Re: [OSPF] New Version Notification for draft-bryant-rtgwg-param-sync-01.txt
Stewart Bryant <stewart.bryant@gmail.com> Mon, 27 February 2017 17:23 UTC
Return-Path: <stewart.bryant@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 595E912A274; Mon, 27 Feb 2017 09:23:35 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.699
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.699 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 VKeN-FHCTV28; Mon, 27 Feb 2017 09:23:34 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-wm0-x241.google.com (mail-wm0-x241.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c09::241]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ABFF412A1FD; Mon, 27 Feb 2017 09:23:33 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-wm0-x241.google.com with SMTP id r18so14481814wmd.3; Mon, 27 Feb 2017 09:23:33 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:subject:to:references:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version :in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=at5tITveEWAWsOt9MKb2OSTbQ61HgsizQn3whAh/wyY=; b=Mzx1uIYwcDcPyScn9aUd2QaqsTaTo2tygWoNlK7BqqRg09H49LJKIWgBiz3A6d65cM TOwIG7No336ukAl9brZV2kUb11PrUvcfP2Rjm9QyvvOJFi+2LGzXTe0fYWsfU9H+C0tu qIlVcPRwhF0ei6gqwbsKTFG5P/E5Q7OGnmtKR3Vryhu0YIiEg0A2AzZIQXOdAzW/EU/U THSz/D4UojqapQTu+P/WasESbaj66eQxxjXL7h2aXzumBov3J9oOANCcgrudtL8Ik+Ek VEdd6WUKO6Xycouz0yJB49w3+XmT2Mz1zl7PI15IjHKOej61dVmFsyhW+OAhp77iG8Lj PX3A==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:subject:to:references:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=at5tITveEWAWsOt9MKb2OSTbQ61HgsizQn3whAh/wyY=; b=TLA/18cWoSrlR614W7wHuYbQ//IWzsqZKy60ZyuQOxsYeR3X4UU3Fe04A9hLtRZfCQ pdZjEVID7E6QsVns9ScG8cAQagGfvsHcQotHjXpVUQlHFVp6n8I7hnw0MKChZE3iammK fM/rASYh0eJA+E7WMwiiNQyqiwYsBhUMF+hhGcsE546UnXgXy5TsD9PMTwdOOXPjzYU4 A+a+amQO9hIa3V1OTQYdHAT869YSmpgyefmbJ3btpHDKZ7qSb3G91dUwT+Hwu6lWhIaT BfWJwPRgMItj13ySXOKU2sZk8nXv9cgFKeYRKNvXZvuers+b5HlmfuqoWehGHZX8xrcT J+FQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AMke39kNJLMnkbxIAkWRCzzO0bhbc322DwSk3aLowTX1UNRSNaOvVxypTH/EEfUqHkBMyg==
X-Received: by 10.28.234.147 with SMTP id g19mr2793199wmi.102.1488216211875; Mon, 27 Feb 2017 09:23:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.2.126] (host213-123-124-182.in-addr.btopenworld.com. [213.123.124.182]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 186sm15017521wmw.24.2017.02.27.09.23.30 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 27 Feb 2017 09:23:31 -0800 (PST)
From: Stewart Bryant <stewart.bryant@gmail.com>
To: internet-drafts@ietf.org, Chris Bowers <cbowers@juniper.net>, Alia Atlas <akatlas@gmail.com>, "rtgwg@ietf.org" <rtgwg@ietf.org>, "rtgwg-chairs@ietf.org" <rtgwg-chairs@ietf.org>, isis-wg@ietf.org, ospf@ietf.org
References: <148821563731.21121.441798485413773688.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Message-ID: <492085d7-d2ba-f2ac-80ea-67ffee013041@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2017 17:23:28 +0000
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.7.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <148821563731.21121.441798485413773688.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ospf/5LNiAKElehLXicMXs6Nbtsi5ZZg>
Subject: Re: [OSPF] New Version Notification for draft-bryant-rtgwg-param-sync-01.txt
X-BeenThere: ospf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: The Official IETF OSPG WG Mailing List <ospf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ospf>, <mailto:ospf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ospf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ospf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ospf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf>, <mailto:ospf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2017 17:23:35 -0000
Resend with correct ISIS WG email address Following discussion at the last IETF, I have made a number of changes to the text to emphasis that this protocols is only to be used for the synchronization of parameters needs by the routing system. As agreed at the RTGWG meeting I am notifying RTGWG, ISIS and OSPF WGs. The draft can be found here: URL: https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-bryant-rtgwg-param-sync-01.txt Status: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-bryant-rtgwg-param-sync/ Htmlized: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-bryant-rtgwg-param-sync-01 Diff: https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-bryant-rtgwg-param-sync-01 The following is a summary of the changed: I have changed the title to: Synchronisation of Routing Parameters ========= I have added in the introduction: Note that this protocol is only intended to be used for the propagation of parameters needed to support the operation of the routing system. It MUST NOT be used as a general purpose parameter exchange protocol, and in particular it MUST NOT be used as a parameter negotiation protocol, since such use may degrade the ability of the underlying link-state routing protocol to carry our its essential purpose. ======== I have changed the IANA text to say: Synchronisation of Routing Parameters ======== I have added to the security section: In specifying a new parameter, consideration must be given to the impact of the additional parameter, and in particular the rate of change of that parameter, on the dynamics of the link-state routing protocol in use. In the specific case of the Convergence Timer, the amount of data being carried and the rate of change of the parameter value will have a negligible impact on the link-state routing protocol in use. ========= Incorporated a number of review suggestions by Mohamed Boucadair (Mod) Added Such consistency may be ensured by deploying automated means such as enforcing the new value by invoking the management interface of all involved routers. For example, a central management entity may be responsible for communicating the new configuration value by means of vendor-specific CLI, NETCONF, etc. This approach may be attracting if all involved nodes expose technology-agnostic and vendor-independent interfaces to tweak a given network-wide configuration parameter. ====== I would like to propose that we move this forward to become a WG draft and refine the detail under the WG process. - Stewart
- Re: [OSPF] New Version Notification for draft-bry… Stewart Bryant
- Re: [OSPF] New Version Notification for draft-bry… Stewart Bryant
- Re: [OSPF] New Version Notification for draft-bry… Les Ginsberg (ginsberg)
- Re: [OSPF] New Version Notification for draft-bry… Alia Atlas
- Re: [OSPF] [Isis-wg] New Version Notification for… Les Ginsberg (ginsberg)
- Re: [OSPF] [Isis-wg] New Version Notification for… Alia Atlas
- Re: [OSPF] [Isis-wg] New Version Notification for… Les Ginsberg (ginsberg)