[Lsr] "OSPFv3 Extensions for SRv6" - draft-li-ospf-ospfv3-srv6-extensions-07 Questions/Comments

"Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee@cisco.com> Sun, 17 November 2019 22:18 UTC

Return-Path: <acee@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 048E112008C; Sun, 17 Nov 2019 14:18:33 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.5
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.5 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-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 header.b=XWcy7ecU; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.onmicrosoft.com header.b=Cv0Q+g5A
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 eFb_aHEsvKha; Sun, 17 Nov 2019 14:18:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rcdn-iport-4.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-4.cisco.com [173.37.86.75]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C898012006B; Sun, 17 Nov 2019 14:18:30 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=23007; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1574029110; x=1575238710; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:mime-version; bh=b2e/bQs3fiTZKtShPDM/LOfUEkox+DBqhAYkdOMKHd8=; b=XWcy7ecUG2oW8ZB1+OuXe9ArnkF/MIoNQFuChazBOJWUEjzuT30EXqyv 5UenxDNSOEPhTlb2RmED0M7Z8+/Mivfp8X8t6AhE1OAamufcfYbD8aFwi qx0tCAxuPlrwVap1CL6pQZe8H5HefPYkk3yCY1Vu/RrQK+LMOxKK3FPfV 8=;
IronPort-PHdr: =?us-ascii?q?9a23=3A0fbRNRahysT4zReOjdvGrN7/LSx94ef9IxIV55?= =?us-ascii?q?w7irlHbqWk+dH4MVfC4el20QKbRp3VvvRDjeee87vtX2AN+96giDgDa9QNHw?= =?us-ascii?q?QAld1QmgUhBMCfDkiuJfXnYgQxHd9JUxlu+HToeUU=3D?=
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0CHDgA3xtFd/5FdJa1lHgELHIMaL1A?= =?us-ascii?q?FbFggBAsqCoNfQINGA4pvgjmYJYJSA1QJAQEBDAEBLQIBAYRAGYIMJDgTAgM?= =?us-ascii?q?LAQEEAQEBAgEFBG2FNwELhVQQBhEdAQE3AREBBkQCBDAnBA4ngwABgXlNAy4?= =?us-ascii?q?BAgGRPpBkAoE4iGB1gTKCfgEBBYR9GIIXCYE2jBUYgX+BECgME4pfMoIskBO?= =?us-ascii?q?FR5dlbgqCKoxAiQ8bgj6HaI9rjkiaCAIEAgQFAg4BAQWBaSKBWHAVZQGCQVA?= =?us-ascii?q?RFJEaDBcVgzuKU3SBKIxWAYEOAQE?=
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.68,317,1569283200"; d="scan'208,217";a="666666457"
Received: from rcdn-core-9.cisco.com ([173.37.93.145]) by rcdn-iport-4.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA; 17 Nov 2019 22:18:29 +0000
Received: from XCH-RCD-006.cisco.com (xch-rcd-006.cisco.com [173.37.102.16]) by rcdn-core-9.cisco.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id xAHMITZ5019794 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Sun, 17 Nov 2019 22:18:29 GMT
Received: from xhs-rcd-003.cisco.com (173.37.227.248) by XCH-RCD-006.cisco.com (173.37.102.16) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3; Sun, 17 Nov 2019 16:18:29 -0600
Received: from xhs-rcd-003.cisco.com (173.37.227.248) by xhs-rcd-003.cisco.com (173.37.227.248) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3; Sun, 17 Nov 2019 16:18:28 -0600
Received: from NAM03-DM3-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (72.163.14.9) by xhs-rcd-003.cisco.com (173.37.227.248) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3 via Frontend Transport; Sun, 17 Nov 2019 16:18:28 -0600
ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=a6gRRwqRDCFXsaGC/BoQj32Wx8mxOJWspNsdpDUWKkzdx3LaMwe7nNxgJTQwMEFf8zoJ+aDwEyMSf8x2K5BeFaND6R0QxmX6MaD9XrT0tywX9XKZMgCJFVHZ600nLHttIFiWjRHiSeye+lide4o6FEwBekzDwjDvbj8L1cHboFnEmVQivtO3cjBRN/neW+AE8eN6DOAe5naAqOc1NaoTlu4OIbdvRKJVlf/faySRxzJ5+kmi6x/vb4qnfbB0csEj1KRcj3jNR92ytkA4GYC+l0yFcNHqp2uI0Sjh1IlToVAASpJhZAtoAD64E91n1DImmTIOEWkHDMMHFjZ9UIFb3Q==
ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=b2e/bQs3fiTZKtShPDM/LOfUEkox+DBqhAYkdOMKHd8=; b=c6TjXQDn6o/zNPUbCfQhBlxmWYaCvhoQRpiJIzNzahl66uv6xmZ8kJVVIYIQrYfhoDEyk2WE56K6dQcuSpcoUGWz00OLu8C/+7f36tlfcpeaWBuR6gMC3FHv70/T1eQZrlE04mF10YwyezADkfyQZqnxnoRlVFssvv/MUoRTf0YHqBDWQg/N8Th+vt1VW98PEs/PhFbSjjQdutFCcXO9Q1FEQNzuN4C9c7sSjRU2R1E/XBCDpV3JsZUHCmzWutkdqovGLELCrFcvY7w05Tfw5IL46PUtUlHovQ8JUoequCXHvpex87iIubkbuEbt9sDeI+bhLa1BiW966XobVmO8Nw==
ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=cisco.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=cisco.com; dkim=pass header.d=cisco.com; arc=none
