Re: [Isis-wg] TLV conflict

"Les Ginsberg (ginsberg)" <ginsberg@cisco.com> Thu, 14 December 2017 15:37 UTC

Return-Path: <ginsberg@cisco.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 49ED012940B; Thu, 14 Dec 2017 07:37:10 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.519
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.519 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.com
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 Im9oEt3FSAhi; Thu, 14 Dec 2017 07:37:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: from alln-iport-7.cisco.com (alln-iport-7.cisco.com [173.37.142.94]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E5A56124319; Thu, 14 Dec 2017 07:37:07 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=15484; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1513265828; x=1514475428; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:mime-version; bh=SAr2OlBZ3CfD6grxvNx0CKVDKQYbHaScSGpeO9rohmI=; b=AG/1OU65CFQnqmMxyWalpfm4za94DBb7YDNy1gtREfunc/VFOcVMlbeW VkzHEQqYGEUF/m07oHscUShEIxUcRP7N+cvfT/sPLXY75EcekvASg+BvG 4nHcUkQg+Ri5xgFLl4cymLb2iUfGIjQXOxBytJEOAa5g6tFBuBagnri3q 4=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0CFAQBUmTJa/5NdJa1dGQEBAQEBAQEBA?= =?us-ascii?q?QEBAQcBAQEBAYJKdGZ0JweDe4ohjwaBfYh8iEyFToIVChgBDIUWAhqEXT8YAQE?= =?us-ascii?q?BAQEBAQEBayiFIwEBAQEDAQEhCkELEAIBCA4DBAEBKAMCAgIfBgsUCQgCBAENB?= =?us-ascii?q?QiJPkwDFRCodIInhzYNgxsBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEYBYNggg6BVoF?= =?us-ascii?q?oAYMrgmpEAYIUEIJfgmMFh3CRY4kVPQKHe4dcU4R1gh+GEotEikeCTj6IbQIRG?= =?us-ascii?q?QGBOgEfOYFObxU6gimEVngBiAIrgQiBFQEBAQ?=
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos; i="5.45,400,1508803200"; d="scan'208,217"; a="44096445"
Received: from rcdn-core-11.cisco.com ([173.37.93.147]) by alln-iport-7.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 14 Dec 2017 15:37:07 +0000
Received: from XCH-ALN-001.cisco.com (xch-aln-001.cisco.com [173.36.7.11]) by rcdn-core-11.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id vBEFb7vb012616 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Thu, 14 Dec 2017 15:37:07 GMT
Received: from xch-aln-001.cisco.com (173.36.7.11) by XCH-ALN-001.cisco.com (173.36.7.11) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1320.4; Thu, 14 Dec 2017 09:37:06 -0600
Received: from xch-aln-001.cisco.com ([173.36.7.11]) by XCH-ALN-001.cisco.com ([173.36.7.11]) with mapi id 15.00.1320.000; Thu, 14 Dec 2017 09:37:06 -0600
From: "Les Ginsberg (ginsberg)" <ginsberg@cisco.com>
To: Alia Atlas <akatlas@gmail.com>, Harish R Prabhu <harish.r.prabhu@gmail.com>
CC: "draft-ietf-isis-segment-routing-extensions@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-isis-segment-routing-extensions@ietf.org>, "isis-wg@ietf.org" <isis-wg@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-isis-segment-routing-msd@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-isis-segment-routing-msd@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [Isis-wg] TLV conflict
Thread-Index: AQHTdOnRrnZJ7yhWikm/7R+GH3BYZaNDU1OA//+hfyA=
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2017 15:37:06 +0000
Message-ID: <d763611576b8441e933a304f297099f2@XCH-ALN-001.cisco.com>
References: <CAMMX+=MoOx0t+q-6gN3H6rQyoDjK201-QSmQ9z=m=JZJjR3vvg@mail.gmail.com> <CAG4d1rfuYrDua6Ws18AhNfqhyZRjQkMOrXsEFuiUZtXaaMY-EA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAG4d1rfuYrDua6Ws18AhNfqhyZRjQkMOrXsEFuiUZtXaaMY-EA@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [10.154.131.130]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_d763611576b8441e933a304f297099f2XCHALN001ciscocom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/isis-wg/CCGp1TkHQp4KVSiA9UOSys0pRQc>
Subject: Re: [Isis-wg] TLV conflict
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: Thu, 14 Dec 2017 15:37:10 -0000

Folks –


The conflict for SRMS Preference sub-TLV in https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-isis-segment-routing-extensions-13#section-3.4 has already been noted and has been eliminated in the new version of the IS-IS SR draft which I expect to publish tomorrow. Note that although the IS-IS SR draft was given early allocation of some code points, a couple more sub-TLVs have been defined since then and these values have not yet been assigned by IANA. SRMS preference was one of them – though at the time of the writing of the version which added this the early allocation for MSD had not yet happened.

Alia - I believe the MSD draft already is using the code points which have been assigned by early allocation – so I do not know what further update you believe is required in that document.
???

   Les


From: Isis-wg [mailto:isis-wg-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Alia Atlas
Sent: Thursday, December 14, 2017 7:01 AM
To: Harish R Prabhu <harish.r.prabhu@gmail.com>
Cc: draft-ietf-isis-segment-routing-extensions@ietf.org; isis-wg@ietf.org; draft-ietf-isis-segment-routing-msd@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Isis-wg] TLV conflict

Hi Harish,

Please take a look at
https://www.iana.org/assignments/isis-tlv-codepoints/isis-tlv-codepoints.xhtml#isis-tlv-codepoints-242
where it is clear that draft-ietf-isis-segment-routing-msd has an early temporary registration for type 23.

draft-ietf-isis-segment-routing-msd-02 should be updated to clearly state the IANA allocations that have already happened.

draft-ietf-isis-segment-routing-extensions-13 MUST be updated to clearly state the IANA allocations
that have already happened for it (e.g. values 2 & 19) and to STOP SQUATTING on already allocated
code-points.

Thank you for bringing this to our attention!

Regards,
Alia


On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 9:41 AM, Harish R Prabhu <harish.r.prabhu@gmail.com<mailto:harish.r.prabhu@gmail.com>> wrote:
While going through the I-Ds pertaining to SR attributes, it was found
that the following 2 TLVs have been assigned the same Type number

SRMS Preference Sub-TLV :
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-isis-segment-routing-extensions-13#section-3.4

Node MSD Advertisement :
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-isis-segment-routing-msd-02#page-4

 Both these sections talk about different sub tlvs under
router_capabilities TLV, but type value assigned is 23 for both.

Request to address this.

Thanks,
--
Harish R Prabhu
Bangalore, India.
mailtp:harish.r.prabhu@gmail.com<mailto:mailtp%3Aharish.r.prabhu@gmail.com>

_______________________________________________
Isis-wg mailing list
Isis-wg@ietf.org<mailto:Isis-wg@ietf.org>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/isis-wg