[OSPF] Comment on draft-ppsenak-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse-01

[Julien Meuric <[e-mail]>]

Hi Pete,

I believe the new text in the section 5 of the aforementioned I-D is a 
nice improvement for the specification (thank you Chris).

However, the current version still says "TE will use the information in 
the TE Opaque LSA and the non-TE applications will use the information 
in the OSPFv2 Extended Link Opaque LSA". Then remote LFA joins the 
party, and I wonder if it is a "TE application" or not. As "there is no 
IETF specification documenting" what would strictly fall under "TE 
application" or "non-TE application", and even no real need to define a 
strict boundary, I consider that sentence as over-specification and 
suggest to jusst drop it. That would let applications themselves look 
for that information where relevant/specified, whether they 
philosophically feel like being TE or not.

What is more, I really think that the current wording  is too loose in 
"it is expected that the information in these LSA [sic] would be 
identical". I do not see the drawback of having full alignment of values 
in case of duplication, but I see the operational risk of nightmare in 
case they are not. As a result, I suggest to rephrase into: "If the same 
link attribute is advertised in both LSAs, the information in these LSAs 
MUST be identical."

Cheers,

Julien