IETF Logo Mail Archive

[babel] Document Shepherd review of draft-ietf-babel-source-specific-04

Donald Eastlake <d3e3e3@gmail.com> Fri, 28 December 2018 04:34 UTC

Return-Path: <d3e3e3@gmail.com>
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 41A36130FBF for <babel@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 27 Dec 2018 20:34:52 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.749
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.749 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 IPCgkcdeGhYR for <babel@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 27 Dec 2018 20:34:51 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-it1-x131.google.com (mail-it1-x131.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::131]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D4E4F130FB7 for <babel@ietf.org>; Thu, 27 Dec 2018 20:34:50 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-it1-x131.google.com with SMTP id i145so27009802ita.4 for <babel@ietf.org>; Thu, 27 Dec 2018 20:34:50 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=adhV4OZv76rxmAKXRHOHerlnWXBUyqXtzArfB9VPMdQ=; b=gduJFRG7Te0BRSwZTZcfY+XxbuALxlpnSKISBxly8UfDBb8xyq09w7OIiwdI6AOXkB ZWR2WmVsnNRG10GlVvvMyzgYYyYlIhkl4x+gBdkQXzDh4GzwHLO2IjRtWhWAT772b8Ce 0PlruRXnbgFtETGhgm/375Zna8fx59edfV/E7BMp9FAiuCeJDEOTo1KFW1navVUBjDAy 5mdIds1NvD7znVG10OK6wT/cssX7s6eeGuoEf9NpPXgPWsaa+tX3kUImiqm4Axbg4ZAe 6KmEy5/1yy6fEZqCaSMmmp66faLloxIjSn562ejfQn1ZxxpbFdfeNjsQvJ96O15Uqlc6 ufAA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=adhV4OZv76rxmAKXRHOHerlnWXBUyqXtzArfB9VPMdQ=; b=CQbyyMYNXlJVhOi/c7Wy98pTP6YQjgzQXzo+DZCyW9FLZyz+IfeaGWVvE7FQ2aYehD aWo2UYOsgcBz1E4WXhZG6i3PNcbwdMER7RWh7235XCcQMIqCrR67pDkVEahrB+4TyjZV AcHR6BzuCHvhGOrmlXRhsi2IQdc77SL2qjJPnTUnWiTW7ibxnmXsxiW/Pti/Eommcuyi 6weLq8q04Ms9QM2DueaaOMBQccMx/c3eXVjrU5efeEnkTTCtrJHIF5m1eMOvk/ykQ9n3 Mf4aSg9+OlE0gISfITEOYVJOynVkyrxOAWWW+D45fTaOmYKdkdutTQH7Ni04c1Y1Oedr mReQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AA+aEWbja3Rbqqqy4PovHF6ag3tDmccWZ+Mjsnz5WVYcJNDHF0w1kKSJ mY6to3rgkMfkVXAyb+ySuO99Y3Qe7C2gz2iBANWw14oP
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ALg8bN7bQu6CIgXZ6XpVkgNB/TTEJkPNMzysqpXhlLqLTkC9OyQ9UBpu+yY+GdfCcdF+dzSwq0ce8U/vhX6ERCK2UJc=
X-Received: by 2002:a24:36cf:: with SMTP id l198mr18059860itl.102.1545971689785; Thu, 27 Dec 2018 20:34:49 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
From: Donald Eastlake <d3e3e3@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2018 23:34:38 -0500
Message-ID: <CAF4+nEEzuw=Fr-uwoQari1hknRJ32zq2k6BQizYKmQyTi53hpw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Babel at IETF <babel@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000006711a4057e0d9555"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/babel/iHFRq-HQAJyIxUiWiESSrurVthE>
Subject: [babel] Document Shepherd review of draft-ietf-babel-source-specific-04
X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Fri, 28 Dec 2018 04:34:52 -0000

I read draft-ietf-babel-source-specific-04. It seems to be in good shape
but and I have the following thought:

I believe babel-source-specific does not have routing loops even with a
mixture of BABEL routers supporting and not supporting source-specific if
routing messages are well formed. However, if a routing message is
interpreted differently by different routers, then it seems to me that you
might get loops. In Section 7, 2nd paragraph, the flexibility that
      "a node
   receiving more than one Source Prefix sub-TLV in a single TLV SHOULD
   ignore this TLV.  It MAY ignore the whole packet."
seems like it might cause problems. Assuming a malformed message with two
Source Prefix sub-TLVs where one router accepts it and uses the first while
the other accepts it and uses the second, or the other possibilities where
they end up with persistent different routing states. Perhaps it would be
better to say "a node receiving more than one Source Prefix sub-TLV in a
single TLV MUST ignore this TLV." (or only use the first or last sub-TLV or
any other precisely deterministic rule). Similarly, in Section 7.2, it says
      "A
   wildcard retraction (Update with AE equals to 0) MUST NOT carry a
   Source Prefix sub-TLV."
So what happens if it does? I would feel more confident if it said
something deterministic so either (1) it MUST NOT carry a Source Prefix
sub-TLV and MUST be ignored if it does or (2) it MUST Not carry a Source
Prefix sub-TLV and if it does, the Source Prefix sub-TLV is ignored.

Thanks,
Donald
===============================
 Donald E. Eastlake 3rd   +1-508-333-2270 (cell)
 1424 Pro Shop Court, Davenport, FL 33896 USA
 d3e3e3@gmail.com

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email