Re: [Isis-wg] ISIS-autoconf-04 submitted //FW: New Version Notification for draft-liu-isis-auto-conf-04.txt

Karsten Thomann <karsten_thomann@linfre.de> Sat, 06 June 2015 11:35 UTC

Return-Path: <karsten_thomann@linfre.de>
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 099B71B2C51 for <isis-wg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 6 Jun 2015 04:35:35 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.561
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.561 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] 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 DklvGTL2MxRn for <isis-wg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 6 Jun 2015 04:35:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from linfre.de (linfre.de [83.151.26.85]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B33551B2C4F for <isis-wg@ietf.org>; Sat, 6 Jun 2015 04:35:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from linne.localnet (80.228.198.90) by linfreserv (Axigen) with (ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA encrypted) ESMTPSA id 1C79DE; Sat, 6 Jun 2015 13:35:22 +0200
From: Karsten Thomann <karsten_thomann@linfre.de>
To: "Liubing (Leo)" <leo.liubing@huawei.com>
Date: Sat, 06 Jun 2015 13:35:26 +0000
Message-ID: <2450780.fSPWS0PjFC@linne>
User-Agent: KMail/4.13.0.0 (Windows/6.1; KDE/4.13.3; i686; git-a6cb62d; 2014-12-22)
In-Reply-To: <8AE0F17B87264D4CAC7DE0AA6C406F45A679225E@nkgeml506-mbx.china.huawei.com>
References: <8AE0F17B87264D4CAC7DE0AA6C406F45A678E17E@nkgeml506-mbx.china.huawei.com> <2366384.fmjLvuEOoo@linne> <8AE0F17B87264D4CAC7DE0AA6C406F45A679225E@nkgeml506-mbx.china.huawei.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="nextPart1574577.K6TaufDzXu"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
X-AXIGEN-DK-Result: No records
DomainKey-Status: no signature
X-AxigenSpam-Level: 5
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/isis-wg/SyS_K7t9dgPvFOoE1F2dozb_3WM>
Cc: "isis-wg@ietf.org" <isis-wg@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Isis-wg] ISIS-autoconf-04 submitted //FW: New Version Notification for draft-liu-isis-auto-conf-04.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: Sat, 06 Jun 2015 11:35:35 -0000

Hi,

please see inline.

Am Freitag, 5. Juni 2015, 06:44:47 schrieb Liubing:
> Hi Karsten,
> 
> Thanks for your review and comments. Please see replies inline.
> 
> From: Karsten Thomann [mailto:karsten_thomann@linfre.de]
> Sent: Thursday, June 04, 2015 5:36 AM
> To: isis-wg@ietf.org
> Cc: Liubing (Leo)
> Subject: Re: [Isis-wg] ISIS-autoconf-04 submitted //FW: New Version
> Notification for draft-liu-isis-auto-conf-04.txt
> 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> 
> 
> some comments after reading the draft:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not really convinced that this will really be implemented in a home
> network or small enterprise networks, as ISIS isn't a protocol widely
> supported on that platforms.
> 
> I was thinking more about shortest path bridging switch autodiscovery, but
> this is only my own opinion.
> 
> 
> 
> [Bing] I agree ISIS is not widely supported on small devices nowadays. But I
> think it might has the potential in the future.
> 
> Actually, In Homenet the ISIS is already in the short list for their routing
> protocol choice
> (http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-mrw-homenet-rtg-comparison/). And
> there is also some operator showed explicit requirement for ISIS in home
> routers.
> 
> 
> 
> Furthermore, the scope might not only limit to home/enterprise scenarios.
> Maybe the operators would find this auto-conf tool is also benefit for them
> one day:)
I didn't wanted to start a real discussion, only express my personal concern that it is unlikely to be 
supported in home networks, but likely in other areas where ISIS has advantages against OSPF.

> 
> 
> 
> Regarding 3.3.2:
> 
> What is exactly the duplication resolution, if the NET is used by an ISIS
> Router not capable of autoconfig?
> 
> In my opinion the device which is auto config capable MUST recalculate its
> NET, if the other router does not advertise a Router-Fingerprint TLV.
> 
> [Bing] The autoconfig should be a dedicated ISIS process that it won't be
> mixed with the non-autoconf routers. This is prevented by the
> Authentication TLV as described in 3.4.1.
Yes and no, the draft uses a MUST for the ability to change the password, and there are possible 
cases where it is indended by design to use somewhere a link between a autoconf based network 
and the not autoconf network...

I my opinion it's a bit weak argument to not specify that behavior explicitly.

> 
> 
> I'm not able to find a similar approach for the OSPF RFC, as it seems to
> have the same problem.
> 
> 
>