[Idr] [idr]Question about draft-ietf-idr-segment-routing-te-policy
"Wanghaibo (Rainsword)" <rainsword.wang@huawei.com> Wed, 29 April 2020 11:25 UTC
Return-Path: <rainsword.wang@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 5683F3A0CFC; Wed, 29 Apr 2020 04:25:14 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.889
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.889 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_KAM_HTML_FONT_INVALID=0.01, 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 qDw6mhrVTmcx; Wed, 29 Apr 2020 04:25:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [185.176.76.210]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F30433A0CFB; Wed, 29 Apr 2020 04:25:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lhreml733-chm.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.18.7.108]) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTP id BF496E0A8B8A3C9E9A7E; Wed, 29 Apr 2020 12:25:08 +0100 (IST)
Received: from nkgeml705-chm.china.huawei.com (10.98.57.154) by lhreml733-chm.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.84) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.1913.5; Wed, 29 Apr 2020 12:25:08 +0100
Received: from nkgeml705-chm.china.huawei.com (10.98.57.154) by nkgeml705-chm.china.huawei.com (10.98.57.154) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.1913.5; Wed, 29 Apr 2020 19:25:05 +0800
Received: from nkgeml705-chm.china.huawei.com ([10.98.57.154]) by nkgeml705-chm.china.huawei.com ([10.98.57.154]) with mapi id 15.01.1913.007; Wed, 29 Apr 2020 19:25:05 +0800
From: "Wanghaibo (Rainsword)" <rainsword.wang@huawei.com>
To: "draft-ietf-idr-segment-routing-te-policy@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-idr-segment-routing-te-policy@ietf.org>
CC: "idr@ietf.org" <idr@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [idr]Question about draft-ietf-idr-segment-routing-te-policy
Thread-Index: AdYeFkePilL//aA+REm5vt4K/rNllA==
Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2020 11:25:05 +0000
Message-ID: <644ead03d4ba41a4af378123cc735b23@huawei.com>
Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US
Content-Language: zh-CN
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.108.202.142]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_644ead03d4ba41a4af378123cc735b23huaweicom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/ymCGwPt8XASY4oIaTxNWTu92zfc>
Subject: [Idr] [idr]Question about draft-ietf-idr-segment-routing-te-policy
X-BeenThere: idr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Wed, 29 Apr 2020 11:25:15 -0000
Hi Authors,
About the draft draft-ietf-idr-segment-routing-te-policy-08, Section 2.1. SR Policy SAFI and NLRI
Before the draft 08 version, it says:
o NLRI Length: 1 octet of length expressed in bits as defined in
[RFC4760].
Now in draft 08 version, it says:
o NLRI Length: 1 octet of length expressed in bits as defined in
[RFC4760<https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4760>]. When AFI = 1 value MUST be 12 and when AFI = 2 value
MUST be 24.
I think the last sentence is conflict with before. If we use bits for length, when AFI = 1 the value is 96 and when AFI = 2, the value is 192.
And now some implementation already use the bits for length.
So is this a clerical error or is it based on other considerations?
Regards,
Haibo
- [Idr] [idr]Question about draft-ietf-idr-segment-… Wanghaibo (Rainsword)
- Re: [Idr] [idr]Question about draft-ietf-idr-segm… Ketan Talaulikar (ketant)