Re: [Isis-wg] New Version Notification for draft-ietf-isis-node-admin-tag-01.txt
Pushpasis Sarkar <psarkar@juniper.net> Wed, 29 April 2015 05:44 UTC
Return-Path: <psarkar@juniper.net>
X-Original-To: isis-wg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: isis-wg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 66E651ACD26 for <isis-wg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 28 Apr 2015 22:44:29 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.302
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.302 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, J_CHICKENPOX_35=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=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 SBaerKnUk5rL for <isis-wg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 28 Apr 2015 22:44:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from na01-by2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-by2on0104.outbound.protection.outlook.com [207.46.100.104]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B1F371ACD0C for <isis-wg@ietf.org>; Tue, 28 Apr 2015 22:44:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from BY1PR0501MB1381.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (25.160.107.139) by BY1PR0501MB1207.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (25.160.104.147) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.148.16; Wed, 29 Apr 2015 05:44:23 +0000
Received: from BY1PR0501MB1240.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (25.160.200.139) by BY1PR0501MB1381.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (25.160.107.139) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.148.16; Wed, 29 Apr 2015 05:44:22 +0000
Received: from BY1PR0501MB1240.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([25.160.200.139]) by BY1PR0501MB1240.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([25.160.200.139]) with mapi id 15.01.0148.008; Wed, 29 Apr 2015 05:44:23 +0000
From: Pushpasis Sarkar <psarkar@juniper.net>
To: "Les Ginsberg (ginsberg)" <ginsberg@cisco.com>, Isis-wg <isis-wg@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: New Version Notification for draft-ietf-isis-node-admin-tag-01.txt
Thread-Index: AQHQWoYfi67kS74+ykW+YWWRR8FZSg==
Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2015 05:44:23 +0000
Message-ID: <D1666C68.2644B%psarkar@juniper.net>
References: <20150309153529.28172.77902.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <D123C7B5.22C9A%psarkar@juniper.net> <F3ADE4747C9E124B89F0ED2180CC814F4EF64BB4@xmb-aln-x02.cisco.com> <D1248B87.22D67%psarkar@juniper.net> <F3ADE4747C9E124B89F0ED2180CC814F4EF66395@xmb-aln-x02.cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <F3ADE4747C9E124B89F0ED2180CC814F4EF66395@xmb-aln-x02.cisco.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach: yes
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.4.9.150325
authentication-results: cisco.com; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-originating-ip: [116.197.184.10]
x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:BY1PR0501MB1381; UriScan:; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:BY1PR0501MB1207;
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <BY1PR0501MB13819ED2853A81137B8E0EEEBCD70@BY1PR0501MB1381.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:;
x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(601004)(5005006)(3002001); SRVR:BY1PR0501MB1381; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:BY1PR0501MB1381;
x-forefront-prvs: 05610E64EE
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(6009001)(479174004)(377454003)(53754006)(377424004)(13464003)(24454002)(51704005)(2950100001)(15975445007)(99936001)(40100003)(76176999)(66066001)(87936001)(50986999)(2900100001)(2420400003)(77156002)(62966003)(102836002)(5001770100001)(5001960100001)(19580405001)(54356999)(122556002)(92566002)(36756003)(5890100001)(99286002)(2656002)(93886004)(46102003)(86362001)(1720100001)(230783001)(106116001)(19580395003); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:BY1PR0501MB1381; H:BY1PR0501MB1240.namprd05.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; MLV:sfv; LANG:en;
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="_002_D1666C682644Bpsarkarjunipernet_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 29 Apr 2015 05:44:23.1393 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: bea78b3c-4cdb-4130-854a-1d193232e5f4
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BY1PR0501MB1381
X-OriginatorOrg: juniper.net
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/isis-wg/BI1-p_fAKXQ6WJ0uxgk_CIF-Kd0>
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 29 Apr 2015 14:37:11 -0700
Cc: "harish.r.pranhu@gmail.com" <harish.r.pranhu@gmail.com>, Rafael Rodriguez <rafael@fb.com>, "bruno.decraene@orange.com" <bruno.decraene@orange.com>, Hannes Gredler <hannes@juniper.net>
Subject: Re: [Isis-wg] New Version Notification for draft-ietf-isis-node-admin-tag-01.txt
X-BeenThere: isis-wg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF IS-IS working group <isis-wg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/isis-wg>, <mailto:isis-wg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/isis-wg/>
