Hi Acee and WG, > Those questioning the flag should have been paying attention > when RFC 9513 and RFC 9352 were being discussed.
No. #1 Those two RFCs are about segment routing extensions. draft-chen-lsr-anycast-flag is not. #2 In those two RFCs it is very clear that anycast flag reflects only the local configuration of the prefix (locator). Please observe that the draft under discussion fails to indicate who and when should set this flag. Quoted RFCs do. Number of questions surfaced if ABRs or ASBRs should be setting such flag. Should summaries have such flag ? Etc .... #3 In those two RFCs there is very good justification why this flag can be useful .. to check if anycast prefixes are advertised with the same SIDs. To me this is sufficient justification and perhaps a good reason why no one had objections to RFC9513 and RFC9352. Neither #1, nor #2 nor #3 apply to the subject draft for OSPFv2. While #2 hopefully can be easily added #1 and #3 are fundamentally different. So at least draft-chen-lsr-anycast-flag should provide a justification being as good as #3. So justification to add it here just because OSPFv3 or ISIS have it is not enough. Kind regards, Robert On Sat, Mar 23, 2024 at 10:38 PM Acee Lindem <[email protected]> wrote: > Speaking as WG member: > > I support working group adoption. > > It would be good to add: > > 1. In the introduction, informational references to OSPFv3 [RFC9513] > and ISIS [9352]. > 2. The example use cases for the prefix Anycast flag we've been > discussing. > > Note that we already have this flag for OSPFv3 and IS-IS and > implementations are making use of it. That ship has left the dock > and now is the time to question whether the use cases could be solved in a > different manner. Those questioning the flag should > have been paying attention when RFC 9513 and RFC 9352 were being > discussed. > > Thanks, > Acee > > > > > On Mar 19, 2024, at 2:43 PM, Acee Lindem <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > This starts the Working Group adoption call for > draft-chen-lsr-anycast-flag. This is a simple OSPFv2 maintenance draft > adding an Anycast flag for IPv4 prefixes to align with IS-IS and OSPFv3. > > > > Please send your support or objection to this list before April 6th, > 2024. > > > > Thanks, > > Acee > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Lsr mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr >
_______________________________________________ Lsr mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr
