Re: [OSPF] More Comments on OSPF S-BFD Discriminator

"Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee@cisco.com> Fri, 05 February 2016 13:00 UTC

Return-Path: <acee@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 18C451B382B; Fri, 5 Feb 2016 05:00:10 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.501
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.501 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, 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 fcoIruVKmcFH; Fri, 5 Feb 2016 05:00:06 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com [173.37.86.80]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 00A7C1B3824; Fri, 5 Feb 2016 05:00:05 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=18397; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1454677205; x=1455886805; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:mime-version; bh=KqVou1qBkzCSqEajjj9JAjej/rQ2cUnKRcGa5zEE8ng=; b=dkJ+/4/BK4gcbjVvtRrYYyLwfGRcGrmlOCGOoQvnQF7DdXO7DcdGQuiP npVSBaccit9bOfuYVB/U85xQQKDkUOEKAlNypPnOHtpMtbhp7SecwIGhD V3Gh8wDMUq6B+mEcLmbUk+CeHjIG1aeGqillU2OTKZOTTRKcNj9VUN7x/ Q=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0AdAgB/nLRW/4sNJK1egm5MUm0GiFWue?= =?us-ascii?q?oITAQ2BZiOFagIcgRQ4FAEBAQEBAQGBCoRBAQEBBCNWEAIBCBEDAQIoAwICAh8?= =?us-ascii?q?RFAkIAgQBDQWIBgMSDrBvihYNhEcBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQERBIpJg?= =?us-ascii?q?jeCGw2CU4E6BZJuhAcBhUuGEYFzgVuNGIVugQ+Db4NRAR4BAUKCAxmBSGoBiH9?= =?us-ascii?q?8AQEB?=
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos; i="5.22,400,1449532800"; d="scan'208,217"; a="68315176"
Received: from alln-core-6.cisco.com ([173.36.13.139]) by rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA; 05 Feb 2016 13:00:04 +0000
Received: from XCH-RTP-004.cisco.com (xch-rtp-004.cisco.com [64.101.220.144]) by alln-core-6.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id u15D039N007036 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Fri, 5 Feb 2016 13:00:04 GMT
Received: from xch-rtp-015.cisco.com (64.101.220.155) by XCH-RTP-004.cisco.com (64.101.220.144) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1104.5; Fri, 5 Feb 2016 08:00:02 -0500
Received: from xch-rtp-015.cisco.com ([64.101.220.155]) by XCH-RTP-015.cisco.com ([64.101.220.155]) with mapi id 15.00.1104.009; Fri, 5 Feb 2016 08:00:02 -0500
From: "Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee@cisco.com>
To: "Carlos Pignataro (cpignata)" <cpignata@cisco.com>, Manav Bhatia <manavbhatia@gmail.com>
Thread-Topic: [OSPF] More Comments on OSPF S-BFD Discriminator
Thread-Index: AQHRGDvPHGJIFP17wUyU2okv88d/op6USjYAgABifwD//7p/AIAAXH+AgAKYOwCAhciXAP//rjMAgABad4CAAHcFAIAACy0AgABKZQA=
Date: Fri, 5 Feb 2016 13:00:02 +0000
Message-ID: <D2DA067F.4BADD%acee@cisco.com>
References: <D252E730.385E8%acee@cisco.com> <CAG1kdojiU6fzn7XYSSdpfabxMDUQYvbgNNRCjZbraJKq2+WwJQ@mail.gmail.com> <D2668656.3CED2%acee@cisco.com> <c3caff28c3d243b99e523be8bc64719f@XCH-ALN-001.cisco.com> <D2669DC6.3CF08%acee@cisco.com> <8ef4f51407804a91950ab126277368a6@XCH-ALN-001.cisco.com> <D2691731.3D460%acee@cisco.com> <DBFC89CC-221C-42C8-8A11-E0E5A49170EC@cisco.com> <D2D90F1A.4B992%acee@cisco.com> <D055B8DB-8D78-4CEC-8E7F-90E9BD6E0A47@cisco.com> <CAG1kdohexHAJBRas53K7YB+U3yE_Nhy5FGd-n4vmr47dNMbU6A@mail.gmail.com> <D35900BF-2CD6-4FFB-B403-49C1210B7547@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <D35900BF-2CD6-4FFB-B403-49C1210B7547@cisco.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [10.116.152.196]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_D2DA067F4BADDaceeciscocom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ospf/64mLLLwuvZLwXsnjKFSjhtwPWCU>
Cc: "draft-ietf-ospf-sbfd-discriminator@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-ospf-sbfd-discriminator@ietf.org>, OSPF WG List <ospf@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [OSPF] More Comments on OSPF S-BFD Discriminator
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: Fri, 05 Feb 2016 13:00:10 -0000

