Re: [Isis-wg] draft-ietf-isis-segment-routing-extensions-02

[Hannes Gredler <[e-mail]>]

hi stefano,

+ISIS-WG as this is now a WG-item.

a comment n the 'V' flag -
what is IMO missing is the clarification when and when not to use the 'V' flag.
i.e. for which particular data plane -

to play devils advocate:
  as generic as the draft is right now,
  the V-flag may be abused for prefix-SIDs on a MPLS data plane
  as an attempt to-reintroduce the notion of global labels,
  which as you may know i do reject.

may i ask you to add some clarifying notes that V-flag=1 applies only for the
Prefix SIDs assuming IPv6-SR dataplane.

furthermore i am not really sure what the V-flag shall mean for Adjacency-SIDs.
(the adjacency-SID always has been a label and never an index).

thanks,

/hannes


On Jun 6, 2014, at 10:47 AM, Stefano Previdi (sprevidi) wrote:

> Co-authors,
> 
> this is the latest version we are ready to submit. It contains the different 
> updates we've discussed in the past weeks.
> 
> . Addition of flags in prefix-sid and adj-sid subtlv. We added E, V and L flags. 
>  At some point we removed the R flag but is now back.
> . use of prefix-sid-tlv for mapping server
> . fixed typo's and inconsistencies
> 
> Bruno and others already sent comments that I have tryed to address (e.g.: I 
> moved the SID/Label SubTLV section after PrefixSID and Adj-SID sections.
> 
> Thanks for letting me know any comment.
> 
> s.
> 
> 
> <draft-ietf-isis-segment-routing-extensions-01.txt>