Re: [Lsr] Opsdir last call review of draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment-routing-extensions-16

Alvaro Retana <aretana.ietf@gmail.com> Fri, 16 November 2018 21:40 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 CA590128D09; Fri, 16 Nov 2018 13:40:29 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.997
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.997 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 QKVZCvO6kThT; Fri, 16 Nov 2018 13:40:27 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-ot1-x335.google.com (mail-ot1-x335.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::335]) (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 AE47F127333; Fri, 16 Nov 2018 13:40:27 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-ot1-x335.google.com with SMTP id n46so22659651otb.9; Fri, 16 Nov 2018 13:40:27 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=B7N76vQ9FXSwSUj9fFHLXfPf9CXJkbAhR5bqqZOu2q0=; b=NPfcJn0uYYtbvqWfdEoTOlY09yBuQVvHUb7/688eQPBPJJU+I2Ae2bW/60sv3obhw0 Bv8p+1JWd4O7y/XcoWbhq/MDlOmT1RT/dbs+7GyAS7GHS5nGGuiaoroDUTz7YcndpJEV CoESmxO8mQQBS/QHMJHIu9+Alhiu+PLsXQr5k2VSRQqe6WG+fHaQ6B8qZCi2YenrK8KA jrTSICgWKXwCxF1oOzgawXoNg8zSC8X5qqxoLov9OWuIPjzzNS3/YWbLHC8Bzve/xj8l hlLee2eXqbxW8HsqSXhlMLsGUwedutlJwA6C73Lhjd8HlXcgIKhmnM1XuVkkxReXzjbo Pb+Q==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=B7N76vQ9FXSwSUj9fFHLXfPf9CXJkbAhR5bqqZOu2q0=; b=CJZAELwvm0AFUROUBjBIdd9bp+zdG0STWJ2K9LmqtCuoiTcGtClKD4bA9L8nf8Jk8K SMbqL4hqzObrfjpWdqKSK1pboFDMejLnh+rCLganAVZnvn2kR0z9MBXF/MP67BBkpzw2 grNl9jFDw9qi4HbXtEzorVPGbFtM0HbkeJm+GtRGkJmA4qMCy/H4XnSEvCQJj+jp8091 pqxxlOv9YrnuhsrAz+GR8rvZVEDUyYXFrq3d8glseBLhg/V9PxfxDfsp3Q5CjbYiLyl1 3RJTKQ9yq9jgPnXHMPE4+ufw0AgG03wofJQDnuxhe4VOIffB3aW4Ghm9kAnQ1zMcSqDI uP3w==
X-Gm-Message-State: AGRZ1gITWHFBJn6ULVX6bZC8KsJiP12YblEPTW0xWj+crIbM7haSlg6j 9MnWUjtoQ+L6alxWUW+YUApWQa04WzI+mO3i0ifNHT93
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AJdET5eKC33SmQwJWlatTBRLSTTeFjTeXamOGzHjX305HVH/QLHei7Bkk1A27WQbvuvohRmpVcUKHWVdHqBILINF0gw=
X-Received: by 2002:a9d:3de2:: with SMTP id l89mr7671528otc.239.1542404426662; Fri, 16 Nov 2018 13:40:26 -0800 (PST)
Received: from 1058052472880 named unknown by gmailapi.google.com with HTTPREST; Fri, 16 Nov 2018 16:40:26 -0500
From: Alvaro Retana <aretana.ietf@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <5BD848FF.7060400@cisco.com>
References: <154058293310.8782.9766839380541329981@ietfa.amsl.com> <5BD848FF.7060400@cisco.com>
X-Mailer: Airmail (528)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2018 16:40:26 -0500
Message-ID: <CAMMESswCUsK+S7gTEPnSsx0fhuK8qyr2HNc5g2XRwh3CpFZL3Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment-routing-extensions.all@ietf.org
Cc: lsr@ietf.org, Peter Psenak <ppsenak@cisco.com>, Joe Clarke <jclarke@cisco.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000f38932057acf0329"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lsr/GkQ_rLLmKZn087PVXqjiBJBHHEc>
Subject: Re: [Lsr] Opsdir last call review of draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment-routing-extensions-16
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, 16 Nov 2018 21:40:30 -0000

[Took the ops-dir and the ietf@ietf lists off.]

Hi!

Joe makes a really good point below about the TLV types and RFC7770.  It
looks like we all missed it! :-(

To quote Peter (from a message in this thread), "I don't think it is good
to specify the behavior which is described somewhere else.”

Looking at -18, Section 4
(draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment-routing-extensions) has the exact same text
[*] as Section 3 in draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions.  Given that
the IANA allocation is done in draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions,
and that draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment-routing-extensions refers back to
it, then I would like to see the following changes:

(1) In draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions, Section 3:

<OLD>
These SR capabilities are advertised in the Router Information Opaque LSA
(defined in [RFC7770]).

<NEW>
These SR capabilities are advertised in the Router Information Opaque LSA
(defined in [RFC7770]).  The TLVs defined below are applicable to both
OSPFv2 and OSPFv3; see also
[ID.ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment-routing-extensions].

…and add an Informative reference to
draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment-routing-extensions.

(2) In draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment-routing-extensions, replace the
entire Section 4 with:

"
Segment Routing requires some additional router capabilities to be
advertised to other routers in the area.

These SR capabilities are advertised in the OSPFv3 Router Information
Opaque LSA (defined in [RFC7770]), and specified in
[ID.ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions].
“


Even though draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions is already with the
RFC Editor, it is waiting for draft-ietf-spring-segment-routing-mpls, so we
can still make changes.  Please submit a new version (and send an update of
the XML to the rfc-editor).

I am scheduling draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment-routing-extensions on the
Dec/6 IESG Telechat.  Please submit an update before the end of this month.

Thanks!!

Alvaro.



[*] Except for the OSPFv3 being specifically called out, and a couple of
other minor points.

On October 30, 2018 at 8:05:27 AM, Peter Psenak (ppsenak@cisco.com) wrote:

> With respect to TLV types 8, 9, 14, and 15, they are defined in
> draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions, and it took me a while to
figure
> out where you were getting those values and why they weren't spelled out
in the
> IANA considerations. You have a normative reference to this, which is
good,
> but you only mention it with respect to the algorithm parameters. I think
> another mention is required.
>
> I'm going to be pedantic here. According to RFC7770, when a new OSPF
Router
> Information LSA TLV is defined, the spec needs to explicitly state if it's

> applicable to OSPFv2, v3, or both. While you reference the TLVs from
> draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions, I didn't see that either
document
> _explicitly_ states that they are applicable to both.

##PP
added the following to each of the values:

Type: X as defined in [I-D.ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions] and
aplicable to OSPFv3.