Carlos, Manav,
 I remember now as well - this is the text I was referring to after the discussion including Les.
Thanks,
Acee

From: "Carlos Pignataro (cpignata)" <cpignata@cisco.com<mailto:cpignata@cisco.com>>
Date: Thursday, February 4, 2016 at 10:33 PM
To: Manav Bhatia <manavbhatia@gmail.com<mailto:manavbhatia@gmail.com>>
Cc: Acee Lindem <acee@cisco.com<mailto:acee@cisco.com>>, "Les Ginsberg (ginsberg)" <ginsberg@cisco.com<mailto:ginsberg@cisco.com>>, "draft-ietf-ospf-sbfd-discriminator@ietf.org<mailto:draft-ietf-ospf-sbfd-discriminator@ietf.org>" <draft-ietf-ospf-sbfd-discriminator@ietf.org<mailto:draft-ietf-ospf-sbfd-discriminator@ietf.org>>, OSPF WG List <ospf@ietf.org<mailto:ospf@ietf.org>>
Subject: Re: [OSPF] More Comments on OSPF S-BFD Discriminator

Thank you Manav! I remember now :-)

Done :-)

https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-ospf-sbfd-discriminator-03

Thanks,

— Carlos.

On Feb 4, 2016, at 9:53 PM, Manav Bhatia <manavbhatia@gmail.com<mailto:manavbhatia@gmail.com>> wrote:

Hi Carlos,

I think we need to add the following in the current version:

“When multiple S-BFD discriminators are advertised how a given discriminator is mapped to a specific use case is out of scope for this document.”

I dont have the xml with me that i can update. Can you do it if you have one with you?

Cheers, Manav

On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 1:17 AM, Carlos Pignataro (cpignata) <cpignata@cisco.com<mailto:cpignata@cisco.com>> wrote:
Hi, Acee,

On Feb 4, 2016, at 2:24 PM, Acee Lindem (acee) <acee@cisco.com<mailto:acee@cisco.com>> wrote:

Hi Carlos,

From: "Carlos Pignataro (cpignata)" <cpignata@cisco.com<mailto:cpignata@cisco.com>>
Date: Thursday, February 4, 2016 at 2:16 PM
To: Acee Lindem <acee@cisco.com<mailto:acee@cisco.com>>
Cc: "Les Ginsberg (ginsberg)" <ginsberg@cisco.com<mailto:ginsberg@cisco.com>>, Manav Bhatia <manavbhatia@gmail.com<mailto:manavbhatia@gmail.com>>, "draft-ietf-ospf-sbfd-discriminator@ietf.org<mailto:draft-ietf-ospf-sbfd-discriminator@ietf.org>" <draft-ietf-ospf-sbfd-discriminator@ietf.org<mailto:draft-ietf-ospf-sbfd-discriminator@ietf.org>>, OSPF WG List <ospf@ietf.org<mailto:ospf@ietf.org>>
Subject: Re: [OSPF] More Comments on OSPF S-BFD Discriminator

Hi, Acee,

Following up on your note below regarding draft-ietf-ospf-sbfd-discriminator, could you request publication and send this document to the IESG?

Has the document been updated with the proposed text? It hasn’t been modified since Sept 24, 2015.


Yes. The only text modification proposed and to be implemented was done here:
https://tools.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-ospf-sbfd-discriminator-02.txt

I do not believe there was anything else pending. Do you mean something else?

Thanks!

Carlos.

Thanks,
Acee


[BTW, its sibling document on ISIS is already in IESG ballot.]

Thanks!

— Carlos.

On Nov 11, 2015, at 4:16 PM, Acee Lindem (acee) <acee@cisco.com<mailto:acee@cisco.com>> wrote:

I was more concerned about the consumer of the information than the IGPs. I did look at base S-BFD draft and I agree this unspecified. Let’s go forward than with the proposed text and I will request publication.

Thanks,
Acee