Re: [Lsr] Working Group Adoption Poll for "OSPF Extension for Prefix Originator" - draft-wang-lsr-ospf-prefix-originator-ext-01

["Goethals, Dirk (Nokia - BE/Antwerp)" <[e-mail]>]

I think we are in sync, i.e.
without this draft there is no use-case for node T1 to send an
AS-scoped router info LSA without being ASBR.
Please correct if you know of an existing use-case.
Thx,
Dirk

On 2/18/2019 15:01, Peter Psenak wrote:
Hi Dirk,

On 18/02/2019 14:47 , Goethals, Dirk (Nokia - BE/Antwerp) wrote:
Hi Peter,
and you use these when you send a traffic to some of the prefixes that
T1 originates

If T1 is not ASBR,  and this draft is not implemented, how are the nodes
in the
other area's going to know that the prefixes belong to T1?

that is exactly what this draft is trying to address. Today there is no way to determine the originator of the prefix in the remote area. We are adding that functionality in this draft.

thanks,
Peter

Dirk


On 2/18/2019 14:34, Peter Psenak wrote:
Hi Dirk,

On 18/02/2019 14:27 , Goethals, Dirk (Nokia - BE/Antwerp) wrote:
Hi Peter,
See inline DG>.
Dirk


On 2/18/2019 14:18, Peter Psenak wrote:
Hi Dirk,

On 18/02/2019 09:31 , Goethals, Dirk (Nokia - BE/Antwerp) wrote:
support +1

1 question:

When S1 in another area receives such LSA, it then can learn that
   prefix Lt1 is associated with node T1, check the ELC, ERLD, or MSD
   value according to its necessity, and construct the right label
stack
   at the ingress node S1 for the traffic destined to Lt1.

How is S1 going to know the "ELC, ERLD, or MSD" of  node T1?
I guess, T1 will need to send an AS-scoped router info LSA?

yes, that is a possibility.


If so, should T1 be ASBR as to be able to send this AS-scoped LSA?

I would not think so.
DG> What's the use of an AS-scoped LSA, if the receiver has no way
to identify/locate the advertising router? Making T1 an ASBR will
enforce the ABR to create a T4 LSA.

if the T1 advertises some properties in it's AS-scoped LSA and you use
these when you send a traffic to some of the prefixes that T1
originates, then you don't really need to know where it is located,
you only care about its properties.





I guess it was needed before as to enforce  the ABR to create the T4
LSAs,
so that others can learn which ABR to use to reach T4, but I guess
it's not needed anymore when this draft is implemented.

not sure how you reached the above conclusion. Can you please clarify?
DG> Since the ABR is adding the originator, one can indirectly learn
that
the originator is also reachable via this ABR.

well, I don't think we want to replace the Type-4 LSA functionality
with the Prefix-Originator.

thanks,
Peter


thanks,
Peter




Regards,
Dirk


On 2/13/2019 14:25, Acee Lindem (acee) wrote:

This begins a two week adoption poll for the subject draft. Please
send your comments to this list before 12:00 AM UTC on Thursday,
February 28^th , 2019.



All authors have responded to the IPR poll and there is one
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/search/?submit=draft&id=draft-wang-lsr-ospf-prefix-originator-ext><https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/search/?submit=draft&id=draft-wang-lsr-ospf-prefix-originator-ext>

https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/search/?submit=draft&id=draft-wang-lsr-ospf-prefix-originator-ext



It is listed multiple times but references the same CN201810650141.



Thanks,

Acee




_______________________________________________
Lsr mailing list
[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr



_______________________________________________
Lsr mailing list
[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr