Sounds like a good idea, I agree with this.
Best regards,
Mach
-----Original Message-----
From: mpls [mailto:mpls-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org] On Behalf Of Adrian Farrel
Sent: Saturday, January 21, 2017 12:11 AM
To: 'Acee Lindem (acee)'; 'Hannes Gredler'; 'Les Ginsberg (ginsberg)'; 'John E
Drake'; 'Alexander Vainshtein'; 'Greg Mirsky'
Cc: mpls(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org; ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org;
isis-chairs(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org; gen-art(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org;
draft-ietf-mpls-residence-time(_dot_)all(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org; 'Abhay Roy
(akr)'; 'Robert Sparks'
Subject: Re: [mpls] Review of draft-ietf-mpls-residence-time-12
I agree with Hannes on this.
However, if the document was to highlight strongly that the data is "a
non-routing related capability" (if that's what we believe!) and stress that
the information "that does not change frequently" (perhaps with some
explanation of
"frequently") I believe that might help everyone.
Adrian
we have taken turns long-time ago to advertise non-routing related
information which is only relevant to controllers (l2bundles comes
into mind ;-)).
while it would have been nice to get at least notice that an IS-IS
extension is being worked on (i mean prior to IANA asking for expert
review :-/ ) i see no reason why we should hold this back. - we can
argue perhaps whether it should be part of GENAPP or ROUTERCAP TLVs,
but i cannot see the sky falling to advertise a non-routing related
capability, that does not change frequently.
I agree but was just trying to get a better idea of precisely how the
information will be used and whether interface is the right granularity.
_______________________________________________
mpls mailing list
mpls(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls