[Lsr] Responses for comments on "passive interface attribute" draft

"Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee@cisco.com> Fri, 20 November 2020 07:36 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 CFC613A19CE for <lsr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 23:36:33 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -9.597
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.597 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, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, 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 header.b=G8LV5BLh; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.onmicrosoft.com header.b=AgKNsazx
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 TFPPhX-P3dbp for <lsr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 23:36:29 -0800 (PST)
Received: from alln-iport-4.cisco.com (alln-iport-4.cisco.com [173.37.142.91]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 93A7A3A19CC for <lsr@ietf.org>; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 23:36:29 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=19609; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1605857789; x=1607067389; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:mime-version; bh=syT3NdHTvXWEeF3Qs5ALCCsZwTj/+t36daqqXYUu/qM=; b=G8LV5BLhoKWa82WOHb1+uY/0gOdQCvOKSioVmE2iaIuyKPz+F+zpbNQA sVFXKd6Le1AmtSISlxO8/ZkSCwEaxSRJAh/lCUG/rCrid9dNdzxOYK04T RHBP1DUETXEdrqCng1DrhhWbJa92+/U+CoSHF0z0u0AUjwms8Z7LO5L/i I=;
X-IPAS-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0DLCAD1b7dffZldJa1ig3svUXtZLy4KhDODSQOhcYRwg?= =?us-ascii?q?lMDVAsBAQENAQElCAIEAQGEShmCEgIlOBMCAwEBAQMCAwEBAQEFAQEBAgEGB?= =?us-ascii?q?BQBAYY8DIVyAQEXER0BATgRARkDAQEBKwIEMB0KBAESGweDBAGBflcDLgEOo?= =?us-ascii?q?gICgTyIaHaBMoMEAQEFgTMBAwICDEFEgk8YghADBoE4gnODdoZXG4IAgTgcg?= =?us-ascii?q?k+DGwEBAgEBgUM4DYJqM4IskCaDR4cenCSBDQqCbQSJDo8bgm4DH4MaiheUT?= =?us-ascii?q?JNWiwGVWgIEAgQFAg4BAQWBayGBWXAVZQGCCgEBMlAXAg2SEIUUhUR0NwIGA?= =?us-ascii?q?QkBAQMJfIw7AYEQAQE?=
IronPort-PHdr: =?us-ascii?q?9a23=3AJJEKkhM2ivMQi233sZEl6mtXPHoupqn0MwgJ65?= =?us-ascii?q?Eul7NJdOG58o//OFDEvK8z3kPSXIPU6+9Nze3MvObrXz9I7ZWAtSUEd5pBH1?= =?us-ascii?q?8AhN4NlgMtSMiCFQXgLfHsYiB7eaYKVFJs83yhd0QAHsH4ag7OuXy04j4PE1?= =?us-ascii?q?P4LwUzLeKmUoLXht68gua1/ZCbag5UhT27NLV1Khj+rQjYusQMx4V4LaNkwR?= =?us-ascii?q?rSqXwOcONTlm4=3D?=
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.78,355,1599523200"; d="scan'208,217";a="595168011"
Received: from rcdn-core-2.cisco.com ([173.37.93.153]) by alln-iport-4.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA; 20 Nov 2020 07:36:28 +0000
Received: from XCH-ALN-005.cisco.com (xch-aln-005.cisco.com [173.36.7.15]) by rcdn-core-2.cisco.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id 0AK7aS1C002881 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Fri, 20 Nov 2020 07:36:28 GMT
Received: from xhs-rtp-001.cisco.com (64.101.210.228) by XCH-ALN-005.cisco.com (173.36.7.15) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1497.2; Fri, 20 Nov 2020 01:36:28 -0600
Received: from xhs-rcd-002.cisco.com (173.37.227.247) by xhs-rtp-001.cisco.com (64.101.210.228) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1497.2; Fri, 20 Nov 2020 02:36:27 -0500
Received: from NAM12-MW2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (72.163.14.9) by xhs-rcd-002.cisco.com (173.37.227.247) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1497.2 via Frontend Transport; Fri, 20 Nov 2020 01:36:27 -0600
ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=VXw/o1uUKIgxyDCYkCzAzsDCJL1ywB1zbV0jpmCbf7c0dgzaTqjp8a5b6k6tc0khJNk4xVRE2wlIvAyuaJ5BycoRtRRTV2IdjzDVaV4Z8TlWd9ckCv59T9phT9N/kMFrsSHz9ktdsAPkcMeZUs7Qp8SnOc2d8Uf5bsGRQvc2QaE2EDn0r1F6wkJs1SjUwxiKDfDUn5bRys6BCumbpEClVsbzbr/QItk5K35KpUjoyoBDoZkM9NDSTQpNxcn1B7AX7NPIR/grsrkGYbeEkZKczLcANLFXg6u7ofvEZ62MvmamDlp55XgaWmNr94DNfSv2O3ZS5wzU0k2yhPjLYhh11w==
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=syT3NdHTvXWEeF3Qs5ALCCsZwTj/+t36daqqXYUu/qM=; b=hdsF9cmCHG9UiIk2nWwXoN9JjFUmh3SVEVWfx8U4mfGIrXZzzZdbN5h8zQ0/nY5MPCo6A1DQ1YXz2VGOPvoMiNfMXtbF8dksR8g/OnOv7yNSxv+UfIi1wmjhPGT+x4mPP656TzAkUow974boDFJ/THX8w85MDJ1L7E9EfVAYKiHyoHGpJWm4Y7LsseGzwE3ov35klXPGhIENqxqGeNyIMR0uOZlkSimXK6SIRZRpMJyy2PFV1VjzWexcX4ZC0A+drKCHpTfBt0dd0xKBz0c1qTC/6llAxyUGYNX6YLuLSjBntNu1LdfW5za0rZfgEVXdtmD/ty9ln34EF/Jdhtky/g==