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cisco.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector2-cisco-onmicrosoft-com; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=b2e/bQs3fiTZKtShPDM/LOfUEkox+DBqhAYkdOMKHd8=; b=Cv0Q+g5AQsBorZcFzRHc0EeKnODn9vm/p1/oeZkwk3X5HcSdSLGuSYGNeK1dVLZNscCmO9ucF9v+JWAXZV98yY/ZSB+iwbX6U6RoeRERwnlc9oHnDeQwJI/eU572+9NwN90e8N/KLr2CHAgTgI6ox4A44j9wFVMzr3CKn2+enYI=
Received: from MN2PR11MB4221.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (52.135.38.14) by MN2PR11MB4397.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (52.135.38.212) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.2451.23; Sun, 17 Nov 2019 22:18:27 +0000
Received: from MN2PR11MB4221.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::218b:2d04:e653:105]) by MN2PR11MB4221.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::218b:2d04:e653:105%7]) with mapi id 15.20.2451.029; Sun, 17 Nov 2019 22:18:27 +0000
From: "Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee@cisco.com>
To: "draft-li-ospf-ospfv3-srv6-extensions@ietf.org" <draft-li-ospf-ospfv3-srv6-extensions@ietf.org>
CC: "lsr@ietf.org" <lsr@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: "OSPFv3 Extensions for SRv6" - draft-li-ospf-ospfv3-srv6-extensions-07 Questions/Comments
Thread-Index: AQHVnZTv18z/fBfHzU6sxa0nMJwCMw==
Date: Sun, 17 Nov 2019 22:18:26 +0000
Message-ID: <50EB2052-5917-4DF1-B597-8C384FDECDC9@cisco.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=acee@cisco.com;
x-originating-ip: [31.133.150.93]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 4a2c2e94-748d-4bbd-10a9-08d76bac11b1
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: MN2PR11MB4397:
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <MN2PR11MB43976B27415C5C4E5878EF2CC2720@MN2PR11MB4397.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:9508;
x-forefront-prvs: 02243C58C6
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10009020)(4636009)(396003)(136003)(376002)(39860400002)(346002)(366004)(189003)(199004)(2906002)(86362001)(102836004)(4326008)(186003)(450100002)(6116002)(81156014)(26005)(3846002)(81166006)(8676002)(76116006)(91956017)(6486002)(2501003)(36756003)(66946007)(5660300002)(5640700003)(33656002)(2351001)(66066001)(6436002)(8936002)(316002)(9326002)(66556008)(64756008)(66446008)(66476007)(71200400001)(71190400001)(476003)(478600001)(99286004)(54896002)(14454004)(6306002)(6512007)(25786009)(2616005)(6916009)(14444005)(256004)(6506007)(486006)(7736002); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; SCL:1; SRVR:MN2PR11MB4397; H:MN2PR11MB4221.namprd11.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; LANG:en; PTR:InfoNoRecords; MX:1; A:1;
received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: cisco.com does not designate permitted sender hosts)
x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0;
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: gXNHa6XhgSUAtF9Z7QVy8dmsH0OdocywbxsZixUzoNnLVRpCECumUNfEhGXxudWkQz8J62+SkBxx7Shk24SkSRnXNAl1gkzB/5z5B8UwI4iPy+7FKkWSUOHYAJr57cZOZyUz6FwUxhEKniVSijkVU6hwvGLsCLs/RQuGd1aOf/CEeWx41FkuQUYJbREZbtpTLdK2mbsXpbtkYTa1Bt+6k6qmDOZJNNPJmJLnxPll49e4pBUCNgpg34TJKiv+nT/ffTD+pD4bmof2klIiVjDauJt3VEbKRE1AKVJLfZRhCB5SF2nUAe8z65DmXX9Nzq/oALK2c3FplVnDJeGKNtKTk9rxC3w/Fy9rGmw006b0nqrcsUY+q5l/tj3pJstVYrAWPd9Lj2/gTrC+LtwuEfieG/y+zx+OWBAGJPPjBYjyoe/h6gg7+oWNcc4JK6aJ/dBq
x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_50EB205259174DF1B5978C384FDECDC9ciscocom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 4a2c2e94-748d-4bbd-10a9-08d76bac11b1
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 17 Nov 2019 22:18:27.0358 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 5ae1af62-9505-4097-a69a-c1553ef7840e
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: bAfX7E0ffS7fGUC9B4QRwZYD0ylAslyxordYU0NCRlTvddHjCfvqu5HtbykThdF3
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: MN2PR11MB4397
X-OriginatorOrg: cisco.com
X-Outbound-SMTP-Client: 173.37.102.16, xch-rcd-006.cisco.com
X-Outbound-Node: rcdn-core-9.cisco.com
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lsr/9LsRmyJDrtHhE2NVEcmENcuKyK4>
Subject: [Lsr] "OSPFv3 Extensions for SRv6" - draft-li-ospf-ospfv3-srv6-extensions-07 Questions/Comments
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: Sun, 17 Nov 2019 22:18:33 -0000

