Re: [Lsr] Clarification on inconsistency between RFC7794 and draft-ietf-lsr-isis-srv6-extensions

"Van De Velde, Gunter (Nokia - BE/Antwerp)" <gunter.van_de_velde@nokia.com> Wed, 24 February 2021 14:28 UTC

Return-Path: <gunter.van_de_velde@nokia.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 48D553A164F; Wed, 24 Feb 2021 06:28:12 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.471
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.471 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.57, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=nokia.onmicrosoft.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 gEu4Mo1MVAFO; Wed, 24 Feb 2021 06:28:09 -0800 (PST)
Received: from EUR05-DB8-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-db8eur05on2134.outbound.protection.outlook.com [40.107.20.134]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4F7963A165A; Wed, 24 Feb 2021 06:28:09 -0800 (PST)
ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=NtS/U1c+tOGPmvtn2DZZrTydIhGnQxsNW3VU4dvfprvChHYMfb+Yzbr1JyvcE4LeBFpF02smHJHpeSSOWRt+BnD0DQXrfu1s1l/V+7l0wtxPQu+S0k/8Uj3eIQ43eK4/QDEqmoi579W5/4dFLpxBeR5rTFwOb2CIm+pIGSQfoT+hePhjbAv9xY+DVYfCxrS1TNG4/zyMmPK8fGVltpL6Y2yLEzo97eX5C1x0e+WghqmWceJ+MscYkeF6hjBbwrYRcoYFII08b9K+N+a8f9EQB4XLSjorqu4pYEIfpKyc21lALSGqVIFDCOwXPs7Nitue9wdZNvCewQkXv/KeLKPBbg==
ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=7kn/6NFJW8K7gFrAzPm4EchkL3gP2QlJK4kS+IlN6TQ=; b=XFEUIeWgyHv9XRx/KiJko0m1CEd3KUCGeIeFg4jB7MOmf4i6DfAWByanXPGH6NmMBC6wVUNaZAUuhKmteSVQlfDCltZegdas3rLCmshLxuAFHvxju9b1coSgmibb3X3RkgSipTzNUbS+Va/ocMSwH03/Peoqp2QVDHX0crbBscTdkSlNnyyWnnj+0s2rOrbuyHsAnFAf8jb/gS4EsIIEeIR46LljL5Fpbqx9NVOByZktQoNucxCSCmQndCny9qDDJkun8TgQO3NC/xg6mV8M8blzu6T/IIj6gK5KGzadmX4j4/st9+u5UadfCEB6xRK2AvjmR2MkNm3wjCQEzWF62Q==
ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=nokia.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=nokia.com; dkim=pass header.d=nokia.com; arc=none
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=nokia.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector1-nokia-onmicrosoft-com; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=7kn/6NFJW8K7gFrAzPm4EchkL3gP2QlJK4kS+IlN6TQ=; b=xwt77NyHMFc08MOZjIcYXPD5a4np8fH2uwpdYuM65Ew1V9SGZYRFkmmqckXmjt3s56MnTdG54d/3ZuojuI8qDbTxw9/SSR+KyCS9HFONS5OsQTo1NecD3YJzkp8iPyaKLugHQHqgIqRGyDNwm2wFXngxwMmO5CydGVSKYy+N9ms=
Received: from AM0PR07MB6386.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com (2603:10a6:20b:144::23) by AM0PR07MB5187.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com (2603:10a6:208:f8::10) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.3890.9; Wed, 24 Feb 2021 14:28:06 +0000
Received: from AM0PR07MB6386.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::5978:ed2b:7cae:e555]) by AM0PR07MB6386.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::5978:ed2b:7cae:e555%3]) with mapi id 15.20.3890.016; Wed, 24 Feb 2021 14:28:06 +0000
