Re: [Idr] Regarding segment routing capability bit set in ŒRouter Informational Capabilities TLV¹ of RI LSA

Veerendranatha Reddy Vallem <veerendranatharv@huawei.com> Thu, 24 November 2016 01:57 UTC

Return-Path: <veerendranatharv@huawei.com>
X-Original-To: idr@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: idr@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF32612965F; Wed, 23 Nov 2016 17:57:53 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.717
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.717 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.497, SPF_PASS=-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 X3iTngicgjBU; Wed, 23 Nov 2016 17:57:52 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [194.213.3.17]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 31F6E129688; Wed, 23 Nov 2016 17:57:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: from 172.18.7.190 (EHLO lhreml707-cah.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.7.190]) by lhrrg02-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.3.7-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id CVV79618; Thu, 24 Nov 2016 01:57:33 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from BLREML405-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.20.4.41) by lhreml707-cah.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.199) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.235.1; Thu, 24 Nov 2016 01:56:37 +0000
Received: from BLREML501-MBX.china.huawei.com ([10.20.5.198]) by BLREML405-HUB.china.huawei.com ([10.20.4.41]) with mapi id 14.03.0235.001; Thu, 24 Nov 2016 07:26:33 +0530
From: Veerendranatha Reddy Vallem <veerendranatharv@huawei.com>
To: "Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee@cisco.com>, "draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment-routing-extensions@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment-routing-extensions@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: =?windows-1256?Q?[Idr]_Regarding_segment_routing_capability_bit_set_in_?= =?windows-1256?Q?=8CRouter_Informational_Capabilities_TLV=B9__of_RI_LSA?=
Thread-Index: AQHSRYA5twd4v7Xem0+i9tRll1kaOqDnYB1A
Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2016 01:56:32 +0000
Message-ID: <73BFDDFFF499304EB26FE5FDEF20F78850836C66@blreml501-mbx>
References: <D45AECDC.8A7DB%acee@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <D45AECDC.8A7DB%acee@cisco.com>
Accept-Language: en-US, zh-CN
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.18.152.243]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_73BFDDFFF499304EB26FE5FDEF20F78850836C66blreml501mbx_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
X-Mirapoint-Virus-RAPID-Raw: score=unknown(0), refid=str=0001.0A090204.5836490D.01A2, ss=1, re=0.000, recu=0.000, reip=0.000, cl=1, cld=1, fgs=0, ip=0.0.0.0, so=2013-06-18 04:22:30, dmn=2013-03-21 17:37:32
X-Mirapoint-Loop-Id: 499ed0cb8300170523676fe77f05e7b9
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/kjTwKEh4Ho_Mfju5Cq5CW3B611I>
Cc: "'idr@ietf.org'" <idr@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Idr] =?cp1256?q?Regarding_segment_routing_capability_bit_set_in_?= =?cp1256?q?=8CRouter_Informational_Capabilities_TLV=B9__of_RI_LSA?=
X-BeenThere: idr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: Inter-Domain Routing <idr.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/idr>, <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/idr/>
List-Post: <mailto:idr@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr>, <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2016 01:57:54 -0000

Thanks to Acee and Hannes for your reply.
I got it.

Regards,
Veerendranath

From: Acee Lindem (acee) [mailto:acee@cisco.com]
Sent: 23 November 2016 17:24
To: Veerendranatha Reddy Vallem <veerendranatharv@huawei.com>om>; draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment-routing-extensions@ietf.org
Cc: 'idr@ietf.org' <idr@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Idr] Regarding segment routing capability bit set in ŒRouter Informational Capabilities TLV¹ of RI LSA

Hi Veerandranath,

Since an algorithm and SID/Label range is required for segment-routing operation in OSPF, no bit is necessary. If a bit were to be allocated, it would go in the RI functional capabilities rather than the informational capabilities.

Thanks,
Acee


From: Idr <idr-bounces@ietf.org<mailto:idr-bounces@ietf.org>> on behalf of Veerendranatha Reddy Vallem <veerendranatharv@huawei.com<mailto:veerendranatharv@huawei.com>>
Date: Wednesday, November 23, 2016 at 4:48 AM
To: "draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment-routing-extensions@ietf.org<mailto:draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment-routing-extensions@ietf.org>" <draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment-routing-extensions@ietf.org<mailto:draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment-routing-extensions@ietf.org>>
Cc: IDR List <idr@ietf.org<mailto:idr@ietf.org>>
Subject: [Idr] Regarding segment routing capability bit set in ‘Router Informational Capabilities TLV’ of RI LSA

Dear Authors,
While advertising Segment Routing capabilities in RI LSA, as per draft there is ‘no bit’ is allocated in ‘Router Informational Capabilities TLV’  for segment routing capability.

9.  IANA Considerations

   This specification updates several existing OSPF registries.

9.1.  OSPF Router Information (RI) TLVs Registry

   o 8 (IANA Preallocated) - SR-Algorithm TLV

   o 9 (IANA Preallocated) - SID/Label Range TLV

   o 12 - SR Local Block Sub-TLV

   o 13 - SRMS Preference Sub-TLV



Whether bit set in ‘Router Informational Capabilities TLV’  is not required for segment routing capability , to notify neighbors?

Regards,
Veerendranath