Hi Authors,
I know you have asked for adoption and I have some comments on the draft. I think these need to be addressed or at least answered prior to any LSR adoption call. In my opinion, this document is not ready.


  1.  Why do you define a separate SRv6 Locator LSA to advertise SRv6 reachability? One of the primary benefits of RFC8362 is to advertise all the information associated with a prefix in one LSA. Now you have negated that benefit by putting this information in a separate LSA.
  2.  Why do always advertise 128 bit values even when you don’t need it? You should only advertise the part of the Locator or SID required dependent on the LOC:FUNCTION split (padded to a 4 octet boundary). I would expect the SIDs the are Sub-TLVs of the Locator TLV would have that locator in the high-order bit…
  3.  Similarly, what is the purpose of the SRv6 SID Structure Sub-TLV? ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming defines the locator to the first N bits and the function to the remaining 128-N bits so I don’t see the need for this TLV. At the very least, there should be text defining how it is used.

Also, some editorial comments to make the text consistent with other OSPF documents.


  1.  There is a mixture of US English and UK English of preferred spellings. Please use the US English as the is the style of IETF documents. For example, lose the extra “u” in “behavior”.
  2.  OSPF doesn’t define sub-sub-TLVs, sub-sub-sub-TLVs, or any other alliterative TLSs.  This is an IS-IS artifact. Any TLV that is not a top-level TLV is a Sub-TLV and can be defined at any level of nesting. The GMPLS optical encodings in OSPF are very heavily nested.
  3.  Sub-TLV is capitalized, not “sub-TLVs”.

Thanks,
Acee