Return-Path: X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D670120285; Wed, 7 Aug 2019 01:47:15 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.997 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.997 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_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-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=googlemail.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 HqrrUxwGfujE; Wed, 7 Aug 2019 01:47:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-ot1-x32c.google.com (mail-ot1-x32c.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::32c]) (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 33D6A120043; Wed, 7 Aug 2019 01:47:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ot1-x32c.google.com with SMTP id s20so35742754otp.4; Wed, 07 Aug 2019 01:47:12 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=4VzSjD8Gm5djfm1pdvyaZ5De3aLBgM6UQeYKrgaJ5j8=; b=q+JuWx3ma+jdkr3W9gx7oeZuA7F+Nmblxi9bB7ajBUTxFx+SKV7BWz5pVZFNLvR/2Y AghyPipEK+AJsUBonEHUtPtb8I1vWYS3uA3D772mAL3M69k5fl5wyRDtg1smVA4tPqWR oxYxLvcpCW3mWhy1AuMjG0XUrjSylWWbS7oVLNfLjdUIx2rHj2326sYaoQJHyMJG9u2j BGqWUdJV/o/eDDSd0tsZV7YLxCXel9mCcgtXobiLn7LpvunWSGPijJpuSeHpPGFRpav/ CesZSOMoq9Fg3Nm3/RTPhmYVG2v51HV6mlB7xMXroeNQKeHLuM2dgRcipQwtA7DAxt7u Gf5Q== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=4VzSjD8Gm5djfm1pdvyaZ5De3aLBgM6UQeYKrgaJ5j8=; b=rpT1XnCHXEnr5MwOkEQY7IsaiYsqmI/FueMLnEi2baHxavcvZvOV9MrsPNMff0pHLV GhUngu0nBHB84ndrgUIn9+SohxZmfgc/vktjuCxvBir5+7KbqMd3ipaU2BGnOQUPAfBt dOqzXrzP1qFHckuGX0hI/IjgSWWahZSIBZCFkx9TtaI1mol0uefG4wRVzra/3zayntDU uAFeRFVXoyhV3ZV1l/dYwr+G33pgnLNdA4KXqB/tA3IvpNsscr2LextUXAIpeto6qKdq qt4QG136dR1ZzYaLs9DfdiP6CumGys+4leylAGaz9MQ04BRW3effeE27bUJ4x10aTPSd rMfw== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAUmclofY0SU2aZZnu3bxXHDRcBFNfwkFFAu+3QhBdEceorQHjnX OxNomkEMoNFbD7QTnKUxN5LpfErZEp5zFDAJOas= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxT3bS+Qy7UezPpPWmIr3XvAMItbR8FsDs+s54ZDU46HBXN5jUFTFSM2F38lun6BPZmYP8klxr2t5O9LHwZ2mE= X-Received: by 2002:a5e:d817:: with SMTP id l23mr7989640iok.282.1565167631145; Wed, 07 Aug 2019 01:47:11 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <156448869146.2787.8676709133801114398@ietfa.amsl.com> <10B18110-50E1-4969-841F-084158A3EFEE@cooperw.in> In-Reply-To: From: Ines Robles Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2019 11:46:59 +0300 Message-ID: To: "Carlos Pignataro (cpignata)" Cc: Alissa Cooper , "gen-art@ietf.org" , mpls , IETF discussion list , "draft-ietf-mpls-rfc8287-len-clarification.all@ietf.org" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000ab1c69058f82fcda" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [mpls] [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-mpls-rfc8287-len-clarification-02 X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 07 Aug 2019 08:47:16 -0000 --000000000000ab1c69058f82fcda Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Carlos, Ok, thank you very much for addressing my comments. Best, Ines. On Tue, Aug 6, 2019 at 10:25 PM Carlos Pignataro (cpignata) < cpignata@cisco.com> wrote: > Hi, Ines, Many thanks for your very useful review! > > Thanks Alissa for flagging this. > > Please find some follow-up comments inline. > > > On Aug 6, 2019, at 3:11 PM, Alissa Cooper wrote: > > > > Ines, thanks for your review. I entered a DISCUSS ballot to get the > figure fixed in Section 4.2. > > > > Alissa > > > > > >> On Jul 30, 2019, at 8:11 AM, Ines Robles via Datatracker < > noreply@ietf.org> wrote: > >> > >> Reviewer: Ines Robles > >> Review result: Ready with Issues > >> > >> I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area > >> Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed > >> by the IESG for the IETF Chair. Please treat these comments just > >> like any other last call comments. > >> > >> For more information, please see the FAQ at > >> > >> . > >> > >> Document: draft-ietf-mpls-rfc8287-len-clarification-02 > >> Reviewer: Ines Robles > >> Review Date: 2019-07-30 > >> IETF LC End Date: 2019-07-31 > >> IESG Telechat date: Not scheduled for a telechat > >> > >> Summary: > >> > >> I believe the draft is technically good. This document is well written= . > >> > >> The document updates RFC8287 by clarifying the length for the followin= g > Segment > >> ID Sub-TLVs: IPv4 IGP-Prefix Segment ID Sub-TLV, IPv6 IGP-Prefix > Segment ID > >> Sub-TLV and IGP-Adjacency Segment ID Sub-TLV. > >> > >> There are some minor issues detailed below that should be addressed. > >> > >> Major issues: Not found > >> > >> Minor issues: > >> > >> 1- Section 3 - Requirements notation is not complete, it should be > added: "NOT > >> RECOMMENDED" and "...are to be interpreted as described in BCP 14 > [RFC2119] > >> [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all capitals, as shown > here.