Re: [Lsr] IGP TE Metric Extensions

Muthu Arul Mozhi Perumal <> Thu, 31 May 2018 16:14 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id D42DD12EB67 for <>; Thu, 31 May 2018 09:14:57 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 7xZZBVk0FJqK for <>; Thu, 31 May 2018 09:14:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c0b::22d]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 500C212EB9F for <>; Thu, 31 May 2018 09:14:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id 144-v6so28289778iti.5 for <>; Thu, 31 May 2018 09:14:55 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=LsW0yFjqPSrQ7Sp8fBMc8bmJVx37lgiknZaNPCSFEg0=; b=YJ8zWYKe23Xg8qg2kKeJF7RFovt6pPWos3g2yX7cOxscXIRuoMeFOpHp0FA91jQfEY SbOXfOtHhVaUi44vLbhAp+RnyEgVjpy9HucwbGiP3K1Ht4CU3DTv9yIbBuhjgmy/FZA8 TZR6lyEGm12XtxGLRJgsvv4XIao416uk9VQdhFix+nvUxiomCF9RlkoxYyaxsvkupYGD ShkhqNOtI3vmAlIrWNgRRKZBclKGc8M0LzshffDl8tQxFh6VbgfXmeNGheW/9wwl6uAo OKeLDbJvYsLATDk/E9JG6CG8NKMSGUTFXZ6/4wLBhVedX/g+6+/5wEvunZk5YzCpUuAP 5qig==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=LsW0yFjqPSrQ7Sp8fBMc8bmJVx37lgiknZaNPCSFEg0=; b=GJVHvk9CElNH+uEbSnEpzpKn74LnkvOE2v/++JL5tlLRl6pzGmHLHdYApFuLksSocr EkN0SdMOaN/fHVq3Ezlce11Y1OeFWNikZSjKD0WJmI6q9Omf1bFJ5iFTRhGxjYO0HtSI DIpOexL54UpdL/tnyEo+8f8Y/vGnVfViJTx7IJm7e/Ku/N/4wJqOCTvLuem5ChNKK+/X IQKmkBX8Xh1kGxDQQLlxiYqEn7Q1dVqcxnk7+ZSAR8x0GJZSoD8O8kc7SDZ4DXAxTZ// X0qkqCdgmIWxyJkeAr1rM0vbGRmREoocD2jYa64TdBXRQkA1r89iE2qebzk03491FzVE ZzmQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALKqPwd4p+zxsmdm1BkXHFEfl782JvcbgdSmWl/zzs45z6mBMuXDF2Hw /gB8PUD86kFgWy9cpnmCWrYsjmcQhJF1Cah4ass=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADUXVKLRmO8deBd+/QB6V4YKNrhEUctrn8b3/tC7/hOn4qiOIIUL0apMaFE+GP6fFtbGCjIthK8tGyPyL3JjLKkodG4=
X-Received: by 2002:a24:6806:: with SMTP id v6-v6mr608096itb.139.1527783294701; Thu, 31 May 2018 09:14:54 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 2002:a02:9802:0:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Thu, 31 May 2018 09:14:54 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <> <>
From: Muthu Arul Mozhi Perumal <>
Date: Thu, 31 May 2018 21:44:54 +0530
Message-ID: <>
To: Jeff Tantsura <>,
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000009315c3056d82c440"
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [Lsr] IGP TE Metric Extensions
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: Link State Routing Working Group <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 31 May 2018 16:14:58 -0000

Thanks, Jeff. Would be good to have this clarified
in draft-ginsberg-isis-rfc7810bis. My original message seems to have been
stripped off, so including it again for the lsr list..

​Both RFC 7810 and RFC 7471 say that:

   The measurement interval, any filter coefficients, and any
   advertisement intervals MUST be configurable per sub-TLV.

   Additionally, the default measurement interval for all sub-TLVs
   SHOULD be 30 seconds.

However, both RFCs initially say that they only describe mechanisms for
disseminating performance information and methods of measurements is
outside their scope.

Moreover, for a first time reader, it seems to suggest that the measurement
interval and filter coefficient must be supported and configurable under
the IGP. In a system supporting multiple IGPs, I would expect that they be
implemented outside the IGP and the IGPs just disseminate the information
provided to them.

Thoughts, especially from an implementation standpoint?


On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 11:37 AM, Jeff Tantsura <>

> Muthu,
> LSR would be a more suitable list to post to, CCed.
> Regards,
> Jeff
> > On May 30, 2018, at 18:06, Muthu Arul Mozhi Perumal <
>> wrote:
> >
> > Muthu