Re: [OSPF] New Version Notification for draft-liang-ospf-flowspec-extensions-01.txt

Peter Psenak <ppsenak@cisco.com> Wed, 08 October 2014 16:16 UTC

Return-Path: <ppsenak@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C49471A8732 for <ospf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 8 Oct 2014 09:16:10 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -15.287
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-15.287 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, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.786, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id wGukVr-ukDJb for <ospf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 8 Oct 2014 09:16:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from aer-iport-4.cisco.com (aer-iport-4.cisco.com [173.38.203.54]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0DD171A6FAE for <ospf@ietf.org>; Wed, 8 Oct 2014 09:16:07 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=3083; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1412784970; x=1413994570; h=message-id:date:from:mime-version:to:subject:references: in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=6VRt7vnWJsThYWT9LVCihYCot1us6/BtYv8hj1Zy8FU=; b=lGBr/0UPI0Rof6gAFKON6GnYjoDW/xs1HufK50hsDvQ754hK2wRA+l/7 qcgyCbLSf2M40Efxut/mWwlVAxllFZccYCwcJVmF6tGy/tHwKGyvKGXge qVn1eAKUjHBMWV9UZdi+1CGhCvJajdGRiQpH6RK2mnGZOyluoUKSAo80w 4=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AqgEABxiNVStJssW/2dsb2JhbABfg2FTgwnIAgyHSwKBIAF7hAMBAQEEAQEBIA8BBTYJAQ0ECQIRBAEBAQICBRYIAwICCQMCAQIBFR8JCAYBDAYCAQEFiDUIBZA5nE2VCwEXgSyPHwaCcYFUAQSWNYcQgS48gwmCcYoqg3+BchgWgUU7LwGCSQEBAQ
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.04,678,1406592000"; d="scan'208";a="199935188"
Received: from aer-iport-nat.cisco.com (HELO aer-core-4.cisco.com) ([173.38.203.22]) by aer-iport-4.cisco.com with ESMTP; 08 Oct 2014 16:16:07 +0000
Received: from [10.55.51.194] (ams-ppsenak-8711.cisco.com [10.55.51.194]) by aer-core-4.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id s98GG4iI016305; Wed, 8 Oct 2014 16:16:05 GMT
Message-ID: <54356344.3040806@cisco.com>
Date: Wed, 08 Oct 2014 18:16:04 +0200
From: Peter Psenak <ppsenak@cisco.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "Osborne, Eric" <eric.osborne@level3.com>, Youjianjie <youjianjie@huawei.com>, "ospf@ietf.org" <ospf@ietf.org>
References: <F6C28B32DA084644BB6C8D0BD65B669D11A0A9@nkgeml509-mbs.china.huawei.com> <63CB93BC589C1B4BAFDB41A0A19B7ACDF930C2@USIDCWVEMBX08.corp.global.level3.com>
In-Reply-To: <63CB93BC589C1B4BAFDB41A0A19B7ACDF930C2@USIDCWVEMBX08.corp.global.level3.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ospf/VcsWsWCXPd_t0-uknOBD_2GWK1Q
Subject: Re: [OSPF] New Version Notification for draft-liang-ospf-flowspec-extensions-01.txt
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: Wed, 08 Oct 2014 16:16:10 -0000

Hi Eric,

there are definitely deployments using OSPF as PE-CE. It's typically 
used for enterprise customers, that use OSPF as their IGP and use L3 VPN 
service to interconnect their sites.

thanks,
Peter

On 10/8/14 17:45 , Osborne, Eric wrote:
> I'm not sure this has much value.  The vast majority of dynamic PE-CE is done with BGP; the little bit that isn't BGP is, in my experience, RIP.  I don't think I've seen many (any?) OSPF PE-CE deployments.
>
>
>
>
> eric
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: OSPF [mailto:ospf-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Youjianjie
> Sent: Tuesday, October 07, 2014 10:11 PM
> To: ospf@ietf.org
> Subject: [OSPF] 转发: New Version Notification for draft-liang-ospf-flowspec-extensions-01.txt
>
> Hi all,
>
> This document discusses the use cases that OSPF is used to distribute FlowSpec routes. This document also defines a new OSPF FlowSpec Opaque Link State Advertisement (LSA) encoding format.
> Your comments are appreciated.
>
> Best Regards,
> Jianjie
>
> -----邮件原件-----
> 发件人: internet-drafts@ietf.org [mailto:internet-drafts@ietf.org]
> 发送时间: 2014年9月28日 10:32
> 收件人: Youjianjie; Youjianjie; liuweihang; liuweihang
> 主题: New Version Notification for draft-liang-ospf-flowspec-extensions-01.txt
>
>
> A new version of I-D, draft-liang-ospf-flowspec-extensions-01.txt
> has been successfully submitted by Jianjie You and posted to the IETF repository.
>
> Name:		draft-liang-ospf-flowspec-extensions
> Revision:	01
> Title:		OSPF Extensions for Flow Specification
> Document date:	2014-09-27
> Group:		Individual Submission
> Pages:		11
> URL:            http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-liang-ospf-flowspec-extensions-01.txt
> Status:         https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-liang-ospf-flowspec-extensions/
> Htmlized:       http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-liang-ospf-flowspec-extensions-01
> Diff:           http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-liang-ospf-flowspec-extensions-01
>
> Abstract:
>     This document discusses the use cases why OSPF (Open Shortest Path
>     First) distributing flow specification (FlowSpec) routes is
>     necessary.  This document also defines a new OSPF FlowSpec Opaque
>     Link State Advertisement (LSA) encoding format that can be used to
>     distribute FlowSpec routes.
>
>     For the network only deploying IGP (Interior Gateway Protocol) (e.g.
>     OSPF), it is expected to extend IGP to distribute FlowSpec routes.
>     One advantage is to mitigate the impacts of Denial-of-Service (DoS)
>     attacks.
>
>
>
>
>
> Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.
>
> The IETF Secretariat
>
> _______________________________________________
> OSPF mailing list
> OSPF@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf
> _______________________________________________
> OSPF mailing list
> OSPF@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf
>