=E2=80=9D > >> > > Sure. > > >> 2- Figure of Section 4.2: Type =3D 35 (IPv4 IGP-Prefix SID) ---> Type = =3D > 35 (IPv6 > >> IGP-Prefix SID) > >> > > Indeed. Great catch and many thanks. > > >> 2.1- It would be nice if the figures have a caption where we can point > to the > >> figure number, and the figure number is referenced in the text. The > same for > >> the table of Section 4.3. > >> > > We had thought about this, and received this comment before also, but > since this is largely a fix and update to RFC 8287, we want to remain > consistent to the format used there. > > >> 3- Question: What do you think? > >> > >> I think it would be nice to explain a bit more the length for the > different > >> combinations of the table of Section 4.3, e.g. with tables as detailed > below: > > Thanks for this suggestion. To me, it seems a bit overkill to explain the > the size of an IPv4 is 4 octets, and the size of an IPv6 is 16 octets, et= c. > The fact that we are including the table seems the right middle-ground fo= r > readability, thoroughness, and detailed-orientedness. > > But thanks for the suggestion. > > Best, > > Carlos. > > >> > >> +-----------------------------+-------------------+ > >> | Field | Parallel (octets) | > >> | rfc8287#section-5.3 +-----+------+------+ > >> | | Any | OSPF | > ISIS | > >> +-----------------------------+-----+------+------+ > >> | Local Interface ID | 4 | 4 | 4 | > >> +-----------------------------+-----+------+------+ > >> | Remote Interface ID | 4 | 4 | 4 | > >> +-----------------------------+-----+------+------+ > >> | Advertising Node Identifier | 4 | 4 | 6 | > >> +-----------------------------+-----+------+------+ > >> | Receiving Node Identifier | 4 | 4 | 6 | > >> +-----------------------------+-----+------+------+ > >> | Reserved | 2 | 2 | > 2 | > >> +-----------------------------+-----+------+------+ > >> | Adj. Type + Protocol | 2 | 2 | 2 | > >> +-----------------------------+-----+------+------+ > >> | Sum Total octets =3D | 20 | 20 | 24 = | > >> +-----------------------------+-----+------+------+ > >> > >> +-----------------------------+-------------------+ > >> | Field | IPv4 (octets) = | > >> | rfc8287#section-5.3 +-----+------+------+ > >> | | Any | OSPF = | > ISIS | > >> +-----------------------------+-----+------+------+ > >> | Local Interface ID | 4 | 4 | 4 | > >> +-----------------------------+-----+------+------+ > >> | Remote Interface ID | 4 | 4 | 4 | > >> +-----------------------------+-----+------+------+ > >> | Advertising Node Identifier | 4 | 4 | 6 | > >> +-----------------------------+-----+------+------+ > >> | Receiving Node Identifier | 4 | 4 | 6 | > >> +-----------------------------+-----+------+------+ > >> | Reserved | 2 | 2 | > 2 | > >> +-----------------------------+-----+------+------+ > >> | Adj. Type + Protocol | 2 | 2 | 2 | > >> +-----------------------------+-----+------+------+ > >> | Sum Total octets =3D | 20 | 20 | 24 | > >> +-----------------------------+-----+------+------+ > >> > >> +-----------------------------+-------------------+ > >> | Field | IPv6 (octets) > | > >> | rfc8287#section-5.3 +-----+------+------+ > >> | | Any | OSPF | > ISIS | > >> +-----------------------------+-----+------+------+ > >> | Local Interface ID | 16 | 16 | 16 | > >> +-----------------------------+-----+------+------+ > >> | Remote Interface ID | 16 | 16 | 16 | > >> +-----------------------------+-----+------+------+ > >> | Advertising Node IdentifieR | 4 | 4 | 6 | > >> +-----------------------------+-----+------+------+ > >> | Receiving Node Identifier | 4 | 4 | 6 | > >> +-----------------------------+-----+------+------+ > >> | Reserved | 2 | 2 | > 2 | > >> +-----------------------------+-----+------+------+ > >> | Adj. Type + Protocol | 2 | 2 | 2 | > >> +-----------------------------+-----+------+------+ > >> | sum Total octets =3D | 44 | 44 | 48 = | > >> +-----------------------------+-----+------+------+ > >> > >> Nits/editorial comments: Issue tool: Summary: 0 errors (**), 0 flaws > (~~), 0 > >> warnings (=3D=3D), 1 comment (--). > >> > >> Thanks for this document, > >> > >> Ines > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Gen-art mailing list > >> Gen-art@ietf.org > >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art > > > > --000000000000ab1c69058f82fcda Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi Carlos,

