Re: [Idr] FW: New Version Notification for draft-vandevelde-idr-bgp-ls-segment-routing-rld-01.txt

Robert,

Please take a look at 02 isis draft published yesterday, we have added type flag that defines the type of a SID and could be used with v6 dataplane.
The limitations wrt label operations are well understood across both custom and merchant  silicon and from use case prospective had to be addressed first.
V6 dataplane will be added.

Please let me know if this answers your questions and addresses concerns.

Regards,
Jeff

> On Mar 4, 2017, at 06:24, Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net> wrote:
> 
> Jeff,
> 
> MSD drafts (yours invluded) talks about labels while MSD as such seems to be defined as maximum SID depth.
> 
> In SRv6 SID is *NOT* a label. So why not to define MSD properly across all SR scenarios?
> 
> Are we going to have now new zoo of drafts now defining MSD for SRv6 vs current docs just defining MSD for SR-MPLS ?
> 
> Cheers,
> R.
> 
> 
> 
>> On Mar 4, 2017 9:41 AM, "Jeff Tantsura" <jefftant.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Robert,
>> 
>> That's done in MSD drafts.
>> In the recently published isis draft we have also introduced MSD type flag that would be used to signal different types of SID's: recirculated labels, EL's, etc
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> Jeff
>> 
>> On Fri, Mar 3, 2017 at 22:35 Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net> wrote:
>> Hey Gunter,
>> 
>> Good proposal however why do you only think about labels ?
>> 
>> Seriously if this is to move fwd let's add ability to signal also following elements:
>> 
>> * ability to punt SR-MPLS to local CPU (slow path) when not handled in hardware (per node basis)
>> 
>> * add signalling for number of SRv6 SRHs supported per node/per LC
>> 
>> * add signalling for depth per SRH and total of SIDs supported per node/per LC
>> 
>> * signal ability to punt to slow path or not for longer then support SRH stack or number of SIDs in each SRH structure.
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> Robert.
>> 
>> 
>> On Fri, Mar 3, 2017 at 3:55 PM, Van De Velde, Gunter (Nokia - BE) <gunter.van_de_velde@nokia.com> wrote:
>> Heads-up… Happy to learn feedback and comments.
>> 
>> This draft is short and defines the attribute to use for BGP-LS to expose a
>> node RLD "Readable Label Depth" to a centralised controller (PCE/SDN).
>> 
>> G/
>> 
>> On 03/03/2017, 14:21, "internet-drafts@ietf.org" <internet-drafts@ietf.org> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>>     A new version of I-D, draft-vandevelde-idr-bgp-ls-segment-routing-rld-01.txt
>>     has been successfully submitted by Gunter Van de Velde and posted to the
>>     IETF repository.
>> 
>>     Name:               draft-vandevelde-idr-bgp-ls-segment-routing-rld
>>     Revision:   01
>>     Title:              Signalling RLD using BGP-LS
>>     Document date:      2017-03-03
>>     Group:              Individual Submission
>>     Pages:              5
>>     URL:            https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-vandevelde-idr-bgp-ls-segment-routing-rld-01.txt
>>     Status:         https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-vandevelde-idr-bgp-ls-segment-routing-rld/
>>     Htmlized:       https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-vandevelde-idr-bgp-ls-segment-routing-rld-01
>>     Diff:           https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-vandevelde-idr-bgp-ls-segment-routing-rld-01
>> 
>>     Abstract:
>>        This document defines the attribute to use for BGP-LS to expose a
>>        node RLD "Readable Label Depth" to a centralised controller (PCE/
>>        SDN).
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>     Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission
>>     until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.
>> 
>>     The IETF Secretariat
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Idr mailing list
>> Idr@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Idr mailing list
>> Idr@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr