IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Working Group Last Call for draft-ietf-ospf-2547-dnbit-01.txt to both lists

Eric Rosen <erosen@CISCO.COM> Thu, 20 November 2003 20:11 UTC

Received: from cherry.ease.lsoft.com (cherry.ease.lsoft.com [209.119.0.109]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA22489 for <ospf-archive@LISTS.IETF.ORG>; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 15:11:22 -0500 (EST)
Received: from PEAR.EASE.LSOFT.COM (209.119.0.19) by cherry.ease.lsoft.com (LSMTP for Digital Unix v1.1b) with SMTP id <1.00C50419@cherry.ease.lsoft.com>; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 15:11:33 -0500
Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM by PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8e) with spool id 61341085 for OSPF@PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 15:11:31 -0500
Received: from 171.68.10.86 by WALNUT.EASE.LSOFT.COM (SMTPL release 1.0i) with TCP; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 15:11:31 -0500
Received: from cisco.com (erosen-u10.cisco.com [161.44.70.36]) by rtp-core-2.cisco.com (8.12.9/8.12.6) with ESMTP id hAKKBSDM024423; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 15:11:28 -0500 (EST)
User-Agent: EMH/1.14.1 SEMI/1.14.3 (Ushinoya) FLIM/1.14.3 (Unebigoryōmae) APEL/10.3 Emacs/21.3 (sparc-sun-solaris2.8) MULE/5.0 (SAKAKI)
MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI 1.14.3 - "Ushinoya")
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID: <200311202011.hAKKBSDM024423@rtp-core-2.cisco.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 15:11:28 -0500
Reply-To: Mailing List <OSPF@PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender: Mailing List <OSPF@PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From: Eric Rosen <erosen@CISCO.COM>
Subject: Re: Working Group Last Call for draft-ietf-ospf-2547-dnbit-01.txt to both lists
Comments: To: Tom Petch <nwnetworks@DIAL.PIPEX.COM>
To: OSPF@PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM
In-Reply-To: Your message of Wed, 19 Nov 2003 17:09:19 +0000. <002001c3aec0$3f8a7be0$0301a8c0@tom3>
Precedence: list

> In the abstract, I would like the text to include LSA Header in the reference
> to options, as OSPF has options in other places

No problem.

> Throughout, VPN-IP address should be VPN-IPv4 address as in (mostly) the base
> VPN documents

I  prefer to  leave it  as is,  since there  is nothing  v4-specific  in the
procedures.

> The  dn  bit  stops  OSPF   route  calculation.   What  about  other  OSPF
> processing?   I  assume  that the  LSA  will  be  put in  the  topological
> database, aged, flooded etc just as if  dn was not set.  In which case, or
> if not, I would like that specifically stated.

We will add a  statement saying that LSAs with the DN  bit set still get put
in the topological database, aged, flooded, etc.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email