Ok, thank you very much for = addressing my comments.

Best,

=
Ines.

On Tue, Aug 6, 2019 at 10:25 PM Carlos Pignataro (cpignata)= <cpignata@cisco.com> wrote= :
Hi, Ines, Many= thanks for your very useful review!

Thanks Alissa for flagging this.

Please find some follow-up comments inline.

> On Aug 6, 2019, at 3:11 PM, Alissa Cooper <alissa@cooperw.in> wrote:
>
> Ines, thanks for your review. I entered a DISCUSS ballot to get the fi= gure fixed in Section 4.2.
>
> Alissa
>
>
>> On Jul 30, 2019, at 8:11 AM, Ines Robles via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> w= rote:
>>
>> Reviewer: Ines Robles
>> Review result: Ready with Issues
>>
>> I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Are= a
>> Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed >> by the IESG for the IETF Chair.=C2=A0 Please treat these comments = just
>> like any other last call comments.
>>
>> For more information, please see the FAQ at
>>
>> <https://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenAr= tfaq>.
>>
>> Document: draft-ietf-mpls-rfc8287-len-clarification-02
>> Reviewer: Ines Robles
>> Review Date: 2019-07-30
>> IETF LC End Date: 2019-07-31
>> IESG Telechat date: Not scheduled for a telechat
>>
>> Summary:
>>
>> I believe the draft is technically good. This document is well wri= tten.
>>
>> The document updates RFC8287 by clarifying the length for the foll= owing Segment
>> ID Sub-TLVs: IPv4 IGP-Prefix Segment ID Sub-TLV, IPv6 IGP-Prefix S= egment ID
>> Sub-TLV and IGP-Adjacency Segment ID Sub-TLV.
>>
>> There are some minor issues detailed below that should be addresse= d.
>>
>> Major issues: Not found
>>
>> Minor issues:
>>
>> 1- Section 3 - Requirements notation is not complete, it should be= added:=C2=A0 "NOT
>> RECOMMENDED" and "...are to be interpreted as described = in BCP 14 [RFC2119]
>> [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all capitals, as sho= wn here.=E2=80=9D
>>

Sure.

