Re: [Isis-wg] [OSPF] OSPFv2 Segment Routing Extensions ERO Extensions (would also effect OSPFv3 and IS-IS) - REPLY TO THIS ONE

<bruno.decraene@orange.com> Mon, 12 June 2017 13:37 UTC

Return-Path: <bruno.decraene@orange.com>
X-Original-To: isis-wg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: isis-wg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 783311242EA; Mon, 12 Jun 2017 06:37:52 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.619
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.619 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=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 zLJWDvrLOyrE; Mon, 12 Jun 2017 06:37:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from relais-inet.orange.com (mta134.mail.business.static.orange.com [80.12.70.34]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0A718124E15; Mon, 12 Jun 2017 06:37:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from opfednr04.francetelecom.fr (unknown [xx.xx.xx.68]) by opfednr20.francetelecom.fr (ESMTP service) with ESMTP id B52EE40197; Mon, 12 Jun 2017 15:37:47 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from Exchangemail-eme2.itn.ftgroup (unknown [xx.xx.31.21]) by opfednr04.francetelecom.fr (ESMTP service) with ESMTP id 612864007F; Mon, 12 Jun 2017 15:37:47 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from OPEXCLILM21.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup ([fe80::e92a:c932:907e:8f06]) by OPEXCLILM6C.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup ([fe80::d9f5:9741:7525:a199%18]) with mapi id 14.03.0339.000; Mon, 12 Jun 2017 15:37:47 +0200
From: <bruno.decraene@orange.com>
To: "Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee@cisco.com>, "draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-isis-segment-routing-extensions@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-isis-segment-routing-extensions@ietf.org>
CC: "spring@ietf.org" <spring@ietf.org>, "isis-wg@ietf.org" <isis-wg@ietf.org>, OSPF WG List <ospf@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [OSPF] OSPFv2 Segment Routing Extensions ERO Extensions (would also effect OSPFv3 and IS-IS) - REPLY TO THIS ONE
Thread-Index: AQHS4S8Y37adDddm1EW7MKj9+rQk+aIhPVmA
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2017 13:37:46 +0000
Message-ID: <8753_1497274667_593E992B_8753_641_5_53C29892C857584299CBF5D05346208A4777B990@OPEXCLILM21.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup>
References: <D5602C7F.B268A%acee@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <D5602C7F.B268A%acee@cisco.com>
Accept-Language: fr-FR, en-US
Content-Language: fr-FR
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.168.234.3]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_53C29892C857584299CBF5D05346208A4777B990OPEXCLILM21corp_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/isis-wg/4M2sQgAfH3wQmwdCQSvNz-T2ayo>
Subject: Re: [Isis-wg] [OSPF] OSPFv2 Segment Routing Extensions ERO Extensions (would also effect OSPFv3 and IS-IS) - REPLY TO THIS ONE
X-BeenThere: isis-wg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF IS-IS working group <isis-wg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/isis-wg>, <mailto:isis-wg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/isis-wg/>
List-Post: <mailto:isis-wg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:isis-wg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/isis-wg>, <mailto:isis-wg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2017 13:37:52 -0000

Hi Acee, authors

2 clarification questions inline [Bruno]

From: OSPF [mailto:ospf-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Acee Lindem (acee)
Sent: Friday, June 09, 2017 4:46 PM
To: OSPF WG List; spring@ietf.org; isis-wg@ietf.org
Cc: draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [OSPF] OSPFv2 Segment Routing Extensions ERO Extensions (would also effect OSPFv3 and IS-IS) - REPLY TO THIS ONE

Corrected IS-IS WG alias – Please reply to this one.
Thanks,
Acee

From: Acee Lindem <acee@cisco.com<mailto:acee@cisco.com>>
Date: Friday, June 9, 2017 at 10:42 AM
To: OSPF WG List <ospf@ietf.org<mailto:ospf@ietf.org>>, "spring@ietf.org<mailto:spring@ietf.org>" <spring@ietf.org<mailto:spring@ietf.org>>, "isis@ietf.org<mailto:isis@ietf.org>" <isis@ietf.org<mailto:isis@ietf.org>>
Cc: "draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions@ietf.org<mailto:draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions@ietf.org>" <draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions@ietf.org<mailto:draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions@ietf.org>>
Subject: OSPFv2 Segment Routing Extensions ERO Extensions (would also effect OSPFv3 and IS-IS)

Hi OSPF, ISIS, and SPRING WGs,

As part of the Alia’s AD review, she uncovered the fact that the ERO extensions in 6.1 and 6.2 are specified as far as encoding but are not specified as far as usage in any IGP or SPRING document. As document shepherd,  my proposal is that they simply be removed since they were incorporated as part of a draft merge and it appears that no one has implemented them (other than parsing).
[Bruno] Is the option to move those Binding SID IGP extensions in a different (WG) document opened/considered? Any opinion on this?

We could also deprecate types (4-8) in the OSPFv2 Extended Prefix LSA Sub-TLV registry to delay usage of these code points for some time (or indefinitely ;^).
[Bruno] Are there reasons to make actions to delay/against such usage?

Thanks
Regards,
--Bruno

Thanks,
Acee

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc
pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler
a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,
Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci.

This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law;
they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.
If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments.
As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified.
Thank you.