Re: [OSPF] OSPF WG Last Call for "Hiding Transit-only Networks in OSPF " - <draft-ietf-ospf-prefix-hiding-02.txt>

Acee Lindem <acee.lindem@ericsson.com> Wed, 22 February 2012 19:48 UTC

Return-Path: <acee.lindem@ericsson.com>
X-Original-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C80221E8049 for <ospf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 22 Feb 2012 11:48:07 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.511
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.511 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.088, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ZMkZXg0-MEzd for <ospf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 22 Feb 2012 11:48:06 -0800 (PST)
Received: from imr3.ericy.com (imr3.ericy.com [198.24.6.13]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 011F221E803D for <ospf@ietf.org>; Wed, 22 Feb 2012 11:48:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: from eusaamw0711.eamcs.ericsson.se ([147.117.20.178]) by imr3.ericy.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q1MJm3RF026053 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Wed, 22 Feb 2012 13:48:03 -0600
Received: from EUSAACMS0702.eamcs.ericsson.se ([169.254.1.229]) by eusaamw0711.eamcs.ericsson.se ([147.117.20.178]) with mapi; Wed, 22 Feb 2012 14:48:02 -0500
From: Acee Lindem <acee.lindem@ericsson.com>
To: Yi Yang <yiya@cisco.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2012 14:47:59 -0500
Thread-Topic: [OSPF] OSPF WG Last Call for "Hiding Transit-only Networks in OSPF " - <draft-ietf-ospf-prefix-hiding-02.txt>
Thread-Index: AczxmuJ8MFbJaLgXTJ2UjWxyhxuePg==
Message-ID: <9569B639-280C-465D-BFA9-81A81CF1FCE8@ericsson.com>
References: <84AB6152-7E34-4E21-9D2E-32DB3ACD93DE@ericsson.com> <529797C2-F390-4224-A1DC-EBDC5142BC9F@ericsson.com> <000501ccef94$2f162340$8d4269c0$@com> <368D3284-15EA-49C6-9868-5633EA079E8A@ericsson.com> <000001ccf048$05e3d2b0$11ab7810$@com> <14D90FEF-DB8F-41FF-A27E-26CD8FED6AEB@cisco.com> <A351666C-1EE9-45DD-BF4E-49FD652E803A@ericsson.com> <DA8F784A-35A5-4E58-8741-B6F7AD2F878A@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <DA8F784A-35A5-4E58-8741-B6F7AD2F878A@cisco.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: OSPF List <ospf@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [OSPF] OSPF WG Last Call for "Hiding Transit-only Networks in OSPF " - <draft-ietf-ospf-prefix-hiding-02.txt>
X-BeenThere: ospf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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, 22 Feb 2012 19:48:07 -0000

Hi Yi,
Ok - does the draft already say that all routers on a transit network SHOULD be configured with the same prefix visibility?
Thanks,
Acee
On Feb 22, 2012, at 9:51 AM, Yi Yang wrote:

Hi Acee,

Let me clarify what I meant.

The DR will use the Link-LSAs to produce the intra-area-prefix-LSA for the transit networks. However, as long as we omit the global address from the intra-area-prefix-LSA, the global address won't be installed in the routing table, no matter if the global address has been advertised in the Link-LSAs or not.

In other words, for prefix-hiding, we don't need to omit the global address in the Link-LSAs.

Yi



On Feb 22, 2012, at 8:53 AM, Acee Lindem wrote:


Hi Yi,
The global addresses do need to be suppressed from OSPFv3 Link-LSAs since they are used by the DR to produce the Intra-Area-Prefix-LSA corresponding to the transit network
Thanks,
Acee

On Feb 22, 2012, at 8:21 AM, Yi Yang wrote:

> Hi Rajesh,
>
> Thanks for your comments. I agree that prefix-hiding must not be configured on VL interface. But link-LSAs are not being used in SPF calculations.
>
> Yi
>
>
>
> On Feb 20, 2012, at 10:22 PM, Rajesh wrote:
>
>> Dear Acee,
>>
>> Some more thoughts.
>>
>> 1) In section 3 of this draft " Hiding IPv6 Transit-only Networks in OSPFv3"
>> We can also mention about LINK LSA. If the prefix hiding is configured on a
>> interface, then no need to mention global prefixes in Link LSA.
>>
>> 2) For prefix hiding configuration option, may be we need to support OSPF
>> and OSPFv3 MIBs as well.
>>
>> Thanks
>> Rajesh
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Acee Lindem [mailto:acee.lindem@ericsson.com]
>> Sent: Monday, February 20, 2012 7:49 PM
>> To: Rajesh
>> Cc: OSPF List
>> Subject: Re: [OSPF] OSPF WG Last Call for "Hiding Transit-only Networks in
>> OSPF " - <draft-ietf-ospf-prefix-hiding-02.txt>
>>
>> Hi Rajesh,
>>
>> On Feb 20, 2012, at 12:55 AM, Rajesh wrote:
>>
>>> Dear Acee,
>>>
>>> We can add one statement in section 3 of this draft [which is for OSPFv3]
>>> "LA-bit prefix we advertise in intra area prefix LSA for Virtual LINK IPv6
>>> address discovery, must not be taken from the interface where the prefix
>>> hiding is configured"
>>
>> It is somewhat obvious that you wouldn't choose an address that is not
>> advertised. However, I guess it wouldn't hurt to add that the RFC 5340,
>> Section 4.4.3.9.  Intra-Area-Prefix-LSAs, selection an IPv6 address to
>> terminate virtual links will be modified to exclude interfaces with the
>> prefix hiding configured.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Acee
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Please check.
>>>
>>> Thanks & Regards
>>> Rajesh
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: ospf-bounces@ietf.org<mailto:ospf-bounces@ietf.org> [mailto:ospf-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
>> Acee
>>> Lindem
>>> Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2012 10:37 PM
>>> Cc: OSPF List
>>> Subject: [OSPF] OSPF WG Last Call for "Hiding Transit-only Networks in
>> OSPF
>>> " - <draft-ietf-ospf-prefix-hiding-02.txt>
>>>
>>> As I have heard no objections, I'm beginning the 2 week OSPF Working Group
>>> last call for draft-ietf-ospf-prefix-hiding-02.txt.
>>> Please review the draft and post your last call comments prior to 12:00 AM
>>> PDT on February 23nd, 2012.
>>> Here is a URL for your convenience:
>>>
>>> http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-ospf-prefix-hiding-02.txt
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Acee
>>>
>>> On Jan 26, 2012, at 11:19 AM, Acee Lindem wrote:
>>>
>>>> As WG co-chair, I have reviewed this document and believe it is ready for
>>> OSPF WG last call. Any other opinions?
>>>> There is at least one implementation. Here is a URL for you convenience:
>>>>
>>>> http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-ospf-prefix-hiding-01.txt
>>>>
>>>> There is an IPR disclosure on this draft:
>>>>
>>>> http://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/1423/
>>>>
>>>> I will start WG last call next week if I don't hear any objections.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Acee
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> OSPF mailing list
>>>> OSPF@ietf.org<mailto:OSPF@ietf.org>
>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> OSPF mailing list
>>> OSPF@ietf.org<mailto:OSPF@ietf.org>
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> OSPF mailing list
>> OSPF@ietf.org<mailto:OSPF@ietf.org>
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf
>