From: "Van De Velde, Gunter (Nokia - BE/Antwerp)" <gunter.van_de_velde@nokia.com>
To: Peter Psenak <ppsenak@cisco.com>, "draft-ietf-lsr-isis-srv6-extensions@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-lsr-isis-srv6-extensions@ietf.org>
CC: "lsr@ietf.org" <lsr@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: Clarification on inconsistency between RFC7794 and draft-ietf-lsr-isis-srv6-extensions
Thread-Index: AdcKdQrZK0qw4ydZSAiQZgUFd9/T0gAG9p+AAAjecqA=
Date: Wed, 24 Feb 2021 14:28:06 +0000
Message-ID: <AM0PR07MB638677D5D0C1970A1666200DE09F9@AM0PR07MB6386.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com>
References: <AM0PR07MB6386C5C8AD58755D858650B0E09F9@AM0PR07MB6386.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com> <85c79a31-f901-a0ea-6e00-3d3aba6aa6df@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <85c79a31-f901-a0ea-6e00-3d3aba6aa6df@cisco.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
authentication-results: cisco.com; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;cisco.com; dmarc=none action=none header.from=nokia.com;
x-originating-ip: [103.40.135.162]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-ms-office365-filtering-ht: Tenant
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 7719485b-85be-4589-29c1-08d8d8d066f2
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: AM0PR07MB5187:
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <AM0PR07MB518780BABFCDC8AD00B2118DE09F9@AM0PR07MB5187.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com>
x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:9508;
x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0;
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: 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
x-forefront-antispam-report: CIP:255.255.255.255; CTRY:; LANG:en; SCL:1; SRV:; IPV:NLI; SFV:NSPM; H:AM0PR07MB6386.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com; PTR:; CAT:NONE; SFS:(4636009)(346002)(366004)(136003)(376002)(39860400002)(396003)(7696005)(33656002)(71200400001)(316002)(52536014)(86362001)(2906002)(186003)(76116006)(66946007)(8676002)(83380400001)(5660300002)(9686003)(26005)(64756008)(66574015)(53546011)(478600001)(4326008)(66556008)(6506007)(55016002)(8936002)(66446008)(66476007)(110136005); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102;
