[Bier] https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-bier-ospf-bier-extensions-09
matecs <matecs@niif.hu> Sun, 05 November 2017 16:17 UTC
Return-Path: <matecs@niif.hu>
X-Original-To: bier@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: bier@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 91C7013FC7E for <bier@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 5 Nov 2017 08:17:51 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6uI-k5sENUlH for <bier@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 5 Nov 2017 08:17:49 -0800 (PST)
Received: from linzer.ki.iif.hu (linzer.ki.iif.hu [IPv6:2001:738:0:600:216:3eff:fe02:b1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 58BD013FB77 for <bier@ietf.org>; Sun, 5 Nov 2017 08:17:49 -0800 (PST)
Received: from bolha.lvs.iif.hu (bolha.lvs.iif.hu [193.225.14.181]) by linzer.ki.iif.hu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1798F406339 for <bier@ietf.org>; Sun, 5 Nov 2017 17:17:47 +0100 (CET)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at bolha.lvs.iif.hu
Received: from linzer.ki.iif.hu ([IPv6:::ffff:193.224.163.7]) by bolha.lvs.iif.hu (bolha.lvs.iif.hu [::ffff:193.225.14.72]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id eId5qHsCcmWk for <bier@ietf.org>; Sun, 5 Nov 2017 17:17:45 +0100 (CET)
Received: from [IPv6:2001:db8:21:0:221a:6ff:fe6d:1304] (unknown [IPv6:2001:470:1f1a:308::dead:beef]) by linzer.ki.iif.hu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B8EA0406337 for <bier@ietf.org>; Sun, 5 Nov 2017 17:17:44 +0100 (CET)
To: "bier@ietf.org" <bier@ietf.org>
From: matecs <matecs@niif.hu>
Message-ID: <787cb628-5c1b-36bf-da80-9cee8046278b@niif.hu>
Date: Sun, 05 Nov 2017 17:17:44 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/bier/H5S0eYkKIMG0t15y56PdT_eTEd0>
Subject: [Bier] https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-bier-ospf-bier-extensions-09
X-BeenThere: bier@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: "\"Bit Indexed Explicit Replication discussion list\"" <bier.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/bier>, <mailto:bier-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/bier/>
List-Post: <mailto:bier@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bier-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bier>, <mailto:bier-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 05 Nov 2017 16:17:52 -0000
hi, i went through the igp drafts and the isis seems straightforward but the ospf seems a bit troublesome to me. in that draft you say that "The BIER MPLS Encapsulation Sub-TLV is a Sub-TLV of the BIER Sub-TLV." (you can find the same at the bsl conversion subtlv) but at iana considerations you request 3 tlv ids from the registry, which indicates that the newly defined subtlvs will be carried in the extended prefix tlv, without further encapsulation of the bier subtlv. could you please clarify this? thanks, cs