IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Lsr] AD Review of draft-ietf-lsr-isis-srv6-extensions-11

Alvaro Retana <aretana.ietf@gmail.com> Fri, 09 April 2021 20:54 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 1F60F3A10AD; Fri, 9 Apr 2021 13:54:54 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.097
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 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, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 0KtcaxlTuk3t; Fri, 9 Apr 2021 13:54:49 -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 4D9103A10AC; Fri, 9 Apr 2021 13:54:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ej1-x634.google.com with SMTP id a7so10721067eju.1; Fri, 09 Apr 2021 13:54:49 -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=b6Jjs/6nzg3M7x3RLypLKQrRbGaoJXZWPt8upsKc6Ls=; b=XwLMvYkV/jNbZJDfXh/cqyjKwcKaa/QSXN8UTHHgZT0s0vnykLa5wFBWgwkudToA9J jrqi9B9yNcbCaAos26u3JuKRuqKtFszbHgFnm5/hM4SuX6BX63wtM8svmpBBLMoIdqoU 6EBHEVhQ60InepQouT1hBtIAq9h4eb2w0nkIw7VRDk6tvo3NU2/RXM/CCS99qr9Wfo4P tamTEiyGEawNN+51V6/4KwMxXn+s4PaN0YxCkHaWoGYcev1SOigOz/vXuG9P4cMgAOO/ JSBJ5XplBzEY7oG/+uDU1LI3LR7q9WIgbm201CM6ppfrPlJIxc51QqDAhz9O1vCq3pKd 7/Sw==
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=b6Jjs/6nzg3M7x3RLypLKQrRbGaoJXZWPt8upsKc6Ls=; b=tZtcb3zG4v6M4vspvqDJSnQWwb2ROSd7iKXsK5SH3fo6/7nyw6hJdBxDXFab6iT5DW sMdCr/ck+9LbA0sk18GAFOBPS8Dme0/+dexRe0G1cxiQfaMVC9iqewm8rSWUVWYXmfnj xiGPx4j4fTyPwIPMHx4ucdqcuROWO3VYlDCqw3i9BUnhqlLSOOPZ/B0RfhoHybti7mxe bbLI+BJdeZvTVhjkw73N5XR+8Dq3HdhFBczrNHawkIivB/HKjJWUophkMmkygVZ/qZM+ gAUg+ZXc3stOPARjgt8ur4JQ8TQ2v4KM4A+TErWobxiEnqoOAteWETnO25IGgdJxGd0g VdBw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532KEz75xBpMg74LRSc8f1qJyES+WocDqaBGf5Y6aO51p6SqtFr0 B4pCzuty656Q88AaGXwHpkRNEXIs4kjF4kru7Ib1uUlUdI0=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJza8zW/jxZc+h0emq4Gbz42u+BWvv1tU0Rg9qHLqh27CZ4CtBOvsB7DOQTEFiOqDiboOgkHiY5JjKmmnfJ6Y7I=
X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:8242:: with SMTP id f2mr17458147ejx.478.1618001682604; Fri, 09 Apr 2021 13:54:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from 1058052472880 named unknown by gmailapi.google.com with HTTPREST; Fri, 9 Apr 2021 13:54:42 -0700
From: Alvaro Retana <aretana.ietf@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <a1473c8c-fdc1-c004-3caf-ed34eefbaf95@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> <CAMMESszmppR6XCurV+Gsr-DaEEf7JW6dE0OuTEn8wFqaRmdSww@mail.gmail.com> <a1473c8c-fdc1-c004-3caf-ed34eefbaf95@cisco.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Fri, 09 Apr 2021 13:54:42 -0700
Message-ID: <CAMMESsxV9eL9bxf_ayms3JWn+JiUTPM09Y_MUfZ9Qt3EagA5AQ@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/DBYdIid0m06CBjjh5uFmHDi_o-k>
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: Fri, 09 Apr 2021 20:54:54 -0000

Peter:

I’m ok with the text below.

Thanks!

Alvaro.


On April 9, 2021 at 4:12:43 AM, Peter Psenak (ppsenak@cisco.com
(mailto:ppsenak@cisco.com)) wrote:

> > 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).
>
> what about:
>
> "In case where the same prefix, with the same prefix-length, MTID and
> algorithm is received in both a Prefix Reachability TLV and an SRv6
> Locator TLV the Prefix Reachability advertisement MUST be preferred.."
> >

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email