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=syT3NdHTvXWEeF3Qs5ALCCsZwTj/+t36daqqXYUu/qM=; b=AgKNsazxT1j2OipL5ixh0tHovXZE8NF26ka3mHiSnVhEInuUSekFVkMdKm2MIhHUpZ+kVD5ZAHX9P00W+9Jh2kf+puiqJ7qszpQmtObaMyruyR2JISLWBe82PGEBbOLj0qDrQCHxNPFw6/rNEFlpQhN8w2yDDvTYydS6i+aT0hw=
Received: from BYAPR11MB2887.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:a03:89::27) by BYAPR11MB3158.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:a03:1c::29) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.3541.25; Fri, 20 Nov 2020 07:36:26 +0000
Received: from BYAPR11MB2887.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::1ddc:cdb4:32cc:f078]) by BYAPR11MB2887.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::1ddc:cdb4:32cc:f078%3]) with mapi id 15.20.3564.028; Fri, 20 Nov 2020 07:36:26 +0000
From: "Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee@cisco.com>
To: Aijun Wang <wangaijun@tsinghua.org.cn>, "lsr@ietf.org" <lsr@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: Responses for comments on "passive interface attribute" draft
Thread-Index: AQHWvw/avWty8nR3UUCa1g0YSsyy4A==
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2020 07:36:25 +0000
Message-ID: <B0990E97-A2C3-476E-B4B1-F09D29233322@cisco.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/16.43.20110804
authentication-results: tsinghua.org.cn; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;tsinghua.org.cn; dmarc=none action=none header.from=cisco.com;
x-originating-ip: [136.56.133.70]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 04e763ec-a26e-4346-9b06-08d88d26fcb0
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: BYAPR11MB3158:
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <BYAPR11MB3158F8E3CFD19349D7B7C7A4C2FF0@BYAPR11MB3158.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:9508;
x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0;
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: HVVA7lbnb5IjzRS3+FuUo1PE9LOkm1z/ySH8E1pRIZtF34GDSyaZitkRVWCzMOIVkeC8a1pC4ggtJiZWFCqhd1i5qeUaeZhsGIWsGJgwz+WzI0noHEIvHuRPmKumbmmbxejSBUTz3X7H7jxlHRWEZ63cAu5DdsPEpJwjSThqvRj+Q8/L2JukAYsfdwBju5sEXoGaAXmKBqb1QZXjc8JD0HFApLYGFsNH0ELVgViT1bu+toSsf/FUwFe82maxXuJKJh1iBZ9D63dXgpdjsBzk2vFr/RfoDKt4TCc7ZAS+PDIa0JXsOQdnLKWXoeIHjEvGZvMf5C8/m6Amd/QEdKqAlp6CZImfZ+47uZN0KenfXMSyjLVhMX1q5Bh0sIHlTmdnfzBNF4sEA1M6ECfYJSbMJA==
x-forefront-antispam-report: CIP:255.255.255.255; CTRY:; LANG:en; SCL:1; SRV:; IPV:NLI; SFV:NSPM; H:BYAPR11MB2887.namprd11.prod.outlook.com; PTR:; CAT:NONE; SFS:(39860400002)(376002)(346002)(366004)(136003)(396003)(66946007)(66476007)(64756008)(6486002)(66556008)(66446008)(6512007)(83380400001)(36756003)(71200400001)(478600001)(966005)(91956017)(76116006)(2906002)(8676002)(8936002)(26005)(33656002)(5660300002)(110136005)(316002)(6506007)(186003)(166002)(2616005)(86362001)(53546011)(66574015); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101;
x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata: 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
x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_B0990E97A2C3476EB4B1F09D29233322ciscocom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthAs: Internal
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthSource: BYAPR11MB2887.namprd11.prod.outlook.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 04e763ec-a26e-4346-9b06-08d88d26fcb0
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 20 Nov 2020 07:36:25.8832 (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: DDicGmMTyHNYwBfv5+6fzIxfKBFRtT4vCNXolq4ZKX9EFr/mhstGu+WRgocLufdL
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BYAPR11MB3158
X-OriginatorOrg: cisco.com
X-Outbound-SMTP-Client: 173.36.7.15, xch-aln-005.cisco.com
X-Outbound-Node: rcdn-core-2.cisco.com
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lsr/G58yG8FbGSuyvgmcKhb83BjMNCU>
Subject: [Lsr] Responses for comments on "passive interface attribute" draft
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: Fri, 20 Nov 2020 07:36:34 -0000