>> 2- Figure of Section 4.2: Type =3D 35 (IPv4 IGP-Prefix SID) --->= ; Type =3D 35 (IPv6
>> IGP-Prefix SID)
>>

Indeed. Great catch and many thanks.

>> 2.1- It would be nice if the figures have a caption where we can p= oint to the
>> figure number, and the figure number is referenced in the text. Th= e same for
>> the table of Section 4.3.
>>

We had thought about this, and received this comment before also, but since= this is largely a fix and update to RFC 8287, we want to remain consistent= to the format used there.

>> 3- Question: What do you think?
>>
>> I think it would be nice to explain a bit more the length for the = different
>> combinations of the table of Section 4.3, e.g. with tables as deta= iled below:

Thanks for this suggestion. To me, it seems a bit overkill to explain the t= he size of an IPv4 is 4 octets, and the size of an IPv6 is 16 octets, etc. = The fact that we are including the table seems the right middle-ground for = readability, thoroughness, and detailed-orientedness.

But thanks for the suggestion.

Best,

Carlos.

>>
>> +-----------------------------+-------------------+
>> |=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Field=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2= =A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 = =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0| Parallel (octets) |
>> |=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0rfc8287#section-5.3=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2= =A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 +-----+------+------+
>> |=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 = =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2= =A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0| Any | OSPF | I= SIS |
>> +-----------------------------+-----+------+------+
>> |=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Local Interface ID=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2= =A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 |=C2=A0 4=C2=A0 |=C2=A0 =C2= =A04=C2=A0 |=C2=A0 =C2=A04=C2=A0 |
>> +-----------------------------+-----+------+------+
>> |=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0Remote Interface ID=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2= =A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0|=C2=A0 4=C2=A0 |=C2=A0 =C2=A04=C2=A0= |=C2=A0 =C2=A04=C2=A0 |
>> +-----------------------------+-----+------+------+
>> | Advertising Node Identifier=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 |= =C2=A0 4=C2=A0 |=C2=A0 =C2=A04=C2=A0 |=C2=A0 =C2=A06=C2=A0 |
>> +-----------------------------+-----+------+------+
>> |=C2=A0 Receiving Node Identifier=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2= =A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0|=C2=A0 4=C2=A0 |=C2=A0 =C2=A04=C2=A0 |=C2=A0 =C2=A06=C2= =A0 |
>> +-----------------------------+-----+------+------+
>> |=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0Reserved=C2=A0 =C2=A0 = =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2= =A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0|=C2=A0 2=C2=A0 |=C2=A0 =C2=A02=C2=A0 |=C2= =A0 =C2=A02=C2=A0 |
>> +-----------------------------+-----+------+------+
>> |=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0Adj. Type + Protocol=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2= =A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0|=C2=A0 2=C2=A0 |=C2=A0= =C2=A02=C2=A0 |=C2=A0 =C2=A02=C2=A0 |
>> +-----------------------------+-----+------+------+
>> |=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0Sum Total octets =3D=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2= =A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 |=C2=A0 20 |=C2= =A0 20=C2=A0 |=C2=A0 24=C2=A0 |
>> +-----------------------------+-----+------+------+
>>
>> +-----------------------------+-------------------+
>> |=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Field=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2= =A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 = =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 |=C2=A0 =C2=A0IPv4 (octets)=C2=A0 =C2=A0|
>> |=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0rfc8287#section-5.3=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2= =A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0+-----+------+------+
>> |=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 = =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2= =A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 | Any | OSPF | = ISIS |
>> +-----------------------------+-----+------+------+
>> |=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Local Interface ID=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2= =A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0|=C2=A0 4=C2=A0 |=C2=A0= =C2=A04=C2=A0 |=C2=A0 =C2=A04=C2=A0 |
>> +-----------------------------+-----+------+------+
