for SRv6 - draft-ietf-lsr-isis-srv6-extensions-06.
thanks,
Peter
Alvaro.
_______________________________________________
Lsr mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr
