Re: [Lsr] Opsdir last call review of draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment-routing-extensions-16

[Peter Psenak <[e-mail]>]

Hi Alvaro,

done.

Have some issues posting the new ospfv2 draft, so requested manual posting.

thanks,
Peter

On 16/11/18 22:40 , Alvaro Retana wrote:
> [Took the ops-dir and the ietf@ietf lists off.]
>
> Hi!
>
> Joe makes a really good point below about the TLV types and RFC7770.  It
> looks like we all missed it! :-(
>
> To quote Peter (from a message in this thread), "I don't think it is
> good to specify the behavior which is described somewhere else.”
>
> Looking at -18, Section 4
> (draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment-routing-extensions) has the exact same
> text [*] as Section 3 in draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions.
> Given that the IANA allocation is done
> in draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions, and
> that draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment-routing-extensions refers back to
> it, then I would like to see the following changes:
>
> (1) In draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions, Section 3:
>
> <OLD>
> These SR capabilities are advertised in the Router Information Opaque
> LSA (defined in [RFC7770]).
>
> <NEW>
> These SR capabilities are advertised in the Router Information Opaque
> LSA (defined in [RFC7770]).  The TLVs defined below are applicable to
> both OSPFv2 and OSPFv3; see also
> [ID.ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment-routing-extensions].
>
> …and add an Informative reference to
> draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment-routing-extensions.
>
> (2) In draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment-routing-extensions, replace the
> entire Section 4 with:
>
> "
> Segment Routing requires some additional router capabilities to be
> advertised to other routers in the area.
>
> These SR capabilities are advertised in the OSPFv3 Router Information
> Opaque LSA (defined in [RFC7770]), and specified in
> [ID.ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions].
> “
>
>
> Even though draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions is already with
> the RFC Editor, it is waiting
> for draft-ietf-spring-segment-routing-mpls, so we can still make
> changes.  Please submit a new version (and send an update of the XML to
> the rfc-editor).
>
> I am scheduling draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment-routing-extensions on the
> Dec/6 IESG Telechat.  Please submit an update before the end of this month.
>
> Thanks!!
>
> Alvaro.
>
>
>
> [*] Except for the OSPFv3 being specifically called out, and a couple of
> other minor points.
>
> On October 30, 2018 at 8:05:27 AM, Peter Psenak ([e-mail]
> <mailto:[e-mail]>) wrote:
>
>> > With respect to TLV types 8, 9, 14, and 15, they are defined in
>> > draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions, and it took me a while to figure
>> > out where you were getting those values and why they weren't spelled out in the
>> > IANA considerations. You have a normative reference to this, which is good,
>> > but you only mention it with respect to the algorithm parameters. I think
>> > another mention is required.
>> >
>> > I'm going to be pedantic here. According to RFC7770, when a new OSPF Router
>> > Information LSA TLV is defined, the spec needs to explicitly state if it's
>> > applicable to OSPFv2, v3, or both. While you reference the TLVs from
>> > draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions, I didn't see that either document
>> > _explicitly_ states that they are applicable to both.
>>
>> ##PP
>> added the following to each of the values:
>>
>> Type: X as defined in [I-D.ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions] and
>> aplicable to OSPFv3.