Re: [OSPF] RtgDir review: draft-smirnov-ospf-xaf-te

Anton Smirnov <> Sat, 18 June 2016 22:14 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id B21D912DA28; Sat, 18 Jun 2016 15:14:23 -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_H4=-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=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id KhO2YmoyeT7c; Sat, 18 Jun 2016 15:14:22 -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 4A69212DA1B; Sat, 18 Jun 2016 15:06:34 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple;;; l=1714; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1466287594; x=1467497194; h=message-id:date:from:mime-version:to:cc:subject: references:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=V6NOAkb98CVFIR4Do18k77v9np10XyfSYw9PZNEqdsM=; b=T9y3Ci+AVKghyAUMYhL10ScDDfkXX9dCL7cI8f9HAXRKa/YHfyFlwPu2 5eriyFZz41AKm8PofMxyMTJqqUVu3APXuKJxOuX70+5SybGa/tEaduD/T UWcUyYqzuc0C+yUFQevZ1aMj8cehkvHIzP8JRWJO2ve3zWtZIbs6kSRQg U=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.26,489,1459814400"; d="scan'208";a="635245513"
Received: from (HELO ([]) by with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 18 Jun 2016 22:06:32 +0000
Received: from ( []) (authenticated bits=0) by (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id u5IM6V8n030290 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Sat, 18 Jun 2016 22:06:32 GMT
Message-ID: <>
Date: Sun, 19 Jun 2016 00:06:31 +0200
From: Anton Smirnov <>
Organization: Cisco Systems
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.3.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Manav Bhatia <>, "<>" <>
References: <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Authenticated-User: asmirnov
Archived-At: <>
Cc: "" <>,, OSPF WG List <>
Subject: Re: [OSPF] RtgDir review: draft-smirnov-ospf-xaf-te
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: Sat, 18 Jun 2016 22:14:24 -0000

    Hi Manav,
    thanks for your review.

    I just published new revision of the draft addressing comments of 
the second Routing Directorate review (by Ice Wijnands). In brief, there 
is a mention of applicability to sub-LSPs of a Point-to-Multipoint LSP 
and rewritten example (hopefully, for better readability).


On 06/10/2016 06:56 AM, Manav Bhatia wrote:
> Hello,
> I have been selected as the Routing Directorate reviewer for this draft.
> The Routing Directorate seeks to review all routing or routing-related
> drafts as they pass through IETF last call and IESG review, and
> sometimes on special request. The purpose of the review is to provide
> assistance to the Routing ADs. For more information about the Routing
> Directorate, please see
> Although these comments are primarily for the use of the Routing ADs, it
> would be helpful if you could consider them along with any other IETF
> Last Call comments that you receive, and strive to resolve them through
> discussion or by updating the draft.
> Document: draft-smirnov-ospf-xaf-te
> Reviewer: Manav Bhatia
> Review Date: 10/06/2016
> IETF LC End Date: date-if-known
> Intended Status: Standards Track
> Summary: No issues found. This document is ready for publication.
> The draft proposes something that prima facie appears reasonable --
> using a single OSPF instance to set up TE LSPs for both v4 and v6.
> Comments:
> The draft is quite simple and i see no technical issues. However, i
> would like this to go through the regular IETF WG process before it gets
> pushed to the publication pipeline.
> Cheers, Manav