IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Lsr] draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment-routing-extensions - small change

Mahendra Singh Negi <mahendrasingh@huawei.com> Fri, 16 November 2018 06:20 UTC

Return-Path: <mahendrasingh@huawei.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 0120A128C65 for <lsr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 15 Nov 2018 22:20:12 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.6
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 JBPxWV2dRKGi for <lsr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 15 Nov 2018 22:20:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: from huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [185.176.76.210]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9092F12426A for <lsr@ietf.org>; Thu, 15 Nov 2018 22:20:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lhreml701-cah.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.18.7.108]) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTP id 56B4432C05 for <lsr@ietf.org>; Fri, 16 Nov 2018 06:20:03 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from DGGEMI421-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.1.199.150) by lhreml701-cah.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.42) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.408.0; Fri, 16 Nov 2018 06:20:04 +0000
Received: from DGGEMI532-MBX.china.huawei.com ([169.254.7.74]) by dggemi421-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.1.199.150]) with mapi id 14.03.0415.000; Fri, 16 Nov 2018 14:19:51 +0800
From: Mahendra Singh Negi <mahendrasingh@huawei.com>
To: "Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee@cisco.com>, "Peter Psenak (ppsenak)" <ppsenak@cisco.com>
CC: "Goethals, Dirk (Nokia - BE/Antwerp)" <dirk.goethals@nokia.com>, "lsr@ietf.org" <lsr@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [Lsr] draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment-routing-extensions - small change
Thread-Index: AQHUfPJJBkTM1hYfUUq3Z3N0xQGuV6VQbtUAgAF9NwA=
Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2018 06:19:50 +0000
Message-ID: <B495DF531F7B5943B1816E2031125EF8B55ECD13@DGGEMI532-MBX.china.huawei.com>
References: <5BED872A.7090201@cisco.com> <C8A070CC-FC8A-4F2C-8029-C8F8639FD3C1@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <C8A070CC-FC8A-4F2C-8029-C8F8639FD3C1@cisco.com>
Accept-Language: en-US, en-GB
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.18.153.41]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lsr/hbAgM9Awr2oCF0-_XdVI9LA6YWk>
Subject: Re: [Lsr] draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment-routing-extensions - small change
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 06:20:12 -0000

Hi Acee/Peter,

This change doesn't impact our implementation.

Thanks,
Mahendra

-----Original Message-----
From: Acee Lindem (acee) [mailto:acee@cisco.com] 
Sent: 15 November 2018 20:55
To: Peter Psenak (ppsenak) <ppsenak@cisco.com>; lsr@ietf.org
Cc: Goethals, Dirk (Nokia - BE/Antwerp) <dirk.goethals@nokia.com>; Mahendra Singh Negi <mahendrasingh@huawei.com>
Subject: Re: [Lsr] draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment-routing-extensions - small change

Hi Peter, 
I agree - it is not needed in OSPFv3 Extended LSAs.

Hi Dirk, Mahendra, 

How will this impact your implementations?

Thanks,
Acee

On 11/15/18, 9:48 AM, "Lsr on behalf of Peter Psenak (ppsenak)" <lsr-bounces@ietf.org on behalf of ppsenak@cisco.com> wrote:

    Hi,
    
    as a part of the RtgDir review we got a comment about the usage of the 
    IA bit in the OSPFv3 Extended Prefix Range TLV (Section 5).
    
    We defined this bit for OSPFv2 originally. In OSPFv2 Extended Prefix 
    Range TLV is carried as a top level TLV of the Extended Prefix Opaque 
    LSA, which is not specific to any route-type, so we needed a mechanism 
    to prevent redundant flooding of Prefix Range TLVs between areas.
    
    In OSPFv3 however, we are advertising the Extended Prefix Range TLV in 
    the type specific LSAs, so we can use standard rules to prevent the 
    "looping" of advertisements.
    
    So we want to remove the IA bit from the flags field in OSPFv3 Extended 
    Prefix Range TLV.
    
    I would like to know whether anyone has any objection.
    
    thanks,
    Peter
    
    _______________________________________________
    Lsr mailing list
    Lsr@ietf.org
    https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email