Re: [OSPF] "OSPF Link Overhead" - draft-ietf-ospf-link-overload-01

"Acee Lindem (acee)" <> Mon, 27 June 2016 14:03 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6AB7412D51F; Mon, 27 Jun 2016 07:03:01 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -15.947
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-15.947 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.426, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id KttXvIEclQbE; Mon, 27 Jun 2016 07:02:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EE3BD12D519; Mon, 27 Jun 2016 07:02:21 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple;;; l=1766; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1467036142; x=1468245742; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:content-id: content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=7lvSo9yQrtln4bVvG9N86fHsDORs21Slog7XOpSLvtY=; b=J4MnA/K3++k4kw4AmHF+G/TiPtOjnRJWv0rvXfwHpOEa98wJnIMhZHut lU504ErUAdLiZmYlF9sPHJ5SMzFCNi2xMoYxTgpggs/J4SxCgbBaM5PIT LI7K2mYiFEX04jos863wNI9PYzpFZfKtKkXnM9T9bIRu1n3kLOsj4k8tc g=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.26,536,1459814400"; d="scan'208";a="290412569"
Received: from ([]) by with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 27 Jun 2016 14:02:21 +0000
Received: from ( []) by (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id u5RE2KO2029729 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Mon, 27 Jun 2016 14:02:21 GMT
Received: from ( by ( with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1210.3; Mon, 27 Jun 2016 10:02:20 -0400
Received: from ([]) by ([]) with mapi id 15.00.1210.000; Mon, 27 Jun 2016 10:02:20 -0400
From: "Acee Lindem (acee)" <>
To: "Acee Lindem (acee)" <>, "" <>
Thread-Topic: [OSPF] "OSPF Link Overhead" - draft-ietf-ospf-link-overload-01
Thread-Index: AQHR0HyFHYsn+P+9Y0uR9BNlktlqAw==
Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2016 14:02:20 +0000
Message-ID: <>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: []
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-ID: <>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <>
Cc: OSPF WG List <>
Subject: Re: [OSPF] "OSPF Link Overhead" - draft-ietf-ospf-link-overload-01
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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: Mon, 27 Jun 2016 14:03:01 -0000

Speaking as WG co-chair:

I think we can move towards WG last call with this addition. Note that the
document needs to be refreshed as it will expire soon.


On 6/27/16, 10:00 AM, "OSPF on behalf of Acee Lindem (acee)"
< on behalf of> wrote:

>Speaking as WG member:
>One area of mild contention with this draft has been whether the
>advertisement that the link is being taken out of service needs to be
>advertised beyond the link endpoint router (which will take the
>appropriate action of advertising the maximum link metric in the reverse
>direction). We have gotten somewhat entangled into use case discussions
>and whether or not this is really necessary.
>What I’d like to propose is that offer the alternative of advertising the
>OSPF RI LSA with link-scope (fully supported by RFC 7770). This way, the
>advertisement could be restricted to the local link in situations where
>the knowledge doesn’t really need to go anywhere else. Note that the
>current text doesn’t prevent this so this is merely a matter of describing
>the use case. 
>OSPF mailing list