IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Softwires] BGP TE attr last call by softwires WG (2nd question)

"Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk> Mon, 08 September 2008 10:35 UTC

Return-Path: <owner-ccamp@ops.ietf.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-ccamp-archive@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-ccamp-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 636A23A6929 for <ietfarch-ccamp-archive@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 8 Sep 2008 03:35:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.024
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.024 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.560, BAYES_40=-0.185, J_CHICKENPOX_13=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, STOX_REPLY_TYPE=0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id tZkuI6JG1AGR for <ietfarch-ccamp-archive@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 8 Sep 2008 03:35:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 05F153A69D4 for <ccamp-archive@ietf.org>; Mon, 8 Sep 2008 03:35:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.69 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <owner-ccamp@ops.ietf.org>) id 1Kcdva-00030o-Hy for ccamp-data@psg.com; Mon, 08 Sep 2008 10:25:02 +0000
Received: from [62.128.201.249] (helo=asmtp2.iomartmail.com) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.69 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <adrian@olddog.co.uk>) id 1KcdvV-0002zm-M5 for ccamp@ops.ietf.org; Mon, 08 Sep 2008 10:25:00 +0000
Received: from asmtp2.iomartmail.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by asmtp2.iomartmail.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) with ESMTP id m88AOPca013945; Mon, 8 Sep 2008 11:24:26 +0100
Received: from your029b8cecfe (dsl-sp-81-140-15-32.in-addr.broadbandscope.com [81.140.15.32]) (authenticated bits=0) by asmtp2.iomartmail.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m88AOKJY013841; Mon, 8 Sep 2008 11:24:22 +0100
Message-ID: <066201c9119d$0e2da5a0$0200a8c0@your029b8cecfe>
Reply-To: Adrian Farrel <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
From: Adrian Farrel <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
To: Igor Bryskin <i_bryskin@yahoo.com>
Cc: ccamp@ops.ietf.org, softwires@ietf.org
References: <199523.75146.qm@web36807.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [Softwires] BGP TE attr last call by softwires WG (2nd question)
Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2008 11:23:52 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format="flowed"; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type="original"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3138
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3350
Sender: owner-ccamp@ops.ietf.org
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <ccamp.ops.ietf.org>

Hi Igor,

Not sure that the scope of this discussion is particularly appropriate to 
CCAMP and Softwires mailing lists. Might be more relevant on the L1VPN and 
OSPF lists. You could open a thread there if you want to debate this 
further.

> Although multi-instance OSPF was enthusiastically discussed and is ongoing 
> work in OSPF WG, it was never discussed in the L1VPN context.

Please see RFC 5253 section 7.1

     Alternatively, a separate instance of
     the OSPF protocol can be used just between PEs for distributing
     membership information.

This appears to be exactly the point you are making. So perhaps we are all 
in agreement?

Adrian

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email