Re: [Lsr] AD Review of draft-ietf-lsr-isis-srv6-extensions-11
Alvaro Retana <aretana.ietf@gmail.com> Thu, 08 April 2021 22:17 UTC
Return-Path: <aretana.ietf@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: lsr@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: lsr@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A90943A1F0C; Thu, 8 Apr 2021 15:17:17 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.098
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.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 Zi68W6uGnafW; Thu, 8 Apr 2021 15:17:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ej1-x634.google.com (mail-ej1-x634.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::634]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BF8E53A1F0A; Thu, 8 Apr 2021 15:17:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ej1-x634.google.com with SMTP id v6so4299566ejo.6; Thu, 08 Apr 2021 15:17:14 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=8upRR4UyfwOHPIigTggS+gboIy99Tazct0ychdoc0vk=; b=ULhHmyhEhhwyiq/wsoiRFDEExS/9ziU/RvqOj5Ip7aH6zlNRnja3xLzC20kY3+3hX1 TbTHxX8JlUG44lIxMrxJwzG6f+Sin485/Q4XmQEAjwruCcNzG7WKsugRr5bqwvVxJb74 I2lOZ2suF9VykU6h1qjSaWmh7qoO64D+6TocWvIbu28+npNpRM0OtNtg4kUNoStBAx7a J0ucecdapbf8zYr1/E3C8/rGd3W505E6+YxrVXLk8uCNE9CVWXnPYSUEnA26wRFlSVeP z13nNykjSoFWt966S7oiPfP6fkaE8K4whYReH+/+h67ppVQfnMVPcGzasQIS9fLWKAqi husg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=8upRR4UyfwOHPIigTggS+gboIy99Tazct0ychdoc0vk=; b=Da55mJjcrQ5AQ0aFwZkhcbVn28WQnulixufzCa89iJleawiIPi8wJQuuwjWRiHiV/1 HBSzt3B92jRPVQ5b2qgbWzIv0WkqxuR2ROiiqDADF60fN7OlM2ww0uNjp2qfThido0W2 PBbEnCdf7Gk+m6oBUWgjo+QlKC3cr2rpzewmGqZg1BHERxfcWDuS4QL3JFAnZs1E39kg 2MTksHLkMufAow5AL9lOy6bQR9Ut0I/V5zpdORKU2yLn7wiVBi8corfYizt+gU74EJUx 2mr7v9lLZAwjGU+uxgrm271zEHhxh/ab74hphNZWVA74QHya19cYtfD96T7AZUAoRTKq AE6w==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530K8f8I+fGrRZ6ctLdPYidxBZlioJxvxPTv4+ClDApCN1ZwExhk 10yiQJAl8wHpb3UmoXRCRKH5G0cozBFRFqdINmo=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJypIpnbAjxoUQtLXdOD32kXmEA5ZM4dXm0POH6h4Lzid7yvfpPB/8nZpcj8Z0VS+gLxoefbRd9woXeN9wp9Mqk=
X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:36d1:: with SMTP id b17mr13665395ejc.235.1617920228093; Thu, 08 Apr 2021 15:17:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from 1058052472880 named unknown by gmailapi.google.com with HTTPREST; Thu, 8 Apr 2021 18:17:07 -0400
From: Alvaro Retana <aretana.ietf@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <ceab0774-4837-1cc2-23da-8a6945fbebc4@cisco.com>
References: <CAMMESswF4GiLTRAYeLfhkC4w9tsr2J5YaMNFSG=979Bh2tmULw@mail.gmail.com> <836ca254-1273-7339-4c7d-f92d5e17315f@cisco.com> <CAMMESszNithwE6cGy9pkyb7Zxso=BTqwyO9oza-Ascz-5dU=jg@mail.gmail.com> <cf0a8c57-96f7-2684-8752-887887dc1831@cisco.com> <CAMMESszvHXXZpqQhrqF6MFVvpukf7vt4qLVXHocWa1JAneKXRw@mail.gmail.com> <ceab0774-4837-1cc2-23da-8a6945fbebc4@cisco.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Thu, 08 Apr 2021 18:17:07 -0400
Message-ID: <CAMMESszmppR6XCurV+Gsr-DaEEf7JW6dE0OuTEn8wFqaRmdSww@mail.gmail.com>
To: Peter Psenak <ppsenak@cisco.com>, draft-ietf-lsr-isis-srv6-extensions@ietf.org
Cc: John Scudder <jgs@juniper.net>, "lsr-chairs@ietf.org" <lsr-chairs@ietf.org>, lsr@ietf.org, Christian Hopps <chopps@chopps.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lsr/7HTrRRPIf9S1AAhOUHs0Mxq4-sk>
Subject: Re: [Lsr] AD Review of draft-ietf-lsr-isis-srv6-extensions-11
X-BeenThere: lsr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Link State Routing Working Group <lsr.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/lsr>, <mailto:lsr-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/lsr/>
List-Post: <mailto:lsr@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:lsr-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr>, <mailto:lsr-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 08 Apr 2021 22:17:18 -0000
