Re: [Lsvr] Mail regarding draft-ietf-lsvr-bgp-spf

[Keyur Patel <[e-mail]>]

Hi Pushpasis,

What you are looking for is a H-bit support in OSPFv2 like feature.

https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv2-hbit-06

Regards,
Keyur

From: Lsvr <[e-mail]> on behalf of Pushpasis Sarkar <[e-mail]>
Date: Wednesday, September 25, 2019 at 11:53 PM
To: "Acee Lindem (acee)" <[e-mail]>
Cc: "YADLAPALLI, CHAITANYA" <[e-mail]>, "[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [Lsvr] Mail regarding draft-ietf-lsvr-bgp-spf
Resent-From: <[e-mail]>

Hi Chaitanya and Acee,

How about the 'O' bit in Node-Flag-Bits TLV defined in RFC 7752 section 3.3.1.1? I suppose the node can set the 'O' bit when it wants to take itself out from all transit paths. I know the 'O' bit is more related to the scenario when ISIS topology is being exported in BGP-LS. But I suppose we can use that for BGP-LS-SPF as well.

Thanks
-Pushpasis

On Tue, Sep 24, 2019 at 8:35 PM Acee Lindem (acee) <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
Hi Chaitanya,
I think this is a good idea and will discuss with my co-authors.
Thanks,
Acee

From: "YADLAPALLI, CHAITANYA" <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>
Date: Tuesday, September 24, 2019 at 11:02 AM
To: Acee Lindem <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>, "[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>" <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>
Subject: RE: [Lsvr] Mail regarding draft-ietf-lsvr-bgp-spf

Correct like a R-Bit.

I have read this draft and I support it.

Thanks,
Chaitanya


This communication may contain information that is privileged, or confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please note that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited.  Anyone who receives this message in error should notify the sender immediately by telephone or by return e-mail and delete it from his or her computer.



From: Acee Lindem (acee) <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>
Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2019 10:42 AM
To: YADLAPALLI, CHAITANYA <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>; [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [Lsvr] Mail regarding draft-ietf-lsvr-bgp-spf

Hi Chaitanya,

Exactly what do you mean by node cost out and what use case are you trying to satisfy. If a node wants to remove itself from the topology, it can simply withdraw its link NLRI. However, are you looking for a mechanism similar to the OSPFv3 R-Bit as a Node NLRI SPF Attribute?

   R-bit
      This bit (the `Router' bit) indicates whether the originator is an
      active router.  If the router bit is clear, then routes that
      transit the advertising node cannot be computed.  Clearing the
      router bit would be appropriate for a multi-homed host that wants
      to participate in routing, but does not want to forward non-
      locally addressed packets.

Thanks,
Acee




From: Lsvr <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>> on behalf of "YADLAPALLI, CHAITANYA" <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>
Date: Tuesday, September 24, 2019 at 10:31 AM
To: "[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>" <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>
Subject: [Lsvr] Mail regarding draft-ietf-lsvr-bgp-spf

Hi Authors,
The draft does not explicitly call out mechanisms for node cost out. It would be good to call out mechanisms to cost out a node explicitly.

Thanks,
Chaitanya


Chaitanya Yadlapalli
Network Infrastructure And Services

AT&T Services, Inc.
200 S Laurel Ave, Middletown, NJ 07722
o  732.420.7977  |  [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>

This communication may contain information that is privileged, or confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please note that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited.  Anyone who receives this message in error should notify the sender immediately by telephone or by return e-mail and delete it from his or her computer.


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