Subject: [spring] draft-li-ospf-ospfv3-srv6-extensions-03

From: Rajesh M <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 24 Mar 2019 14:31:54 +0000

Hi All,

Please find few comments on this draft.

  1.  Its better to have SRv6 Locator TLV similar to what is there in draft-bashandy-isis-srv6-extensions-05.

  1.  Draft says O-flag: If set, then router is capable of supporting SRH O-bit

Flags, as specified in [I-D.ietf-6man-segment-routing-header]. This must be

      O-flag: If set, the router supports use of the O-bit
      in the Segment Routing Header(SRH) as defined in

[I-D.ali-spring-srv6-oam].

  1.  SRv6 SID Link Attribute Sub-TLV, SRv6 SID LAN Link Attribute Sub-TLV here SID Flags must define

B-Flag: Backup flag.
S-Flag. Set flag.
P-Flag. Persistent flag.

Thanks
Rajesh

---

From: "Ketan Talaulikar (ketant)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 24 Mar 2019 15:21:03 +0000

Hi Rajesh,

Thanks for your review of the draft. As you've noticed, this draft is not yet in sync with the IS-IS SRv6 specifications. Please expect an update to this draft soon - likely during this IETF week or shortly thereafter.

Thanks,
Ketan

From: Rajesh M <[email-masked]>
Sent: 24 March 2019 20:02
To: [email-masked]; [email-masked]; [email-masked]; Ketan Talaulikar (ketant) <[email-masked]>; Peter Psenak (ppsenak) <[email-masked]>
Cc: Ron Bonica <[email-masked]>; SPRING WG <[email-masked]>
Subject: draft-li-ospf-ospfv3-srv6-extensions-03

Hi All,

B-Flag: Backup flag.
S-Flag. Set flag.
P-Flag. Persistent flag.

Thanks
Rajesh