[OSPF] draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment-routing-extensions-03

"Anil Kumar S N (VRP Network BL)" <anil.sn@huawei.com> Tue, 22 September 2015 08:02 UTC

Return-Path: <anil.sn@huawei.com>
X-Original-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A4CC1A01F4; Tue, 22 Sep 2015 01:02:33 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.21
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.21 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id m1s1sjU44ufc; Tue, 22 Sep 2015 01:02:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com []) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 312861A0181; Tue, 22 Sep 2015 01:02:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from (EHLO lhreml404-hub.china.huawei.com) ([]) by lhrrg01-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.3.7-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id CBO70336; Tue, 22 Sep 2015 08:02:28 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from nkgeml405-hub.china.huawei.com ( by lhreml404-hub.china.huawei.com ( with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id; Tue, 22 Sep 2015 09:02:26 +0100
Received: from NKGEML512-MBX.china.huawei.com ([]) by nkgeml405-hub.china.huawei.com ([]) with mapi id 14.03.0235.001; Tue, 22 Sep 2015 16:02:22 +0800
From: "Anil Kumar S N (VRP Network BL)" <anil.sn@huawei.com>
To: Peter Psenak <ppsenak@cisco.com>, "sprevidi@cisco.com" <sprevidi@cisco.com>, "cfilsfil@cisco.com" <cfilsfil@cisco.com>, "hannes@juniper.net" <hannes@juniper.net>, "rob.shakir@bt.com" <rob.shakir@bt.com>, "draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment-routing-extensions.all@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment-routing-extensions.all@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment-routing-extensions-03
Thread-Index: AdD1DQJIQ5Q47XwURc2+jKkx8N5BFA==
Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2015 08:02:21 +0000
Message-ID: <327562D94EA7BF428CD805F338C31EF06C05F21E@nkgeml512-mbx.china.huawei.com>
Accept-Language: en-US, zh-CN
Content-Language: en-US
x-originating-ip: []
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_327562D94EA7BF428CD805F338C31EF06C05F21Enkgeml512mbxchi_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ospf/3VN4Fc-L6MgTuPFFY3LS2MSUB5Y>
Cc: OSPF WG List <ospf@ietf.org>
Subject: [OSPF] draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment-routing-extensions-03
X-BeenThere: ospf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: The Official IETF OSPG WG Mailing List <ospf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ospf>, <mailto:ospf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ospf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ospf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ospf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf>, <mailto:ospf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2015 08:02:33 -0000

Hi Authors,

In OSPFv3 Extensions for Segment Routing I couldn't find any references to MT-ID considered for Node, Prefix & Adjacency SID advertisement in contrast to OSPFv2 and ISIS SR extensions.

Please let me know you opinion on the same.

Thanks & Regards
Anil S N

"Be liberal in what you accept, and conservative in what you send" - Jon Postel