IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Isis-wg] New Layer2 extensions to ISIS - thorough review will be required

Paul Unbehagen <paul@unbehagen.net> Mon, 26 April 2010 13:53 UTC

Return-Path: <paul@unbehagen.net>
X-Original-To: isis-wg@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: isis-wg@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC5CE3A6A8C for <isis-wg@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 26 Apr 2010 06:53:02 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.197
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.197 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.402, BAYES_00=-2.599]
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 k7caRtfFZx1O for <isis-wg@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 26 Apr 2010 06:53:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pw0-f44.google.com (mail-pw0-f44.google.com [209.85.160.44]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0A4D83A6A2C for <isis-wg@ietf.org>; Mon, 26 Apr 2010 06:52:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by pwj2 with SMTP id 2so8364537pwj.31 for <isis-wg@ietf.org>; Mon, 26 Apr 2010 06:52:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.114.162.11 with SMTP id k11mr4211994wae.138.1272289961370; Mon, 26 Apr 2010 06:52:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.0.1.42] (c-76-25-0-102.hsd1.co.comcast.net [76.25.0.102]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id c22sm20960323wam.6.2010.04.26.06.52.37 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Mon, 26 Apr 2010 06:52:38 -0700 (PDT)
References: <E5AACC79-7A9A-4315-86DF-8E27268EA20D@juniper.net> <60C093A41B5E45409A19D42CF7786DFD4F9969AE14@EUSAACMS0703.eamcs.ericsson.se> <D3F33DCB7804274A890F9215F86616580AC5C7DB78@USNAVSXCHMBSC2.ndc.alcatel-lucent.com> <4BD594BB.4020708@cisco.com>
Message-Id: <E181EC17-A74E-45A6-A6D1-33ADFF029922@unbehagen.net>
From: Paul Unbehagen <paul@unbehagen.net>
To: "stbryant@cisco.com" <stbryant@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <4BD594BB.4020708@cisco.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"; delsp="yes"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (7E18)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (iPhone Mail 7E18)
Date: Mon, 26 Apr 2010 07:52:29 -0600
Cc: Adrian Farrel <Adrian.Farrel@huawei.com>, Ralph Droms <rdroms@cisco.com>, Christian Hopps <chopps@rawdofmt.org>, isis-wg <isis-wg@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Isis-wg] New Layer2 extensions to ISIS - thorough review will be required
X-BeenThere: isis-wg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF IS-IS working group <isis-wg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/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: Mon, 26 Apr 2010 13:53:02 -0000

Yes, the base protocol provides 90% of what we need. Our tlv's are  
simply extensions for SPB capability awareness.

--
Paul Unbehagen

from my iPhone

On Apr 26, 2010, at 7:27 AM, Stewart Bryant <stbryant@cisco.com> wrote:

>
>> > From and 802.1aq standpoint we are happy with no new PDUs.  IS-IS  
>> carries multiple address families to date, a capability that we  
>> wanted to leverage.
> Are the changes required by 802.1aq limited to simply adding (sub) 
> TLVs to carry additional address families with no other changes  
> whatsoever required to the protocol?
>
> - Stewart
>
> _______________________________________________
> Isis-wg mailing list
> Isis-wg@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/isis-wg

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email