[Lsr] OSPFv3 Implementations of draft-ietf-ospf-mpls-elc

Alvaro Retana <aretana.ietf@gmail.com> Thu, 07 May 2020 13:10 UTC

Return-Path: <aretana.ietf@gmail.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 ACADD3A07D5; Thu, 7 May 2020 06:10:41 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.097
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.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 yjfcwn5xJGuN; Thu, 7 May 2020 06:10:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wr1-x432.google.com (mail-wr1-x432.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::432]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1BC783A07BB; Thu, 7 May 2020 06:10:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wr1-x432.google.com with SMTP id i15so5890654wrx.10; Thu, 07 May 2020 06:10:39 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:mime-version:date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=1xvfrKYdZ8yrAIp8eG/1dhmJ1ShNNL+JZn3tfz5n7ew=; b=FAgNLeBQPNfbs0jmjhOsjSzzZNXdn6R8zXPiYNIjeVTg/MJ7DkgKpA9bHkMUIkbKZI dBJ0/eYkpu0mg5qsW752GRWXIbJDHtXqTi49HSXF4zf9HsCiFQmnbAGL5/P5cBNO57zx 1qcSSHXe3HL5mwZCKFPHqYoqlNYWRzoB1jmuG1auqyvPBiN/kq34G2eAk+1W/+hLmXSV v7c7StAh8j7RQxuPfsdzZ1LwzGxCMBcNFD9PBdAHy2TrNulemVxWclE6qutXqIutHvmG 0IQhWclWU19fDKfkMlEIndn14e376W1p2hCiqGbe8hjSKme4sz0+2B9BCU3KaZN8Y/N7 BR4A==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:mime-version:date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=1xvfrKYdZ8yrAIp8eG/1dhmJ1ShNNL+JZn3tfz5n7ew=; b=YGdHvuAtcA9L7z+y1Tt3iGpX7yg6JmbnkmHoM+cvt/sJsM/EmaNTyTJ5979AHutc7b oB8fRoURHy9axEVSZA2UVXg24ADQJk0+Gy64xND3vwFLChbUz20c7YPJmsV9x6xvNG7Y 6kol+7ITtWNrW2wYkWiFBTcM8P6/Rv3plnQXzxjvYfcxG/xFu2GHo3Ir6Rj+xjSkhMP0 0X0tTOYpYMdzd7NdFDTd69Sf4Z5cjbc6dL5oH4Fao6KrSDohlK03D/Bkk4zCfZ79ADv/ Jdtdv945c0Hr5aN5ObzO7Ix9quqjKQfObSryDfqQbes3KoxfXId26xdHRZe8B5yMycz8 9YKQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AGi0PuaJcU1lZmJJvBCpevWaFpbrLSbg5xpMTz0Rp7eSCMKlVORjucT6 Hfo/3hooU2VPfy43PcD+vq8er6WHlpDJawScskCLLnBS
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APiQypJUSqfR2+Ma9+ujsqyTkjVRtVhlp5SLPb6pw2rWdX21uzZDtWUWN3fGUUh1ovdcyHairIHNRssF4EIlHk/uWeQ=
X-Received: by 2002:adf:e7cb:: with SMTP id e11mr14592077wrn.145.1588857038064; Thu, 07 May 2020 06:10:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from 1058052472880 named unknown by gmailapi.google.com with HTTPREST; Thu, 7 May 2020 06:10:37 -0700
From: Alvaro Retana <aretana.ietf@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Thu, 7 May 2020 06:10:37 -0700
Message-ID: <CAMMESswmfcfOgstP_na5YFAf_DJWiZ5hnp16rKchReRXsY0jCA@mail.gmail.com>
To: lsr@ietf.org
Cc: draft-ietf-ospf-mpls-elc@ietf.org, "lsr-chairs@ietf.org" <lsr-chairs@ietf.org>, "Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee@cisco.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000005a531d05a50e9b08"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lsr/4UJ7IuZhLfwZW4shhzI9FKHSQqI>
Subject: [Lsr] OSPFv3 Implementations of draft-ietf-ospf-mpls-elc
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: Thu, 07 May 2020 13:10:42 -0000

Dear lsr WG:

If you’ve been following the progress of this document, you will have
noticed that it is already in IESG Evaluation.

IANA discovered a typo in the draft; the current text says "Bit 0x04 in the
"OSPFv3 Prefix Options (8 bits) registry has been assigned to the E-Flag
(ELC Flag)”.   However, the value assigned by IANA is 0x40.


Does anyone have an OSPFv3 implementation of this document?  If so, which
value is used, 0x04 or 0x40?  Are there deployments?


The Shepherd report doesn’t mention any implementations, and with the help
of the authors it has already been confirmed that cisco, Nokia and Huawei
don’t have an OSPFv3 implementation.


Please respond by COB on May 14.


Thanks!

Alvaro.