Re: Vendor attributes in TE LSAs

Udo Neustadter <neustadter@TROPICNETWORKS.COM> Wed, 28 May 2003 14:24 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 KAA05688 for <ospf-archive@LISTS.IETF.ORG>; Wed, 28 May 2003 10:24:37 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from PEAR.EASE.LSOFT.COM (209.119.0.19) by cherry.ease.lsoft.com (LSMTP for Digital Unix v1.1b) with SMTP id <2.009E8BE5@cherry.ease.lsoft.com>; Wed, 28 May 2003 10:24:37 -0400
Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM by PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8e) with spool id 43937635 for OSPF@PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM; Wed, 28 May 2003 10:24:34 -0400
Received: from 209.202.99.50 by WALNUT.EASE.LSOFT.COM (SMTPL release 1.0i) with TCP; Wed, 28 May 2003 10:24:32 -0400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6249.0
content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Thread-Topic: Vendor attributes in TE LSAs
Thread-Index: AcMkbn9w3zcLKF/RQ2Sbi3lS9X3RCwAtehZg
Message-ID: <83040F98B407E6428FEC18AC720F5D73276CE9@exchange.tropicnetworks.com>
Date: Wed, 28 May 2003 10:24:31 -0400
Reply-To: Mailing List <OSPF@PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender: Mailing List <OSPF@PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From: Udo Neustadter <neustadter@TROPICNETWORKS.COM>
Subject: Re: Vendor attributes in TE LSAs
To: OSPF@PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM
Precedence: list
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ietf.org id KAA05688

Thank you Vishwas.
I read the isis-experimental-tlv draft you mention and sections 5 and 6
in that draft seem applicable. A new version of my draft will include
similar notes.

Udo

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Manral, Vishwas [mailto:VishwasM@NETPLANE.COM] 
> Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2003 12:41
> To: OSPF@PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM
> Subject: Re: Vendor attributes in TE LSAs
> 
> 
> Hi Udo,
> 
> The draft looks pretty straight forward and simple.
> 
> A similar draft exists in IS-IS 
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-isis-experiment
al-tlv-00.txt
, and instead of "SMI Network management enterprise code for the vendor
or organization" uses "a valid IEEE assigned OUI as the first three
bytes of the value of the TLV."

I do not know the tradeoffs but if possible we could use the same value
too. Maybe someone could point out the tradeoffs if any.

Besides I guess Section 5(if the same mechanism is used in TLV's) and
Section 6 of the ISIS draft wold be valid here too.

Thanks,
Vishwas

-----Original Message-----
From: Udo Neustadter [mailto:neustadter@TROPICNETWORKS.COM]
Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2003 6:49 PM
To: OSPF@PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM
Subject: Vendor attributes in TE LSAs


Hi all,

I am working on a GMPLS implementation, and part of my problem is the
addition of company specific data to the TE LSAs. The Internet-Draft
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-udo-ospf-vendatt-00.txt
proposes an interoperable way to solve the following two issues:
  1. Companies that already applied with IANA for an SMI Network
management enterprise code do not need to re-apply for sub-TLV values
from the pool of numbers reserved for private use
  2. Allows private attributes/data to be embedded in the TE router LSA
(the one TE LSA that contains the router address TLV).

I would like for the draft to be considered part of this working group.
This work is an extension to the work done in
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-katz-yeung-ospf-traffic-09.txt
and
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ccamp-ospf-gmpls-extensio
ns-09.txt.

Thanks in advance for your support.

Udo