Subject: [Idr] Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on draft-ietf-idr-bgp-prefix-sid-25: (with COMMENT)

From: Mirja Kühlewind <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 04:09:03 -0700

Mirja Kühlewind has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-prefix-sid-25: 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/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-idr-bgp-prefix-sid/

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

Minor, no critical comment:
I still don't really see why reserved bits and flags are needed given they are
both defined the same way ("MUST be clear on transmission and MUST be ignored
on reception."). Or more generally, I don't see at all why a flags field is
needed given you can also just always create a new TLV...

---

From: "Acee Lindem (acee)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 13:28:03 +0000

Hi Mirja, 

On 6/18/18, 7:09 AM, "Mirja Kühlewind" <[email-masked]> wrote:

    

This is simply an encoding choice that was made early on and which has been maintained through the life of the specification including implementation. However, if I would have written the document originally, I would not have put in these flags and reserved fields just "in case" they are ever needed given that future requirement could be satisfied with new sub-TLVs. This definitely would have avoided a lot of unnecessary work once we added IANA registries for these flags. 

Thank,
Acee

---

From: "Mirja Kuehlewind (IETF)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 15:47:12 +0200

Thanks for the background. I guess editorially you could still just add the reserved field to the flags and just have larger flags field then instead of calling them differently.

> Am 18.06.2018 um 15:28 schrieb Acee Lindem (acee) <acee=[email-masked]>:
> 
> Hi Mirja, 
>