Re: [spring] Dependency Issues (WAS: I-D Action: draft-ietf-spring-bfd-09.txt)

[Alvaro Retana <[e-mail]>]

On April 16, 2024 at 3:55:44 AM, Greg Mirsky wrote:

Greg:

...
> > > > (1) I-D.ietf-spring-mpls-anycast-segments
...
> GIM2>> You're right; the IDR document does not define an Anycast SID (and has
> no reference to the document that does, but that is not our problem now).
> Could we use RFC 8402 as the informational reference? AFAICS, it defines an
> Anycast SID in Terminology section through IGP-Anycast Segment construct:
>
> IGP-Anycast Segment: an IGP-Anycast segment is an IGP-Prefix segment
> that identifies an anycast prefix advertised by a set of routers.
>
> Anycast-SID: the SID of the IGP-Anycast segment.


This is the text we're working with:

   If the target segment is an anycast prefix segment
   ([I-D.ietf-spring-mpls-anycast-segments]) the corresponding Anycast
   SID MUST be included in the Target TLV as the very last sub-TLV.

Yes, rfc8402 could be a replacement -- for what an "anycast prefix segment" is.


As I mentioned before, I did a very light review of the document.
Looking at this sentence a little more...

What is the "Target TLV"?  That name is not used anywhere else.  I
assume it is the same as the "Target FEC TLV" mentioned in the same
section with references to rfc8287 (?).  If so, rfc8287 talks about
the "Target FEC Stack TLV", but doesn't define it; rfc8029 does.
Please use the correct terminology throughout.

Which sub-TLV should be used to carry the information as that "very
last sub-TLV"?  I couldn't find this information in
I-D.ietf-spring-mpls-anycast-segments, rfc8287, or rfc8029, and none
of the sub-TLVs in the registry [1] jump out at me.

[1] https://www.iana.org/assignments/mpls-lsp-ping-parameters/mpls-lsp-ping-parameters.xhtml#sub-tlv-1-16-21


For completion, please add rfc8029 as the reference for the "Target
FEC Stack TLV".  We also need a reference for the sub-TLV.



> > > > (2) I-D.ietf-mpls-bfd-directed
...
> > The only two choices to leave the document "intact" is to change its
> > intended status.
> >
> GIM2>> Thank you for the detailed explanation of the options in front of us.
> Let us think about that and we'll get back with the next step.

Ok.

Thanks!

Alvaro.