Speaking as WG member and updating subject:

Hi Aijun,

We’re not going to add stub links back into Router-LSAs under any circumstance since that was an advantage of OSPFv3 over OSPFv2 (refer to section 2.8 of RFC 5340). Additionally, we’re going to be careful as to what information we put into the topological LSAs.

With respect to your specific use case, you haven’t disclosed it other than you’re making some loose inference based on an interface being a passive interface  (which isn’t a standardized IGP concept). Rather, you should precisely design your use case and then we can talk about a solution.

Thanks,
Acee

From: Aijun Wang <wangaijun@tsinghua.org.cn>
Date: Thursday, November 19, 2020 at 10:06 PM
To: Acee Lindem <acee@cisco.com>om>, "lsr@ietf.org" <lsr@ietf.org>
Subject: RE: [Lsr] IETF I09 LSR Meeting Minutes(Responses for comments on "passive interface attribute" draft)

HI, Acee:

Thanks for the minutes, and also thanks for Yingzhen.

Below are the responses for the comments regarding to draft-wang-lsr-passive-interface-attribute-06<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-wang-lsr-passive-interface-attribute-06>06>, please see whether they address your concern or not.
For simplicity, I just summary the key points of the comments.
【Chris】: Why not using the existed TLV to solve the Inter-as use case?
【Reply-from Aijun Wang】: For inter-AS use case, using the existed TLV has the constraints that described in https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lsr/VLufuaGDiRgaflcu58FY_SHnJ7A/

【Chris】: Why not using prefix attributes to advertise application server’s information?
【Reply-from Aijun Wang】: It is possible to advertise these information together with prefix. But when we want to describe the resources(for example, link bandwidth, link utilization ratio etc.) to the prefix, it is more reasonable to associated them to link attributes.

On summary, considering the above two use case has the common characteristic, that is, the associated link is stub-link, we think that defines the stub-link TLV to contain the these information  is more extensible.

【Acee】: Why not just advertise the link is the inter-AS boundary or other , and doesn’t need to infer this conclusion?
【Reply-from Aijun Wang】: If necessary, we can add one flag field to indicate clearly the sub-type of the stub-link. But currently, they are all passive-interface, has no other distinguished differences.
The usage of such information, or the inferences method, may be different in different scenario. I think the standardization work should defines the fundamental common parts.


Best Regards

Aijun Wang
China Telecom

From: lsr-bounces@ietf.org <lsr-bounces@ietf.org> On Behalf Of Acee Lindem (acee)
Sent: Friday, November 20, 2020 6:17 AM
To: lsr@ietf.org
Subject: [Lsr] IETF I09 LSR Meeting Minutes

I have uploaded the minutes for the meeting on Monday morning. Thanks much to Yingzhen Qu for taking them. Please send me any additions or corrections to me.

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/minutes-109-lsr/

Presenters and draft authors, please note that if more discussion is need on your draft then it is up to you to initiate such discussion.

Thanks,
Acee