IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Lsr] Working Group Last Call for OSPF LLS Extensions for Local Interface ID Advertisement - draft-ietf-ospf-lls-interface-id-02

Peter Psenak <ppsenak@cisco.com> Tue, 19 June 2018 08:35 UTC

Return-Path: <ppsenak@cisco.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 863711310AF for <lsr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 19 Jun 2018 01:35:52 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.51
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.51 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.com
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 KOf0gpraONm5 for <lsr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 19 Jun 2018 01:35:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rcdn-iport-6.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-6.cisco.com [173.37.86.77]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A6220130DEB for <lsr@ietf.org>; Tue, 19 Jun 2018 01:35:50 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1714; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1529397350; x=1530606950; h=message-id:date:from:mime-version:to:subject:references: in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=uddaZD5e1LbPNgvu88Cs+czBQjty2aXip8/lalRxNLU=; b=KV3kHLQxcCe8CXbG08nDjBkzbzhkpggPauR00or2bqLfrEt2Dncka2IQ rkXd11hCocHTxf8fCUmrobDivehqOdKLo7g92CM5VezBMm7ehijLQpjMb 0vxIWiQSlbgNw8cut5b+ffBqfxfA9yoYcGki3I9TlIwBIbjAsrgToGhkb 8=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0ApAgAWvyhb/5BdJa1cGQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQcBAQEBAYNJYn8omE+CAJUMgWQLGAuESQKCZSE4FAECAQEBAQEBAm0cDIUoAQEBAwEBARsVAQU2CgYLCxEDAQIBCRYECwkDAgECARUoCAYBDAYCAQGDIoF3CA+scg6EXINtgWMFiFSBVD+DbS6DEwEBAoFGhW4CkUSHVwmPDYE/hACCRoU3kVKBWCGBUjMaCBsVO4JDgkmISIVAPTABkVcBAQ
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.51,242,1526342400"; d="scan'208";a="412335250"
Received: from rcdn-core-8.cisco.com ([173.37.93.144]) by rcdn-iport-6.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 19 Jun 2018 08:35:49 +0000
Received: from [10.147.24.41] ([10.147.24.41]) by rcdn-core-8.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id w5J8Zm3r003954; Tue, 19 Jun 2018 08:35:49 GMT
Message-ID: <5B28C064.6040602@cisco.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2018 10:35:48 +0200
From: Peter Psenak <ppsenak@cisco.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.11; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee=40cisco.com@dmarc.ietf.org>, "lsr@ietf.org" <lsr@ietf.org>
References: <6986F592-8643-4222-B3DD-EE48A8D94804@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <6986F592-8643-4222-B3DD-EE48A8D94804@cisco.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lsr/38BD4lYDdS_n29XkO3lB5ybttKE>
Subject: Re: [Lsr] Working Group Last Call for OSPF LLS Extensions for Local Interface ID Advertisement - draft-ietf-ospf-lls-interface-id-02
X-BeenThere: lsr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26
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: Tue, 19 Jun 2018 08:35:53 -0000

Hi Acee,

On 18/06/18 20:51 , Acee Lindem (acee) wrote:
> Speaking as WG member, I support publication of the subject document. I
> have the following comments:
>
>  1. The normative text saying that the TLV MUST be included needs to be
>     changed from section 3.1. I’m sure you didn’t mean this since LLS
>     itself isn’t mandatory and this isn’t backward compatible.

changed to SHOULD.

>  2. Add a reference to RFC 8379 to section 2 or a new section indicating
>     that this mechanism suffers from many of the same shortcomings as
>     using OSPF TE LSAs.

RFC8379 specifies how to advertise the local/remote interface ID for the 
purpose of identifying the link by the remote routers. It does not 
suggest to use the Extended Link Opaque LSA as a discovery mechanism to 
find out what is the interface ID on the remote side of the link.


>  3. Remove RFC 5340 from the references as it is not referenced.

removed.

thanks,
Peter
>
> I’m also send  a couple editorial suggestions off list.
>
> Thanks,
> Acee
>
> *From: *Lsr <lsr-bounces@ietf.org> on behalf of "Acee Lindem (acee)"
> <acee=40cisco.com@dmarc.ietf.org>
> *Date: *Monday, June 18, 2018 at 12:07 PM
> *To: *"lsr@ietf.org" <lsr@ietf.org>
> *Subject: *[Lsr] Working Group Last Call for OSPF LLS Extensions for
> Local Interface ID Advertisement - draft-ietf-ospf-lls-interface-id-02
>
> This begins an LSR WG last call for the subject draft. Please send your
>
> comments to this list prior to 12:00 AM GMT, July 3^rd , 2018.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Acee
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Lsr mailing list
> Lsr@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email