Re: [OSPF] Working Group Last Call for "Advertising per-node administrative tags in OSPF" - draft-ietf-ospf-node-admin-tag-02

Shraddha Hegde <> Thu, 27 August 2015 04:38 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC5281B3A17 for <>; Wed, 26 Aug 2015 21:38:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.902
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.902 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id VQfq3POWn-p5 for <>; Wed, 26 Aug 2015 21:38:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2a01:111:f400:fc10::1:730]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 272CE1B3A2E for <>; Wed, 26 Aug 2015 21:36:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( by ( with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id; Thu, 27 Aug 2015 04:36:35 +0000
Received: from ([]) by ([]) with mapi id 15.01.0243.020; Thu, 27 Aug 2015 04:36:35 +0000
From: Shraddha Hegde <>
To: "Acee Lindem (acee)" <>, OSPF WG List <>
Thread-Topic: [OSPF] Working Group Last Call for "Advertising per-node administrative tags in OSPF" - draft-ietf-ospf-node-admin-tag-02
Thread-Index: AQHQ26MGa9ehpQr4i0KdnsfAH4wZDJ4fRgPw
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2015 04:36:34 +0000
Message-ID: <>
References: <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is );
x-originating-ip: []
x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; BY1PR0501MB1384; 5:mI9OFjtc9a/TBqwLkVc8tyjHV+alzjxS4g0gCoS60115W0l6x+cvDQk1QfThFCNDj6IQC92tSZvu3wcqjzTncPHK/hkrQzqpAWAF5aw/qO1huZR9QUib3SGApILEVHO2sN7I9DEzND1KWryArmQMoQ==; 24:ZW8qhL5mojjhbozCshL2cBnuWvDrtUGqeWqcr4UnJ7PfMHGd6AopWB5MbzahXJ8W/P4GwyOWCcyRR4TCheDNIk/DeE5cpsGlBFiWAnnG0Pg=; 20:nJcgfPGprQ5KI9GpgUbSCg+2KSGseE1tJxl0RcmRW+kyJCgL4mMkV2RNRcaT9/c2TsntbCrSHYfk6dOuSDqbnQ==
x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:BY1PR0501MB1384;
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <>
x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:;
x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(601004)(8121501046)(5005006)(3002001); SRVR:BY1PR0501MB1384; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:BY1PR0501MB1384;
x-forefront-prvs: 06818431B9
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(6009001)(479174004)(164054003)(377454003)(189002)(199003)(24454002)(13464003)(19580395003)(19580405001)(81156007)(33656002)(5001770100001)(97736004)(2656002)(76576001)(40100003)(5003600100002)(101416001)(122556002)(4001540100001)(230783001)(2900100001)(87936001)(2950100001)(46102003)(102836002)(5007970100001)(189998001)(5002640100001)(15975445007)(107886002)(106116001)(68736005)(5001860100001)(86362001)(5004730100002)(64706001)(74316001)(5001960100002)(10400500002)(106356001)(77096005)(54356999)(77156002)(92566002)(66066001)(5001830100001)(50986999)(105586002)(62966003)(99286002)(76176999); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:BY1PR0501MB1384;; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; MX:1; A:1; LANG:en;
received-spf: None ( does not designate permitted sender hosts)
spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:23
spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 27 Aug 2015 04:36:34.2049 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: bea78b3c-4cdb-4130-854a-1d193232e5f4
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BY1PR0501MB1384
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [OSPF] Working Group Last Call for "Advertising per-node administrative tags in OSPF" - draft-ietf-ospf-node-admin-tag-02
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: The Official IETF OSPG WG Mailing List <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2015 04:38:25 -0000


Agree with you that the interpretation should be that the node tags for certain router is  the super set of all the tags from all node-admin tag TLVs from all instances of RI LSA advertised by that router.
Will update the document.


-----Original Message-----
From: OSPF [] On Behalf Of Acee Lindem (acee)
Sent: Friday, August 21, 2015 5:21 AM
To: Acee Lindem (acee) <>om>; OSPF WG List <>
Subject: Re: [OSPF] Working Group Last Call for "Advertising per-node administrative tags in OSPF" - draft-ietf-ospf-node-admin-tag-02


In the “Elements of Procedure” section, please address how multiple instances of the TLV will be handled. At a minimum, the following cases must be handled:

     1. Multiple instances of the TLV in the same OSPF(v3) Router Information LSA
     2. Multiple instances of the TLV in multiple OSPF(v3) Router Information LSA instances
     3. Removal an instance of the TLV in an OSPF(v3) Router Information LSA through re-origination
     4. Purge of an OSPF(v3) Router Information LSA containing the node admin tags TLV. 

One possible interpretation (and probably the simplest) is that the set of valid tags for a given OSPF(v3) router is the superset of the tags in all the existing OSPF(v3) Router Information LSAs advertised by that router.


On 7/23/15, 2:24 PM, "OSPF on behalf of Acee Lindem (acee)"
< on behalf of> wrote:

>This begins the WG last call for the subject draft. Please send your 
>comments to this list prior to 12:00 AM GMT, August 22th, 2015. Note 
>that we are doing a 4 week WG last call due to the volume of IETF WG 
>last calls made this week and the fact that many WG participants may be 
>taking vacation in August.
>OSPF mailing list

OSPF mailing list