Re: [Isis-wg] FW: I-D Action: draft-white-openfabric-00.txt

"Russ White" <> Tue, 07 March 2017 13:36 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 27C5512947A; Tue, 7 Mar 2017 05:36:33 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.749
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.749 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Fw8j4s9pA4EY; Tue, 7 Mar 2017 05:36:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400c:c08::242]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7525A129486; Tue, 7 Mar 2017 05:36:19 -0800 (PST)
Received: by with SMTP id u30so383363uau.2; Tue, 07 Mar 2017 05:36:19 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=from:to:references:in-reply-to:subject:date:message-id:mime-version :content-transfer-encoding:thread-index:content-language; bh=jLzAXyhS2nQXRBj8g7HxNEcDhhme7qtI5O5aGTnqZZY=; b=DekU7P2ItOkZaueKERVn7yo6z6Zg+zRR+sC9jX8nlVtqvQDu1tCWdbYRytrKyNmNu4 WVsCp9xqeX9oL0ooY1/HODqlsMFWAaoLwWC+N1mk8VcZp0u7n+K1I92rA8FnTE5qeTim BWU/OLY/4Msclw26uYSHG3egApSGQTYqqFgyiCxtLnOkc1bh0b5x9RQHzj2DmWaSBDRr /1QIBuTjvn1/aRn3+6u30kYbmYNQnwXWZ7CjRKffOHDnPJG2MDxwiNx9tQ5zSBlV6nGJ xAsL4VBB7sw1cU2uvMM3cRiq+6GiHaWlAX+NkOpKgo9JQpMQh213OH9QvCMjLMTVmriu w1/Q==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:references:in-reply-to:subject:date :message-id:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:thread-index :content-language; bh=jLzAXyhS2nQXRBj8g7HxNEcDhhme7qtI5O5aGTnqZZY=; b=gUZ8ZL5t1d8/WSVHhV2SM7d3N1v4ChGs70AJhsXsPBhy0mIuoLy0Rb8kGXQv9rZ/fi wZ4NffzeCpvz7qgp+XMpObKAE2/8X9kniERt1Lms6q7WA56dzOMDTt79NUyXbux+VI7F w77jYADoB55XL8AKaPtOS2lD2Q1qMawgVZvs6U9jRvFQ6cQJf4V4Do5B5i2Q6VeNYlGp rfLRoL9xjhPNFFdn3M2lqDf34N3RUb8MvUBAhSQidLxM/qfASU5NBZVwBtSG5OMJvIV+ IM21U7JpVKllgasg3CK6NLnJPBkkscoy6wkiU3g/qSycVkTivMZQnhjsVmWHS7f0tidc +d+A==
X-Gm-Message-State: AMke39lQ1JMV/kWZuKNlRmngXRSgn3BQZOirbM0kb7cbXi5UkqM4eAnNsOY2GvGWF5wCtQ==
X-Received: by with SMTP id l21mr180355ybe.68.1488893778499; Tue, 07 Mar 2017 05:36:18 -0800 (PST)
Received: from Russ ( []) by with ESMTPSA id x3sm16093ywd.16.2017. (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 07 Mar 2017 05:36:18 -0800 (PST)
From: "Russ White" <>
To: "'Hannes Gredler'" <>, <>, <>
References: <> <02ee01d296e9$ec570d00$c5052700$> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2017 08:36:15 -0500
Message-ID: <013801d29747$cb64f8b0$622eea10$>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 16.0
Thread-Index: AQNWQt4E90XAKMHWxi2c/u65al3g3gG7LIHEAm3O8PeeYMFX8A==
Content-Language: en-us
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [Isis-wg] FW: I-D Action: draft-white-openfabric-00.txt
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF IS-IS working group <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2017 13:36:33 -0000

>    OpenFabric implementations MUST NOT be mixed with standard IS-IS
>    implementations in operational deployments.  OpenFabric and standard
>    IS-IS implementations SHOULD be treated as two separate protocols.
> ---
> any hard feelings about using MI as a way of guaranteeing that the two
> protocols are shielded from each other ?

Very good idea -- want to suggest text?

> 2) Modified Adjacency Formation
> rather than doing the "only one adjacency is up" (which we did prior to
> graceful-restart SA bit) - suggest to use the graceful-restart 'SA'
> bit, such that a node can bring up the adjacency without generating a new
> LSP. The LSP can then be generated if the initial-sync is done (and the
> LSP arrival rate indicates that the dust is settling) such that the LSP
may get
> released.

This is a really good idea, actually... Again, you want to suggest text? :-)

> 3) Flooding Optimization
> it looks to me you have re-invented the OLSR MPR set.
> perhaps you may want to add a reference.

Very close -- but there's a tiny bit more optimization because of the fixed
topology than can be wrung out of that and/or the other MANET drafts. I
should actually add ref's to all of them, thanks for pointing this out.