Peter: Hi! I looked at -12. I have a couple of nits/minor comments below. There's only one significant one related to the information that must be shared between the Prefix Reachability TLV and the SRv6 Locator TLV: it is currently phrased as an example. We're also waiting of the resolution of the registry thread. If that results in not needed to add registries then you can address the comments below with any other IETF LC comments. Otherwise I'll wait for an update. Thanks! Alvaro. [Line numbers from idnits.] ... 16 Abstract ... 25 This documents updates [RFC7370] by modifying an existing registry. [minor] s/[RFC7370]/RFC 7370 No references in the Abstract. ... 102 1. Introduction ... 137 This documents updates [RFC7370] by modifying an existing registry 138 Section 11.1.2. [nit] s/Section 11.1.2/(Section 11.1.2) ... 192 4.1. Maximum Segments Left MSD Type 194 The Maximum Segments Left MSD Type specifies the maximum value of the 195 "Segments Left" field [RFC8754] in the SRH of a received packet 196 before applying the Endpoint behavior associated with a SID. [minor] s/specifies/signals ... 229 4.4. Maximum End D MSD Type 231 The Maximum End D MSD Type specifies the maximum number of SIDs 232 present in an SRH when performing decapsulation. These includes, but 233 not limited to, End.DX6, End.DT4, End.DT46, End with USD, End.X with 234 USD as defined in [RFC8986]). [nit] s/[RFC8986])/[RFC8986] ... 243 5. SRv6 SIDs and Reachability ... 263 Locators associated with algorithm 0 and 1 (for all supported 264 topologies) SHOULD be advertised in a Prefix Reachability TLV (236 or 265 237) so that legacy routers (i.e., routers which do NOT support SRv6) 266 will install a forwarding entry for algorithm 0 and 1 SRv6 traffic. [minor] s/NOT/not This is not an rfc2119 keyword -- and someone else will ask for the same thing. 268 In cases where a locator advertisement is received in both a Prefix 269 Reachability TLV and an SRv6 Locator TLV - (e.g. prefix, prefix- 270 length, MTID all being equal and Algorithm being 0 in Locator TLV), 271 the Prefix Reachability advertisement MUST be preferred when 272 installing entries in the forwarding plane. This is to prevent 273 inconsistent forwarding entries between SRv6 capable and SRv6 274 incapable routers. Such preference of Prefix Reachability 275 advertisement does not have any impact on the rest of the data 276 advertised in the SRv6 Locator TLV. [major] "e.g. prefix, prefix-length, MTID all being equal and Algorithm being 0 in Locator TLV" This text should not be an example because those are the fields that should match. Please make it clear: "The locator advertisement is both TLVs is considered the same when the following fliends match..." (or something like that with better words). ... 866 11.5. Sub-Sub-TLVs for SID Sub-TLVs 868 This document requests a new IANA registry be created under the IS-IS 869 TLV Codepoints Registry to control the assignment of sub-TLV types 870 for the SID Sub-TLVs specified in this document - Section 7.2, 871 Section 8.1, Section 8.2. The suggested name of the new registry is 872 "sub-sub-TLVs for SRv6 End SID (5) (sub-TLV of TLVs 27, 135, 235, 236 873 and 237) and SRv6 End.X SID (43)/SRv6 LAN End.X SID (44) (sub-TLVs of 874 TLVs 27, 135, 235, 236 and 237)". The registration procedure is 875 "Expert Review" as defined in [RFC8126]. Guidance for the Designated 876 Experts is provided in [RFC7370]The following assignments are made by 877 this document: [nit] s/[RFC7370]The/[RFC7370]. The 879 Type Description Encoding 880 Reference 881 --------------------------------------------------------- 882 0 Reserved 883 1 SRv6 SID Structure Sub-Sub-TLV Section 9 884 2-255 Unassigned [major] The reference should be "[This Document]". [End]
- [Lsr] AD Review of draft-ietf-lsr-isis-srv6-exten… Alvaro Retana
- Re: [Lsr] AD Review of draft-ietf-lsr-isis-srv6-e… Peter Psenak
- Re: [Lsr] AD Review of draft-ietf-lsr-isis-srv6-e… bruno.decraene
- Re: [Lsr] AD Review of draft-ietf-lsr-isis-srv6-e… Peter Psenak
- Re: [Lsr] AD Review of draft-ietf-lsr-isis-srv6-e… bruno.decraene
- Re: [Lsr] AD Review of draft-ietf-lsr-isis-srv6-e… Acee Lindem (acee)
- Re: [Lsr] AD Review of draft-ietf-lsr-isis-srv6-e… Alvaro Retana
- Re: [Lsr] AD Review of draft-ietf-lsr-isis-srv6-e… Peter Psenak
- Re: [Lsr] AD Review of draft-ietf-lsr-isis-srv6-e… Alvaro Retana
- Re: [Lsr] AD Review of draft-ietf-lsr-isis-srv6-e… Les Ginsberg (ginsberg)
- Re: [Lsr] AD Review of draft-ietf-lsr-isis-srv6-e… Peter Psenak
- Re: [Lsr] AD Review of draft-ietf-lsr-isis-srv6-e… Peter Psenak
- Re: [Lsr] AD Review of draft-ietf-lsr-isis-srv6-e… Alvaro Retana
- Re: [Lsr] AD Review of draft-ietf-lsr-isis-srv6-e… Peter Psenak
- Re: [Lsr] AD Review of draft-ietf-lsr-isis-srv6-e… Alvaro Retana
- Re: [Lsr] AD Review of draft-ietf-lsr-isis-srv6-e… Peter Psenak
- Re: [Lsr] AD Review of draft-ietf-lsr-isis-srv6-e… Alvaro Retana