[OSPF] FW: I-D Action: draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv2-hbit-03.txt

"Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee@cisco.com> Wed, 14 June 2017 19:48 UTC

Return-Path: <acee@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7303312955F for <ospf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 14 Jun 2017 12:48:42 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.523
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.523 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=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id HkTCsTFRq1mV for <ospf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 14 Jun 2017 12:48:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rcdn-iport-6.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-6.cisco.com []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6609712952E for <ospf@ietf.org>; Wed, 14 Jun 2017 12:48:40 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=2896; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1497469720; x=1498679320; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:references:in-reply-to: content-id:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=NeDFg7Ed1pQr8IvP5ivJPyxycnXNW1d0nJsiudgRIUE=; b=lBoxwq6UUg7hQvOKNrR27FC4UGuJwpdFHZ14jGciHgW51uC5x2mRQKv3 Qm3yQZU7OPp2b0ZRiik+IENEPreX23q+CUJ9bn+d2pUoyfPZ4kjGfime4 7kOWNwevH/wnSZLKqmPhYeqK0ZHV/Ihx1YEgS/xPLOkRde8NQwWSB7gV0 g=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.39,341,1493683200"; d="scan'208";a="257866801"
Received: from alln-core-8.cisco.com ([]) by rcdn-iport-6.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA; 14 Jun 2017 19:48:39 +0000
Received: from XCH-RTP-012.cisco.com (xch-rtp-012.cisco.com []) by alln-core-8.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id v5EJmdl9019612 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL) for <ospf@ietf.org>; Wed, 14 Jun 2017 19:48:39 GMT
Received: from xch-rtp-015.cisco.com ( by XCH-RTP-012.cisco.com ( with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1210.3; Wed, 14 Jun 2017 15:48:38 -0400
Received: from xch-rtp-015.cisco.com ([]) by XCH-RTP-015.cisco.com ([]) with mapi id 15.00.1210.000; Wed, 14 Jun 2017 15:48:38 -0400
From: "Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee@cisco.com>
To: OSPF WG List <ospf@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [OSPF] I-D Action: draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv2-hbit-03.txt
Thread-Index: AQHS5S2MLmSzz+442kSB0AzaxEZJ8qIkxA4A
Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2017 19:48:38 +0000
Message-ID: <D5670AC2.B39C4%acee@cisco.com>
References: <149745868176.14092.12545952816774640731@ietfa.amsl.com>
In-Reply-To: <149745868176.14092.12545952816774640731@ietfa.amsl.com>
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: <5B5B0897634201448301B1AD4F4B8D73@emea.cisco.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ospf/PaO117CkpZwckb-ltaIPKLyPWOs>
Subject: [OSPF] FW: I-D Action: draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv2-hbit-03.txt
X-BeenThere: ospf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: Wed, 14 Jun 2017 19:48:42 -0000

The question of OSPFv2 complete blocking of transit routing support
(similar to OSPFv3) seems to come up every year or so. I’d like to WG last
call this document. Does anyone see any issues?

On 6/14/17, 12:44 PM, "OSPF on behalf of internet-drafts@ietf.org"
<ospf-bounces@ietf.org on behalf of internet-drafts@ietf.org> wrote:

>A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts
>This draft is a work item of the Open Shortest Path First IGP of the IETF.
>        Title           : H-bit Support for OSPFv2
>        Authors         : Keyur Patel
>                          Padma Pillay-Esnault
>                          Manish Bhardwaj
>                          Serpil Bayraktar
>	Filename        : draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv2-hbit-03.txt
>	Pages           : 8
>	Date            : 2017-06-14
>   OSPFv3 defines an option field for router-LSAs known as a R-bit in
>   RFC5340.  If the R-bit is clear, an OSPFv3 router can participate in
>   OSPF topology distribution without acting as a forwarder to forward
>   the transit traffic.  In such cases, an OSPF router would only accept
>   traffic intended for local delivery.  This draft defines R-bit
>   functionality for OSPFv2 defined in RFC2328.
>The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
>There are also htmlized versions available at:
>A diff from the previous version is available at:
>Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of
>until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.
>Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
>OSPF mailing list