IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [OSPF] draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment-routing-extensions

"Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee@cisco.com> Mon, 02 October 2017 18:45 UTC

Return-Path: <acee@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 36B7A134761 for <ospf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 2 Oct 2017 11:45:48 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.52
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.52 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.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 5XCPDXFSAD6I for <ospf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 2 Oct 2017 11:45:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from alln-iport-7.cisco.com (alln-iport-7.cisco.com [173.37.142.94]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9C18613303F for <ospf@ietf.org>; Mon, 2 Oct 2017 11:45:43 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=2288; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1506969943; x=1508179543; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-id:content-transfer-encoding: mime-version; bh=rLruC6xHb4fG6ecoCRXm9le6IGi6qGDbm9yL2+RSrhk=; b=F9khpeyyzoXst/fY6KKfSDAN8rDt7CrYddcTeoZyU9Rb/fDdqVFXw8k+ gr3ehU9LEs8sagp9JBnCNgTdYIH/THGfHZP65yQDbRmcQ5zVwzsz+ZY4V 1ewSMNBDa6OOgVWn68V8FCK/SdO3O4SwLkwo+y4aKZDuBFp9WgGFO/54L 8=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0DoAQAfiNJZ/4UNJK1dGQEBAQEBAQEBA?= =?us-ascii?q?QEBBwEBAQEBg12BUicHg3KaA4F2iEOPHANcCoU7AhqEJ1cBAgEBAQEBAmsohRg?= =?us-ascii?q?BAQEBAyMRRQwEAgEIEQMBAgMCJgICAh8RFQgIAgQOBYoYAxWlNIInh0ENg2QBA?= =?us-ascii?q?QEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEdgQ6CH4ICgzqDKYJegiYXD4JtgmEFoHY8Ao9?= =?us-ascii?q?qhHmTCYxwiDcCERkBgTgBV08/eBWFYxyBZ3aINIEQAQEB?=
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.42,470,1500940800"; d="scan'208";a="11116873"
Received: from alln-core-11.cisco.com ([173.36.13.133]) by alln-iport-7.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA; 02 Oct 2017 18:45:42 +0000
Received: from XCH-RTP-014.cisco.com (xch-rtp-014.cisco.com [64.101.220.154]) by alln-core-11.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id v92Ijg2j022903 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Mon, 2 Oct 2017 18:45:42 GMT
Received: from xch-rtp-015.cisco.com (64.101.220.155) by XCH-RTP-014.cisco.com (64.101.220.154) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1320.4; Mon, 2 Oct 2017 14:45:41 -0400
Received: from xch-rtp-015.cisco.com ([64.101.220.155]) by XCH-RTP-015.cisco.com ([64.101.220.155]) with mapi id 15.00.1320.000; Mon, 2 Oct 2017 14:45:41 -0400
From: "Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee@cisco.com>
To: "Goethals, Dirk (Nokia - BE/Antwerp)" <dirk.goethals@nokia.com>
CC: OSPF WG List <ospf@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment-routing-extensions
Thread-Index: AQHTO60ryqq8gPAgzUW33ifgYlff26LQ5d+A
Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2017 18:45:41 +0000
Message-ID: <D5F7FF31.CA93E%acee@cisco.com>
References: <00091bae-e9ac-ed07-d7f9-ac18c45d565f@nokia.com> <59D286DA.5080205@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <59D286DA.5080205@cisco.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [10.116.152.196]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-ID: <635294E2B0CB8F42B8F84C193AD88D36@emea.cisco.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ospf/4G-CVdRZLJsGTwTAAQOJQVVWQYY>
Subject: Re: [OSPF] draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment-routing-extensions
X-BeenThere: ospf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: Mon, 02 Oct 2017 18:45:48 -0000

Hi Dirk, 

I agree we should use the same term but we have finished WG last call and
AD review for the OSPFv2 Segment Routing extensions. Additionally,
everyone is familiar with the term link-group. A link-set would be new
terminology. Let’s fix the IS-IS draft.

Thanks,
Acee  
>
>
>
>-------- Original Message --------
>Subject: 	draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment-routing-extensions
>Resent-Date: 	Wed, 13 Sep 2017 06:26:45 -0700
>Resent-From: 	<alias-bounces@ietf.org>
>Resent-To: 	<ppsenak@cisco.com>om>, <stefano@previdi.net>et>,
><cfilsfil@cisco.com>o.com>, <hannes@rtbrick.com>om>, <robjs@google.com>om>,
><wim.henderickx@nokia.com>a.com>, <jefftant.ietf@gmail.com>
>Date: 	Wed, 13 Sep 2017 15:26:47 +0200
>From: 	Dirk Goethals <dirk.goethals@nokia.com>
>To: 	<draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment-routing-extensions@ietf.org>rg>,
><draft-ietf-isis-segment-routing-extensions@ietf.org>f.org>,
>"draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions@ietf.org"
><draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions@ietf.org>
>
>
>
>Hi authors,
>
>OSPF's G-flag and ISIS's S-flag are both representing adjacency sets,
>see snip below,
>can we align these definitions and simply call it S-Flag in both IGPs.
>
>Thx,
>Dirk
>
>OSPFv2 and OSPFv3:
>
>           The G-Flag.  Group Flag.  When set, the G-Flag indicates that
>           the Adj-SID refers to a set of adjacencies (and therefore MAY
>           be assigned to other adjacencies as well).
>
>
>
>ISIS:
>
>           S-Flag.  Set flag.  When set, the S-Flag indicates that the
>           Adj-SID refers to a set of adjacencies (and therefore MAY be
>           assigned to other adjacencies as well).
>
>.
>
>

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email