[OSPF] Comments on draft-xu-ospf-routable-ip-address

Abhay Roy <akr@cisco.com> Mon, 25 August 2014 18:57 UTC

Return-Path: <akr@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A9BD11A02F7 for <ospf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 25 Aug 2014 11:57:24 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -15.168
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-15.168 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.668, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id TYVrgbe5szDI for <ospf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 25 Aug 2014 11:57:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rcdn-iport-4.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-4.cisco.com []) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2816A1A02F4 for <ospf@ietf.org>; Mon, 25 Aug 2014 11:57:23 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1854; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1408993043; x=1410202643; h=message-id:date:from:mime-version:to:subject; bh=MwakGJil5TeiaEsuUPMJhcervjH+aLkWWqJpdfGj3tY=; b=QyPfqSJ8YF6htB7MsjWfDj62XTEKSrEhxE0XgwT4fuOk/OINN7OJIyZ9 Hk3ZXsFTaC/xYAUJr/AGcNZoASUkhFAWIG677gMHmOx0M2Mq62ynVfvsn fva2jBdNQUwnj+9SoRZmtx/y4WO4FwwvGVcYMATWEX96UxjbDdmdB8C1Q U=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AhULAIyG+1OtJV2T/2dsb2JhbABagw2wWQEBAQEFAW4BpSMWd4N6gQgfAR0WGAMCAQIBSwEMCAEBiD6/fxeFfIh5hSoFiyKRJ4cvjV2Dfh2BNoFIAQEB
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.04,398,1406592000"; d="scan'208,217";a="350206674"
Received: from rcdn-core-11.cisco.com ([]) by rcdn-iport-4.cisco.com with ESMTP; 25 Aug 2014 18:57:22 +0000
Received: from [] ([]) by rcdn-core-11.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id s7PIvMPY031821; Mon, 25 Aug 2014 18:57:22 GMT
Message-ID: <53FB8718.1090003@cisco.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2014 11:57:28 -0700
From: Abhay Roy <akr@cisco.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: draft-xu-ospf-routable-ip-address@tools.ietf.org, "ospf@ietf.org" <ospf@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------040807090906010509020804"
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ospf/V6UdYMx5jsyUpfhYQMUUI7r5l2Y
Subject: [OSPF] Comments on draft-xu-ospf-routable-ip-address
X-BeenThere: ospf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Mon, 25 Aug 2014 18:57:24 -0000

[speaking as WG member]

Two comments..

1. Section 3 has this text - "This TLV is only applicable to OSPFv2.".
     I believe, this should also be applicable to RFC5838, i.e. for IPv4 

2. Section 3 and 4 describes the scope as SHOULD be domain-wide. I 
personally don't see any real use cause of any lessor scope (Area or 
Link) since we have mechanisms to generate routable IP address for those 
scopes already. So I would suggest we limit the scope of this document 
to be "MUST be domain-wide". Any concerns with that?