IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Idr] Alvaro's AD Comments on draft-ietf-idr-ls-distribution

"Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk> Sun, 04 October 2015 17:39 UTC

Return-Path: <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
X-Original-To: idr@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: idr@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2FF7E1B2C53; Sun, 4 Oct 2015 10:39:37 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -100.701
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-100.701 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_40=-0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=ham
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 N7UgXsH3tZat; Sun, 4 Oct 2015 10:39:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from asmtp2.iomartmail.com (asmtp2.iomartmail.com [62.128.201.249]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 665C81B2C44; Sun, 4 Oct 2015 10:39:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from asmtp2.iomartmail.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by asmtp2.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id t94HdUWe011067; Sun, 4 Oct 2015 18:39:30 +0100
Received: from 950129200 (dsl-sp-81-140-15-32.in-addr.broadbandscope.com [81.140.15.32]) (authenticated bits=0) by asmtp2.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id t94HdT9p011057 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Sun, 4 Oct 2015 18:39:30 +0100
From: Adrian Farrel <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
To: "'Acee Lindem (acee)'" <acee@cisco.com>, "'Alvaro Retana (aretana)'" <aretana@cisco.com>
References: <022901d0fdc9$0ea4ce80$2bee6b80$@olddog.co.uk> <D2357211.33B9C%acee@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <D2357211.33B9C%acee@cisco.com>
Date: Sun, 04 Oct 2015 18:39:29 +0100
Message-ID: <024301d0fecb$9fd90300$df8b0900$@olddog.co.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0
Thread-Index: AQKMJJdt6aER1MTZdE6+ValWAmuL1wFM68fBnNmXVwA=
Content-Language: en-gb
X-TM-AS-MML: disable
X-TM-AS-Product-Ver: IMSS-7.1.0.1679-8.0.0.1202-21858.001
X-TM-AS-Result: No--12.447-10.0-31-10
X-imss-scan-details: No--12.447-10.0-31-10
X-TMASE-MatchedRID: nVQUmLJJeyanykMun0J1wvHkpkyUphL9cRFSelLG69/kMnUVL5d0E6zX kuh6mdZYdhxB82KCrT85eH69ye07cDrB61PeQ1HamlaAItiONP1/uu9cG8SRaUUNHQAoZf5cLyc 54RnMqio96WZQh47ZuE3iYgzunAImljoCOB2Z7vxT46Ow+EhYOH0tCKdnhB58vqq8s2MNhPDFsa +Yz2ePk1BIVsvVu9ABIAcCikR3vq/9IBYkTbTgSx7n4wupOkiWe1TW2QKxRcyXQPfLjY9UM+gne KSyd2d3
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/tOKoDF1_j5XAIJtLQjvwfccLLKk>
Cc: idr@ietf.org, draft-ietf-idr-ls-distribution@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Idr] Alvaro's AD Comments on draft-ietf-idr-ls-distribution
X-BeenThere: idr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
Reply-To: adrian@olddog.co.uk
List-Id: Inter-Domain Routing <idr.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/idr>, <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/idr/>
List-Post: <mailto:idr@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr>, <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 04 Oct 2015 17:39:37 -0000

Thanks Acee,

That's helpful.

Adrian

> Hi Adrian, Alvaro,
>
> >And similarly no-one has asked for the DN-bit from 2328 or 5340 in section
> >3.3.3.1. I am less sanguine about adding this as I am not quite sure that
> >it is useful in BGP-LS, but it would certainly be easy to add. With this bit,
> >and with other potential additions to both bit fields, I suggest we wait
> > for the need/desire and folk can write new drafts.
> 
> The DN-bit is not really applicable to at the Node level in OSPF and
> IS-IS. It is applicable to prefixes and is included in the flags in
> section 3.3.3.1 (See the D-bit). For extra credit, you could add a
> reference to OSPF and RFC 4576. This document started out with very few
> references to the applicable OSPF RFCs but quite a few have been added by
> Alia and me.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email