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

"YADLAPALLI, CHAITANYA" <cy098d@att.com> Tue, 24 September 2019 15:02 UTC

Return-Path: <cy098d@att.com>
X-Original-To: lsvr@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: lsvr@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5EF7512080F for <lsvr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 24 Sep 2019 08:02:14 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.598
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, 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 49ayRO8NnOri for <lsvr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 24 Sep 2019 08:02:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx0a-00191d01.pphosted.com (mx0b-00191d01.pphosted.com [67.231.157.136]) (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 151611200E3 for <lsvr@ietf.org>; Tue, 24 Sep 2019 08:02:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pps.filterd (m0049458.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by m0049458.ppops.net-00191d01. (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id x8OEj62S005805; Tue, 24 Sep 2019 11:02:08 -0400
Received: from alpi155.enaf.aldc.att.com (sbcsmtp7.sbc.com [144.160.229.24]) by m0049458.ppops.net-00191d01. with ESMTP id 2v7mhr9wna-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 24 Sep 2019 11:02:07 -0400
Received: from enaf.aldc.att.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by alpi155.enaf.aldc.att.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id x8OF25Mt016729; Tue, 24 Sep 2019 11:02:05 -0400
Received: from zlp27125.vci.att.com (zlp27125.vci.att.com [135.66.87.52]) by alpi155.enaf.aldc.att.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id x8OF1xBO016540 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 24 Sep 2019 11:02:00 -0400
Received: from zlp27125.vci.att.com (zlp27125.vci.att.com [127.0.0.1]) by zlp27125.vci.att.com (Service) with ESMTP id C8A2613A268; Tue, 24 Sep 2019 15:01:59 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from MISOUT7MSGHUBAB.ITServices.sbc.com (unknown [130.9.129.146]) by zlp27125.vci.att.com (Service) with ESMTPS id B3CF513A266; Tue, 24 Sep 2019 15:01:59 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from MISOUT7MSGUSRDG.ITServices.sbc.com ([169.254.7.244]) by MISOUT7MSGHUBAB.ITServices.sbc.com ([130.9.129.146]) with mapi id 14.03.0468.000; Tue, 24 Sep 2019 11:01:59 -0400
From: "YADLAPALLI, CHAITANYA" <cy098d@att.com>
To: "Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee@cisco.com>, "lsvr@ietf.org" <lsvr@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [Lsvr] Mail regarding draft-ietf-lsvr-bgp-spf
Thread-Index: AQHVcuYo8M/r5JDftkuPWSUyelTbyKc66yvg
Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2019 15:01:58 +0000
Message-ID: <CA0B675FC61D874D8A9EB2C7B5CEA7872B6A7E11@MISOUT7MSGUSRDG.ITServices.sbc.com>
References: <D2BB4EDE-97FD-4A82-A93D-45203A34A339@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <D2BB4EDE-97FD-4A82-A93D-45203A34A339@cisco.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [135.91.176.248]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_CA0B675FC61D874D8A9EB2C7B5CEA7872B6A7E11MISOUT7MSGUSRDG_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:, , definitions=2019-09-24_06:, , signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_policy_notspam policy=outbound_policy score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1011 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 impostorscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1908290000 definitions=main-1909240144
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lsvr/w_MLAa2jsYI0s_oNQsXHOVZoO28>
Subject: Re: [Lsvr] Mail regarding draft-ietf-lsvr-bgp-spf
X-BeenThere: lsvr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Link State Vector Routing <lsvr.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/lsvr>, <mailto:lsvr-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/lsvr/>
List-Post: <mailto:lsvr@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:lsvr-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsvr>, <mailto:lsvr-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2019 15:02:15 -0000

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) <acee@cisco.com>;
Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2019 10:42 AM
To: YADLAPALLI, CHAITANYA <cy098d@att.com>;; lsvr@ietf.org
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 <lsvr-bounces@ietf.org<mailto:lsvr-bounces@ietf.org>> on behalf of "YADLAPALLI, CHAITANYA" <cy098d@att.com<mailto:cy098d@att.com>>
Date: Tuesday, September 24, 2019 at 10:31 AM
To: "lsvr@ietf.org<mailto:lsvr@ietf.org>" <lsvr@ietf.org<mailto:lsvr@ietf.org>>
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  |  cy098d@att.com<mailto:cy098d@att.com>

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.