Re: [OSPF] regarding draft-ppsenak-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse-00

Peter Psenak <ppsenak@cisco.com> Mon, 11 January 2016 07:33 UTC

Return-Path: <ppsenak@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 89FA31A873A for <ospf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 10 Jan 2016 23:33:17 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -12.593
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-12.593 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_40=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_FILL_THIS_FORM_SHORT=0.01, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham
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 ALa2TNmWZXIy for <ospf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 10 Jan 2016 23:33:15 -0800 (PST)
Received: from aer-iport-1.cisco.com (aer-iport-1.cisco.com [173.38.203.51]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 44AD61A8739 for <ospf@ietf.org>; Sun, 10 Jan 2016 23:33:15 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=3998; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1452497595; x=1453707195; h=message-id:date:from:mime-version:to:subject:references: in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=gW5CyWxIdkQ/qkx4elLGnr9H6CxLGKFIOVRtTqqt1Jw=; b=HEIELwv6ozWzwVCk5PxXTsTTCmD47i7Zaw8qXhxXv4AsOFg0ODfUzJxT yYWv5Cz4dyQmZwqnPQIzLEv8lnFc7YUsU/IJhAfvtyTFaej6jxli1/rcR tSP35QxS+x9dVfewJTuxTYupl4XiXT+DPdQKghuO6Iaiy6bcs43EVEm/U Y=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0CvBADEWZNW/xbLJq1ehAxtiFm1UBgKh?= =?us-ascii?q?W0CgVUQAQEBAQEBAYEKhDQBAQEDAQEBASAPAQUdGQoRCQIRAwECAQICBRYIAwI?= =?us-ascii?q?CCQMCAQIBFR8JCAYBDAYCAQGIIggOkRmdNo9xAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBA?= =?us-ascii?q?RqBAYVVhH+EJgoHAYM7gUkBBIdkjy+GLYcsgV6EQ4MHhVWOUTkrhAs9NIRdCRe?= =?us-ascii?q?BKwEBAQ?=
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.20,551,1444694400"; d="scan'208";a="648402016"
Received: from aer-iport-nat.cisco.com (HELO aer-core-2.cisco.com) ([173.38.203.22]) by aer-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 11 Jan 2016 07:33:13 +0000
Received: from [10.60.140.53] (ams-ppsenak-nitro4.cisco.com [10.60.140.53]) by aer-core-2.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id u0B7XCVc022106; Mon, 11 Jan 2016 07:33:12 GMT
Message-ID: <56935AB8.5010202@cisco.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2016 08:33:12 +0100
From: Peter Psenak <ppsenak@cisco.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "xuling (F)" <xuling3@huawei.com>, "ospf@ietf.org" <ospf@ietf.org>
References: <7C4B8F3BED3A204AB58199B2ABB235B829CC6B97@szxeml523-mbx.china.huawei.com>
In-Reply-To: <7C4B8F3BED3A204AB58199B2ABB235B829CC6B97@szxeml523-mbx.china.huawei.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ospf/5de0f3bmlRnD-6sw9OXIvLykhFU>
Subject: Re: [OSPF] regarding draft-ppsenak-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse-00
X-BeenThere: ospf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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, 11 Jan 2016 07:33:17 -0000

Hi Ling,

On 1/7/16 03:52 , xuling (F) wrote:
> Hi Acee,
>
> I suggest to advertise SRLG only in the TE opaque LSA, and advertise TE
> capability to help understand whether node is TE enabled. If node isn’t
> TE enabled , SRLG shouldn’t be used for TE application; otherwise, SRLG
> can be used for TE application or for other application purposes.

above would be incompatible with the existing implementations, as there 
is no "TE capability" being used today.

regards,
Peter

>
> the mechanism to advertise TE capability has been well defined in
> draft-ietf-ospf-rfc4970bis.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Ling
>
> Hi Ling,
>
> From: OSPF <ospf-bounces@ietf.org<mailto:ospf-bounces@ietf.org
> <mailto:ospf-bounces@ietf.org%3cmailto:ospf-bounces@ietf.org>>> on
> behalf of "xuling (F)" <xuling3@huawei.com<mailto:xuling3@huawei.com
> <mailto:xuling3@huawei.com%3cmailto:xuling3@huawei.com>>>
>
> Date: Wednesday, January 6, 2016 at 2:28 AM
>
> To: OSPF WG List <ospf@ietf.org<mailto:ospf@ietf.org
> <mailto:ospf@ietf.org%3cmailto:ospf@ietf.org>>>
>
> Subject: [OSPF] regarding draft-ppsenak-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse-00
>
> Hi, all
>
> To make the node that is not TE enabled advertises link attributes for
> other applications, it is worth considering another choice which has
> least change to the protocol and implementation. The method is:
> advertising RI capability TLV in RI LSA when advertising TE LSA. TE
> capability bit in RI capability TLV can indicate whether link attributes
> should become part of TE topology.
>
> In draft-ietf-ospf-rfc4970bis,
>
> ?an OSPF router advertising an OSPF RI LSA MAY include the Router
> Informational Capability TLV?? can be enhanced with: an OSPF router
> advertising an OSPF RI LSA should include Router Informational
> Capability TLV which can inform TE capability bit.
>
> In this case, some improvement needs to be done in
> draft-ietf-ospf-rfc4970bis. These are my personal view.
>
> The intent of RFC 4970 and the BIS version is that the drafts requiring
> new capabilities will define them and request IANA allocation as opposed
> to updating RFC 4970BIS for every new capability.
>
> As for the mechanism, I think this would be rather unwieldy to attempt
> to get SRLG information from different LSAs. Rather, within the OSPF
> Routing Domain, I?d choose to advertise SRLGs either in the TE LSAs or
> the Prefix/Link Attribute LSAs.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Acee
>
> Best regards,
>
> Ling XU
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> xuling
> 华为技术有限公司Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd.
> Company_logo
>
> Phone:
> Fax:
> Mobile:
> Email:
> 地址:深圳市龙岗区坂田华为基地 邮编:518129
> Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd.
> Bantian, Longgang District,Shenzhen 518129, P.R.China
> http://www.huawei.com
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> 本邮件及其附件含有华为公司的保密信息,仅限于发送给上面地址中列出的个人或
> 群组。禁
> 止任何其他人以任何形式使用(包括但不限于全部或部分地泄露、复制、或散发)
> 本邮件中
> 的信息。如果您错收了本邮件,请您立即电话或邮件通知发件人并删除本邮件!
> This e-mail and its attachments contain confidential information from
> HUAWEI, which
> is intended only for the person or entity whose address is listed above.
> Any use of the
> information contained herein in any way (including, but not limited to,
> total or partial
> disclosure, reproduction, or dissemination) by persons other than the
> intended
> recipient(s) is prohibited. If you receive this e-mail in error, please
> notify the sender by
> phone or email immediately and delete it!
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> OSPF mailing list
> OSPF@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf
>