IETF Logo Mail Archive

[OSPF] [Adj-SID Flags] Regarding newly added 'P' flag

Veerendranatha Reddy Vallem <veerendranatharv@huawei.com> Thu, 02 March 2017 04:53 UTC

Return-Path: <veerendranatharv@huawei.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 ED821129488; Wed, 1 Mar 2017 20:53:28 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.221
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.221 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 uk52KjGuB0PS; Wed, 1 Mar 2017 20:53:27 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [194.213.3.17]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5B1C4127077; Wed, 1 Mar 2017 20:53:26 -0800 (PST)
Received: from 172.18.7.190 (EHLO lhreml709-cah.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.7.190]) by lhrrg01-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.3.7-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id DIB04915; Thu, 02 Mar 2017 04:53:24 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from BLREML703-CAH.china.huawei.com (10.20.4.172) by lhreml709-cah.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.32) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.301.0; Thu, 2 Mar 2017 04:53:23 +0000
Received: from BLREML501-MBX.china.huawei.com ([10.20.5.198]) by blreml703-cah.china.huawei.com ([::1]) with mapi id 14.03.0301.000; Thu, 2 Mar 2017 10:23:19 +0530
From: Veerendranatha Reddy Vallem <veerendranatharv@huawei.com>
To: "draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment-routing-extensions@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment-routing-extensions@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [Adj-SID Flags] Regarding newly added 'P' flag
Thread-Index: AdKTEGPu1gUHEiJERAeHFca7WT8ZXA==
Date: Thu, 02 Mar 2017 04:53:19 +0000
Message-ID: <73BFDDFFF499304EB26FE5FDEF20F7885087843A@blreml501-mbx>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.18.152.243]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_73BFDDFFF499304EB26FE5FDEF20F7885087843Ablreml501mbx_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
X-Mirapoint-Virus-RAPID-Raw: score=unknown(0), refid=str=0001.0A0B0201.58B7A544.01DB, ss=1, re=0.000, recu=0.000, reip=0.000, cl=1, cld=1, fgs=0, ip=0.0.0.0, so=2013-06-18 04:22:30, dmn=2013-03-21 17:37:32
X-Mirapoint-Loop-Id: f81bc0c82264b6be8a51f5f32924cea3
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ospf/stG9wb9LoztAP7KWEEIONJcVZY8>
Cc: "draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-lsa-extend.authors@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-lsa-extend.authors@ietf.org>, "ospf@ietf.org" <ospf@ietf.org>
Subject: [OSPF] [Adj-SID Flags] Regarding newly added 'P' flag
X-BeenThere: ospf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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: Thu, 02 Mar 2017 04:53:29 -0000

Dear Authors,
As per my understanding 'P' flag is used to avoid Adj-SID value  change in forwarding plane and during segment routing path calculation by controller  for interface flapping or switch over cases.
The Adj-SID value may change if adjacency gone down for longer period (say 10 min) and come up, even P flag is set in previous advertisement.
Please help me to know if any other use cases for setting P flag in Adj-SID

Regards,
Veerendranath

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email