Roman Danyliw's No Objection on draft-ietf-rtgwg-segment-routing-ti-lfa-13: (with COMMENT)

Roman Danyliw via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> Wed, 17 April 2024 20:41 UTC

MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
From: Roman Danyliw via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>
To: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Cc: draft-ietf-rtgwg-segment-routing-ti-lfa@ietf.org, rtgwg-chairs@ietf.org, rtgwg@ietf.org, stewart.bryant@gmail.com, stewart.bryant@gmail.com
Subject: Roman Danyliw's No Objection on draft-ietf-rtgwg-segment-routing-ti-lfa-13: (with COMMENT)
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: Roman Danyliw <rdd@cert.org>
Message-ID: <171338649327.45572.11129591772975163026@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2024 13:41:33 -0700
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtgwg/KkyGPTV4pTlFvalAuBg_xx0UKrA>

Roman Danyliw has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-rtgwg-segment-routing-ti-lfa-13: No Objection

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)


Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/handling-ballot-positions/ 
for more information about how to handle DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.


The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-rtgwg-segment-routing-ti-lfa/



----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Thank you to Roni Evans for the GENART review.

** Section 6.1 – 6.3 prescribe behavior that SHOULD happen. What is the
consequence if that guidance is not followed?

** Section 9
Section 9.
   An implementation MAY support TI-LFA to protect Node-
   SIDs associated to a FlexAlgo.  In such a case, rather than computing
   the expected post-convergence path based on the regular SPF, an
   implementation SHOULD use the constrained SPF algorithm bound to the
   FlexAlgo (using the Flex Algo Definition) instead of the regular
   Dijkstra in all the SPF/rSPF computations that are occurring during
   the TI-LFA computation.

Why isn’t the above SHOULD a MUST?  If it is the case that an implementation
uses a FlexAlgo (per sentence one), what would be the case where an implemented
did not use the constrained SPF algorithm bound to the FlexAlgo?

Roman Danyliw's No Objection on draft-ietf-rtgwg-… Roman Danyliw via Datatracker