List-Post: <mailto:isis-wg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:isis-wg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/isis-wg>, <mailto:isis-wg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2015 05:44:29 -0000
Hi Les, Sorry for a late response. I have addressed your comments and attached the draft for your reference. Please let me know if you have any more comments. I would like to post the draft sometime next week. Thanks -Pushpasis On 3/11/15, 8:04 AM, "Les Ginsberg (ginsberg)" <ginsberg@cisco.com> wrote: >Pushpasis - > >Thanx for the quick response. I think we are pretty close. >Please see the attached document - look for LES: > > Les > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Pushpasis Sarkar [mailto:psarkar@juniper.net] >> Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2015 12:04 AM >> To: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg); Isis-wg >> Subject: Re: New Version Notification for >>draft-ietf-isis-node-admin-tag- >> 01.txt >> >> Hi Les, >> >> Thanks once again for the review. Attached is a copy addressing all your >inline >> comments. >> >> Regarding the comment on removing MT guidelines. >> >> >> LES: I will state this again. This paragraph is making false and >misleading >> statements. It detracts from the quality of the document and should be >> removed. I think it may well be a valid use case for a given tag to mean >> "nodes advertising tag Y should be considered as preferred for >functionality X >> in MTID #10 but as less preferred for functionality X in MTID #11". For >you to >> declare that such usage is illegal is neither appropriate nor within the >scope >> of this document. >> >> [Pushpasis]: Offcourse it is a valid usecase, but they should still mean >the >> same attribute.. What priority is associated with the attribute under >different >> topologies is to be determined by local policy and is outside the scope >of the >> document. What we are trying to say in this document is that the same >>tag >> cannot be assoicciated with different attributes under different >topology. >> Anyways I modified the text as shown below. Hope it is fine with you >>now. >> >> " In deployments using multi-topology routing [RFC5120], since multiple >> topologies within same IS-IS level do not use separate Router >> Capability TLVs (i.e. they share the same flooding scope), >> advertising a separate set of per-node administrative tags for each >> topology is not supported. >> " >> >> >> >> Thanks >> -Pushpasis >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On 3/10/15, 11:25 AM, "Les Ginsberg (ginsberg)" <ginsberg@cisco.com> >> wrote: >> >> >Pushpasis - >> > >> >I thank you for your prompt response to my comments. >> >But, I still have substantive issues with the latest draft. Please see >> >the attached annotated copy - look for "LES:". >> > >> > Les >> > >> > >> >> -----Original Message----- >> >> From: Pushpasis Sarkar [mailto:psarkar@juniper.net] >> >> Sent: Monday, March 09, 2015 9:29 AM >> >> To: Isis-wg >> >> Cc: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) >> >> Subject: FW: New Version Notification for >> >>draft-ietf-isis-node-admin-tag- >> >> 01.txt >> >> >> >> Hi All, >> >> >> >> I have uploaded a revision addressing Les Ginsberg¹s comments on the >> >>draft. >> >> Please review and provide any feedback/comments applicable. >> >> >> >> Thanks >> >> -Pushpasis >> >> >> >> On 3/9/15, 9:05 PM, "internet-drafts@ietf.org" >> >><internet-drafts@ietf.org> >> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> > >> >> >A new version of I-D, draft-ietf-isis-node-admin-tag-01.txt >> >> >has been successfully submitted by Pushpasis Sarkar and posted to >> >> >the IETF repository. >> >> > >> >> >Name: draft-ietf-isis-node-admin-tag >> >> >Revision: 01 >> >> >Title: Advertising Per-node Admin Tags in IS-IS >> >> >Document date: 2015-03-09 >> >> >Group: isis >> >> >Pages: 14 >> >> >URL: >> >> >> >>>http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-isis-node-admin-tag-01 >> >>>.tx >> >>>t >> >> >Status: >> >> >https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-isis-node-admin-tag/ >> >> >Htmlized: >> >> >http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-isis-node-admin-tag-01 >> >> >Diff: >> >> >http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-isis-node-admin-tag-01 >> >> > >> >> >Abstract: >> >> > This document describes an extension to IS-IS protocol >>[ISO10589], >> >> > [RFC1195] to add an optional operational capability, that allows >> >> > tagging and grouping of the nodes in an IS-IS domain. This >>allows >> >> > simple management and easy control over route and path selection, >> >> > based on local configured policies. >> >> > >> >> > This document describes the protocol extensions to disseminate >per- >> >> > node administrative tags in IS-IS protocols. >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> >Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of >> >> >submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at >> >> >tools.ietf.org. >> >> > >> >> >The IETF Secretariat >> >> > >> > > > >
- Re: [Isis-wg] New Version Notification for draft-… Pushpasis Sarkar