IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Lsr] Working Group Adoption Poll for "OSPF Extension for PrefixOriginator" - draft-wang-lsr-ospf-prefix-originator-ext-01

Huzhibo <huzhibo@huawei.com> Wed, 27 February 2019 10:09 UTC

Return-Path: <huzhibo@huawei.com>
X-Original-To: lsr@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: lsr@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8CEB5130E27 for <lsr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 27 Feb 2019 02:09:50 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.199
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.199 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=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 Nlj0RKM1_BII for <lsr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 27 Feb 2019 02:09:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: from huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [185.176.76.210]) (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 B4B8F1295EC for <lsr@ietf.org>; Wed, 27 Feb 2019 02:09:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: from LHREML710-CAH.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.18.7.107]) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTP id C088FD174018C10A2F53 for <lsr@ietf.org>; Wed, 27 Feb 2019 10:09:45 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from DGGEMM402-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.3.20.210) by LHREML710-CAH.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.33) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.408.0; Wed, 27 Feb 2019 10:09:45 +0000
Received: from DGGEMM509-MBX.china.huawei.com ([169.254.9.201]) by DGGEMM402-HUB.china.huawei.com ([10.3.20.210]) with mapi id 14.03.0415.000; Wed, 27 Feb 2019 18:09:18 +0800
From: Huzhibo <huzhibo@huawei.com>
To: "lsr@ietf.org" <lsr@ietf.org>, "acee@cisco.com" <acee@cisco.com>
Thread-Topic: [Lsr] Working Group Adoption Poll for "OSPF Extension for PrefixOriginator" - draft-wang-lsr-ospf-prefix-originator-ext-01
Thread-Index: AQHUzneTdE7Vlb9smEm3wjXb+66DMKXzaxXg
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2019 10:09:18 +0000
Message-ID: <06CF729DA0D6854E8C1E5121AC3330DFADDD8036@dggemm509-mbx.china.huawei.com>
References: <201902271636111453989@zte.com.cn>
In-Reply-To: <201902271636111453989@zte.com.cn>
Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US
Content-Language: zh-CN
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.111.219.232]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_06CF729DA0D6854E8C1E5121AC3330DFADDD8036dggemm509mbxchi_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lsr/2yZN34hFQvLXmQvm3NHGouB2H-o>
Subject: Re: [Lsr] Working Group Adoption Poll for "OSPF Extension for PrefixOriginator" - draft-wang-lsr-ospf-prefix-originator-ext-01
X-BeenThere: lsr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Link State Routing Working Group <lsr.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/lsr>, <mailto:lsr-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/lsr/>
List-Post: <mailto:lsr@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:lsr-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr>, <mailto:lsr-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2019 10:09:51 -0000

Support.It is useful for collect cross-area IGP topologies

Ths
Zhibo Hu

From: Lsr [mailto:lsr-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of peng.shaofu@zte.com.cn
Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2019 4:36 PM
To: acee@cisco.com
Cc: lsr@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Lsr] Working Group Adoption Poll for "OSPF Extension for PrefixOriginator" - draft-wang-lsr-ospf-prefix-originator-ext-01


Support, as this draft provide useful originial source router-id of prefix, as the same as RFC7794.

For topology deducing, it seems too hard to work according to current description in the document. For example, It is hard to represent mulptile links between two nodes if we only know two node-id information but lack of interface IP address or interface-id that is link attribute not be included in prefix flooding, thus there is no way to consider which link could be contained in which TE path, also, so many TE parameters of link need to be supplied for the deducing topology, TE metric, bandwidth, etc. Maybe there already have a complete solution but just not describe detailedly in document.



Thanks

Deccan(Shaofu peng)






原始邮件
发件人：AceeLindem(acee) <acee@cisco.com<mailto:acee@cisco.com>>
收件人：lsr@ietf.org<mailto:lsr@ietf.org> <lsr@ietf.org<mailto:lsr@ietf.org>>;
日 期 ：2019年02月13日 21:26
主 题 ：[Lsr] Working Group Adoption Poll for "OSPF Extension for PrefixOriginator" - draft-wang-lsr-ospf-prefix-originator-ext-01
_______________________________________________
Lsr mailing list
Lsr@ietf.org<mailto:Lsr@ietf.org>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr


This begins a two week adoption poll for the subject draft. Please send your comments to this list before 12:00 AM UTC on Thursday, February 28th, 2019.

All authors have responded to the IPR poll and there is one  https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/search/?submit=draft&id=draft-wang-lsr-ospf-prefix-originator-ext
It is listed multiple times but references the same CN201810650141.

Thanks,
Acee

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email