x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata: =?utf-8?B?V0YybHRTd1pQdThhMCtBcHNuelBJVThOaUVWalJLbTlsbkl3S3h1eXA3eFVM?= =?utf-8?B?cTVUSHRIVEREZWFZeG1kZXpWNXludDJlVjYyLzFTTzhnTVNzSlRPMDFOKy9H?= =?utf-8?B?akc2VFppS2FEVjcxWWUxQmFVeXl6SCszNVUvM0V2d2t5OXQ3MzNoTjR1NGFQ?= =?utf-8?B?c0paMUhETnRwZnhFNDM0SE93VjhZZllkZGlwV0ZYb2gyWWlmelVxYkN4ZWlG?= =?utf-8?B?RlRKQzZ3UVhpY1pZQ2wyeFdpOXMrRWVGckVuMXFHSnlRV1lCeFJIUWE4eFVE?= =?utf-8?B?Nlg4M3haT2VuL1VsVjMwK1IzdWwxZDRERm5QRU15WHlwb2ZCM0ZCWk56ZFMv?= =?utf-8?B?VGJCS0ZaRjdLV2UxK3ZmRnY5bTlaSEYzRVlQQUsrVUdEWWtTcE1TRFl6N21o?= =?utf-8?B?VlBWaFlyaklaWko5YnB4em1LaEZwZ2lsTlFud0s4RVFWa0tMNkxJM2hqSnBv?= =?utf-8?B?bkFOb3JWU3lNUTVUbnoyVGhCUFNwa3QySlhOMkVhUTZIOGtWRVcvWlplUFFI?= =?utf-8?B?Z1RNLzg3ODU3YmRkYzc0U1ZTalE2Z2RlSGwzRW1NaURmS0dyckxIQlBCRHE2?= =?utf-8?B?Z2sxa1p6OWdMa2lLRE14UUdBUmJXeGZOOFhWNkhaNzljYnhsRGZLU2lCMStF?= =?utf-8?B?dDNqUmdBNjZtVnA4Q2RmRVJsdFA3bk5IcXdMR0ZzbFlPNWNQTHhVd1g0WHZ2?= =?utf-8?B?Q25WejhoeVFTTENNamNQS2ZIaGNUd281UEl1ZTluV0FoOVlSWWZLaGdoVmxF?= =?utf-8?B?bENGRmdxR3FsZmlGVFFDU2NYRFlCMmRJeUxTUHVsUTJudXAvcW1taDhKL1c1?= =?utf-8?B?L2JRYXl2cEMvN0ZrdTBYdkUxRVBvYklIWEI3SDB6M3pTckhYUnM2LzVPR1N2?= =?utf-8?B?Qk54ak9ZUklOV1RmU0l5d05JclBRc2VmMmtGcnZaVmQvZmhrNEZXV0NwbVdN?= =?utf-8?B?L1VnY0J3akhRODVlNXNPWVUxSXVrZ1hrREpiSm1ZcmRZbWVYMkJNdjRPKy9Q?= =?utf-8?B?Q0dvaHNaT25VR2RxYVA1czUxdENwbjFIc1EwRjN5c2FwSzM5d0J4MWI3MDFU?= =?utf-8?B?RWMzOStjWWI5OTlQbm1EVDROYWxxcFEzRXp5R250Rm5ja243TEZwWDFwa0pq?= =?utf-8?B?YS95N3A3Zk0vcEs0WGk3bG14VWZkcFBBMGV1SFRCTnhiU2tEK0x1cFF2aHlI?= =?utf-8?B?eTFNaXh1NWJYVjB2ZEF2TExFQ2NSajl3NGFJUk52eVl4MWs5YnJQb2czdUZG?= =?utf-8?B?N2t6OGkrYllCWGc0K1F3Uk1RRnpUOVo0L242TFo5WU1tSlJ4K2xYS1RhK0hW?= =?utf-8?B?akxVK3lUMmkvdjZXYXZ3MlZ2REEvUDJSMDBUcEpGOEFWOXJ3YmV6NEJFRy9M?= =?utf-8?B?MlJJcnU3T0xCQ0NIK3NqdlBxRm84KzdXVlBLZFFBbzc5dmVLNHVTbm11bE9F?= =?utf-8?B?YVRpcjhYSWdZMXJmMmU5Qm5lUElpS3pDMURYb2duUTkxWm5LV3o0a2VOeUZK?= =?utf-8?B?NHMvQnlWRlk0NVlobi9wSXN4NWlmOHlUN1VTUG1aMUs3d2haQzByVGVNMGox?= =?utf-8?B?SW9Ickw2c0Vkd1M4Wm42MnBBRUdtaWVad3hpL2VQWTFaZGlZV2JDNkcrdzZi?= =?utf-8?B?OGtoa01kQ01nNUJMVUxOMjN4MzBWMHVPbFdQOFFDdFBKdUJzalRlWWllQlR5?= =?utf-8?B?RVM4bTdWUlk4RDlYNkNmZ0RnUnlFaExROXowWVp6cWZyekZRR01tODEyNDZq?= =?utf-8?Q?79opeeH5uUW2RXNn+E9W/UMCaEUZat+nSbgpqoD?=
x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: nokia.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthAs: Internal
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthSource: AM0PR07MB6386.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 7719485b-85be-4589-29c1-08d8d8d066f2
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 24 Feb 2021 14:28:06.3763 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 5d471751-9675-428d-917b-70f44f9630b0
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: 7/AMGkfp3nsjEkNafRS+c6WXTlID8wbuzsyejYv4QCa57GRQZnltu+KgqoxA6hYF3jkkSuv0tu7yrrs3AlOF7iP+rKe5LNsIHOBt56jm27E=
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: AM0PR07MB5187
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lsr/qruTjI7mrUuA4LEqaWWOhCZDcfc>
Subject: Re: [Lsr] Clarification on inconsistency between RFC7794 and draft-ietf-lsr-isis-srv6-extensions
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: Wed, 24 Feb 2021 14:28:12 -0000