>> |=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0Remote Interface ID=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2= =A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0|=C2=A0 4=C2=A0 |=C2=A0 =C2=A04=C2=A0= |=C2=A0 =C2=A04=C2=A0 |
>> +-----------------------------+-----+------+------+
>> | Advertising Node Identifier=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 = =C2=A0|=C2=A0 4=C2=A0 |=C2=A0 =C2=A04=C2=A0 |=C2=A0 =C2=A06=C2=A0 |
>> +-----------------------------+-----+------+------+
>> |=C2=A0 Receiving Node Identifier=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2= =A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0|=C2=A0 4=C2=A0 |=C2=A0 =C2=A04=C2=A0 |=C2=A0 =C2=A06=C2= =A0 |
>> +-----------------------------+-----+------+------+
>> |=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0Reserved=C2=A0 =C2=A0 = =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2= =A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 |=C2=A0 2=C2=A0 |=C2=A0 =C2=A02=C2=A0 |=C2= =A0 =C2=A02=C2=A0 |
>> +-----------------------------+-----+------+------+
>> |=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0Adj. Type + Protocol=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2= =A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0|=C2=A0 2=C2=A0 |=C2=A0= =C2=A02=C2=A0 |=C2=A0 =C2=A02=C2=A0 |
>> +-----------------------------+-----+------+------+
>> |=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0Sum Total octets =3D=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2= =A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0|=C2=A0 20 |=C2= =A0 20=C2=A0 |=C2=A0 24=C2=A0 |
>> +-----------------------------+-----+------+------+
>>
>> +-----------------------------+-------------------+
>> |=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Field=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2= =A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 = =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 |=C2=A0 =C2=A0IPv6 (octets)=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0= =C2=A0 |
>> |=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0rfc8287#section-5.3=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2= =A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0+-----+------+------+
>> |=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 = =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2= =A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0| Any | OSPF | I= SIS |
>> +-----------------------------+-----+------+------+
>> |=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Local Interface ID=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2= =A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 |=C2=A0 16 |=C2=A0 16=C2=A0 |= =C2=A0 16=C2=A0 |
>> +-----------------------------+-----+------+------+
>> |=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0Remote Interface ID=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2= =A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 |=C2=A0 16 |=C2=A0 16=C2=A0 |=C2=A0 = 16=C2=A0 |
>> +-----------------------------+-----+------+------+
>> | Advertising Node IdentifieR=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 = =C2=A0|=C2=A0 4=C2=A0 |=C2=A0 =C2=A04=C2=A0 |=C2=A0 =C2=A06=C2=A0 |
>> +-----------------------------+-----+------+------+
>> |=C2=A0 Receiving Node Identifier=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2= =A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 |=C2=A0 4=C2=A0 |=C2=A0 =C2=A04=C2=A0 |=C2=A0 =C2=A06=C2= =A0 |
>> +-----------------------------+-----+------+------+
>> |=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0Reserved=C2=A0 =C2=A0 = =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2= =A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 |=C2=A0 2=C2=A0 |=C2=A0 =C2=A02=C2=A0 |=C2= =A0 =C2=A02=C2=A0 |
>> +-----------------------------+-----+------+------+
>> |=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0Adj. Type + Protocol=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2= =A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0|=C2=A0 2=C2=A0 |=C2=A0= =C2=A02=C2=A0 |=C2=A0 =C2=A02=C2=A0 |
>> +-----------------------------+-----+------+------+
>> |=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0sum=C2=A0 Total octets =3D=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2= =A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0|=C2=A0 4= 4 |=C2=A0 44=C2=A0 |=C2=A0 48=C2=A0 |
>> +-----------------------------+-----+------+------+
>>
>> Nits/editorial comments: Issue tool: Summary: 0 errors (**), 0 fla= ws (~~), 0
>> warnings (=3D=3D), 1 comment (--).
>>
>> Thanks for this document,
>>
>> Ines
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Gen-art mailing list
>> Gen-art@ietf= .org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art<= /a>
>

--000000000000ab1c69058f82fcda--