Re: [babel] Comments about rfc7298bis

Juliusz Chroboczek <jch@irif.fr> Wed, 02 May 2018 22:37 UTC

Return-Path: <jch@irif.fr>
X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9120412DA72 for <babel@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 2 May 2018 15:37:40 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id CxMAPYP3qNTb for <babel@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 2 May 2018 15:37:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from korolev.univ-paris7.fr (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5FEFD12DA4E for <babel@ietf.org>; Wed, 2 May 2018 15:37:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [81.194.30.253]) by korolev.univ-paris7.fr (8.14.4/8.14.4/relay1/75695) with ESMTP id w42MbXUO005860; Thu, 3 May 2018 00:37:33 +0200
Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 91DCFEB226; Thu, 3 May 2018 00:37:33 +0200 (CEST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at math.univ-paris-diderot.fr
Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr ([127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10023) with ESMTP id 7B938-vaktwF; Thu, 3 May 2018 00:37:32 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from trurl.irif.fr (unknown [78.194.40.74]) (Authenticated sender: jch) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BE354EB227; Thu, 3 May 2018 00:37:32 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Thu, 03 May 2018 00:37:32 +0200
Message-ID: <87po2dzntf.wl-jch@irif.fr>
From: Juliusz Chroboczek <jch@irif.fr>
To: Denis Ovsienko <denis@ovsienko.info>
Cc: Babel at IETF <babel@ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <16322fb2d40.b754c16418709.3274574589997739202@ovsienko.info>
References: <87fu4huzgj.wl-jch@irif.fr> <1628e298460.cd82970b35329.4945272877112645380@ovsienko.info> <87muyi3eqi.wl-jch@irif.fr> <16296069fec.e13616a29759.8282754479379679955@ovsienko.info> <878ta1y8k0.wl-jch@irif.fr> <87sh7aaqpw.wl-jch@irif.fr> <16322fb2d40.b754c16418709.3274574589997739202@ovsienko.info>
User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9
MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue")
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [194.254.61.138]); Thu, 03 May 2018 00:37:33 +0200 (CEST)
X-Miltered: at korolev with ID 5AEA3DAD.002 by Joe's j-chkmail (http : // j-chkmail dot ensmp dot fr)!
X-j-chkmail-Enveloppe: 5AEA3DAD.002 from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/null/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/<jch@irif.fr>
X-j-chkmail-Score: MSGID : 5AEA3DAD.002 on korolev.univ-paris7.fr : j-chkmail score : . : R=. U=. O=. B=0.000 -> S=0.000
X-j-chkmail-Status: Ham
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/babel/UKcc_ciJxINxDxRLnAaTptqoJF8>
Subject: Re: [babel] Comments about rfc7298bis
X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." <babel.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/babel>, <mailto:babel-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/babel/>
List-Post: <mailto:babel@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:babel-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/babel>, <mailto:babel-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 02 May 2018 22:37:41 -0000

> 2. Protocol encoding: the "echo" TS/PC sub-TLV is specific to an IHU
> TLV, the additional requirement for IHU TLVs grouping or placement you
> describe does not exist.

I'm sorry if I'm slow, Denis, please explain.

Supposef that a node has 1000 neighbours on a single interface.  In the
original protocol, it can send a single Hello and a single Update followed
with 1000 IHUs split across 50 packets.

What's the encoding in 7298bis if all 1000 neighbours require auth?

-- Juliusz