Thanks Peter.

With algo-0 SRv6, then after the draft is updated, it will be allowed that the 
attribute flags are none-identical between locator-tlv (27) and TLV236/237? 
Is that understanding correct? 

G/


-----Original Message-----
From: Peter Psenak <ppsenak@cisco.com> 
Sent: Wednesday, February 24, 2021 16:39
To: Van De Velde, Gunter (Nokia - BE/Antwerp) <gunter.van_de_velde@nokia.com>om>; draft-ietf-lsr-isis-srv6-extensions@ietf.org
Cc: lsr@ietf.org
Subject: Re: Clarification on inconsistency between RFC7794 and draft-ietf-lsr-isis-srv6-extensions

Hi Gunter,

On 24/02/2021 07:24, Van De Velde, Gunter (Nokia - BE/Antwerp) wrote:
> Hi Peter, All,
> 
> I’m am trying to clarify a potential inconsistency between RFC7794 and 
> draft-ietf-lsr-isis-srv6-extensions.
> 
> draft-ietf-lsr-isis-srv6-extensions says that we should advertise 
> identical prefix-attribute tlv for the ipv6 reachability tlv and for 
> the locator tlv.

yes, for algo 0 only.

> 
> RFC7794 document says that we should not set the X flag in case of 
> ipv6 routes because the ipv6 reachability tlv already has an external indication.
> 
> Can you advise.
> 
>  1. draft-ietf-lsr-isis-srv6-extensions
> 
> The Prefix Attribute Flags Sub-TLV can be carried in the SRv6 Locator
> 
>     TLV as well as the Prefix Reachability TLVs.  When a router
> 
>     originates both the Prefix Reachability TLV and the SRv6 Locator 
> TLV
> 
>     for a given prefix, and the router is originating the Prefix
> 
>     Attribute Flags Sub-TLV in one of the TLVs, the router SHOULD
> 
>     advertise identical versions of the Prefix Attribute Flags Sub-TLV 
> in

For locator TLV, the is X-flag obtained from Prefix Attribute Flags Sub-TLV, unlike the TLVs 236 and 237. I will add the text to clarify that difference.

thanks,
Peter

> 
> both TLVs.
> 
>  2. RFC7794
> 
> Prefix Attribute Flags
> 
>       Type:   4
> 
>       Length: Number of octets of the Value field.
> 
>       Value:
> 
>            (Length * 8) bits.
> 
>         0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7...
> 
>        +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+...
> 
>        |X|R|N|          ...
> 
>        +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+...
> 
>     Bits are defined/sent starting with Bit 0 defined below.  
> Additional
> 
>     bit definitions that may be defined in the future SHOULD be 
> assigned
> 
>     in ascending bit order so as to minimize the number of bits that 
> will
> 
>     need to be transmitted.
> 
>     Undefined bits MUST be transmitted as 0 and MUST be ignored on
> 
>     receipt.
> 
>     Bits that are NOT transmitted MUST be treated as if they are set 
> to 0
> 
>     on receipt.
> 
>     X-Flag:  External Prefix Flag (Bit 0)
> 
>        Set if the prefix has been redistributed from another protocol.
> 
>        This includes the case where multiple virtual routers are
> 
>        supported and the source of the redistributed prefix is another
> 
>        IS-IS instance.
> 
>        The flag MUST be preserved when leaked between levels.
> 
>    In TLVs 236 and 237, this flag SHOULD always be sent as 0and MUST
> 
>        be ignored on receipt.  This is because there is an existing X
> 
>        flag defined in the fixed format of these TLVs as specified in
> 
> [RFC5308 <https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5308>] and [RFC5120 
> <https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5120>].
> 
> G/
>