Re: [OSPF] WG Adoption Poll for "OSPF LLS Extensions for Local Interface ID Advertisement"

prz <> Fri, 05 May 2017 15:09 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 62A0612943B for <>; Fri, 5 May 2017 08:09:50 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_40=-0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id m1tVxHFhdwMJ for <>; Fri, 5 May 2017 08:09:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F604129557 for <>; Fri, 5 May 2017 08:09:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from (localhost []) (Authenticated sender: prz) by (Postfix) with ESMTPA id AC34A14DAA; Fri, 5 May 2017 17:09:28 +0200 (CEST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=_d43168d816b9621565c949c9cac1a98c"
Date: Fri, 05 May 2017 08:09:27 -0700
From: prz <>
To: "Acee Lindem (acee)" <>
Cc: OSPF WG List <>
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <> <>
Message-ID: <>
User-Agent: Roundcube Webmail/0.4.2
X-MailScanner-ID: AC34A14DAA.A74BB
X-MailScanner: Found to be clean
X-MailScanner-SpamScore: s
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [OSPF] WG Adoption Poll for "OSPF LLS Extensions for Local Interface ID Advertisement"
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: Fri, 05 May 2017 15:09:50 -0000

Not sure it made it from my other address so rtx to the list ...  

conditional against here ...  

I am fine with adoption if I see a
version that spells the detailed behavior and especially interactions
between RFC4302 and this draft in a detailed section, i.e. both on,
RFC4302 gets configured/unconfigured, are the LLS extensions advertised
on every hello or just until a specific state (like ISIS padding
thingies) and so on ...  

I'd rather have this now than a LC discussion

The idea is deceptively simple but it is a redundant mechanism
and those always end causing inter-op problems unless cleanly spelled
out ...  

--- tony   

On Thu, 4 May 2017 20:27:27 +0000, "Acee Lindem
(acee)"  wrote:  

Speaking as a WG member:  

I believe we should move
forward with this simple mechanism for OSPFv2 neighbors to learn each
other's interface ID. Both IS-IS and, more importantly, OSPFv3 learn the
interface ID via their respective hello mechanisms. Just because one
implementation has repurposed the Generalized MPL (GMPL) extensions
described in RFC 4302 for interface ID learning is not a reason to
preclude using the more generally accepted IGP Hello packet learning.
Additionally, there is the undesirable side effect of TE LSAs resulting
in inclusion in the TE topology for multiple implementations.  

Finally, when the right technical direction is clear and there is rough
consensus, the OSPF WG MUST NOT be obstructed. 


Acee Lindem 
Date: Thursday, May 4, 2017 at 2:45 PM
To: OSPF WG List

Subject: WG Adoption Poll for "OSPF LLS Extensions for Local Interface
ID Advertisement" 

This draft was presented in Chicago and there was
acknowledgment that a solution was needed. The authors have asked for WG
adoption and we are now doing a WG adoption poll. Please indicate your
support or objection by May 20th, 2017.