Hi, All:
I have the following comments for this draft, and would like to support
its forwarding when the below concerns are addressed.
1. For SRv6 SID’s advertisement, I suggest we should also consider it is
advertised as sub-TLVs of OSPF-Stub-Link TLV, as proposed in
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-wang-lsr-stub-link-attributes-04#section-4.1.
There are situations that such information can be utilized by the routers
within the area, as I presented at the IETF 114 meeting (the draft is pending
to be updated). Then the following sentence:
“SRv6 SIDs are advertised as Sub-TLVs in the SRv6 Locator TLV except
for SRv6 End.X SIDs/LAN End.X SIDs which are associated with a
specific Neighbor/Link and are therefore advertised as Sub-TLVs of E-
Router-Link TLV.”
Should be relaxed as:
“SRv6 SIDs are advertised as Sub-TLVs in the SRv6 Locator TLV except
for SRv6 End.X SIDs/LAN End.X SIDs which are associated with a
specific Neighbor/Link and are therefore advertised as Sub-TLVs of
Neighbor/Link related TLVs.”
2. Support for the “SRv6 Locator TLV” to be included within the existing
LSA, rather than to define the new “Locator LSA”.
Best Regards
Aijun Wang
China Telecom
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Acee Lindem
(acee)
Sent: Saturday, July 30, 2022 1:17 AM
To: lsr <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: [Lsr] Working Group Last Call for "OSPFv3 Extensions for SRv6" -
draft-ietf-lsr-ospfv3-srv6-extensions-06.txt (Corrected Address)
As promised in today’s LSR WG meeting, this begins a 3 week WG Last Call,
ending on August 19th, 2022, for draft-ietf-lsr-ospfv3-srv6-extensions. The
extra week is to account for PIST (Post-IETF Stress Syndrome). The
corresponding IS-IS draft is already on the RFC Queue and there are
implementations.
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-lsr-ospfv3-srv6-extensions/
Thanks,
Acee & Chris
_______________________________________________
Lsr mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr
