[OSPF] Feedback regarding draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-autoconfig

Rama Darbha <rama.h.darbha@gmail.com> Sat, 24 January 2015 03:51 UTC

Return-Path: <rama.h.darbha@gmail.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 9B0D21A0120 for <ospf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 23 Jan 2015 19:51:33 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id h0UYAJK06OfO for <ospf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 23 Jan 2015 19:51:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-wi0-x22d.google.com (mail-wi0-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c05::22d]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 17A2F1A010C for <ospf@ietf.org>; Fri, 23 Jan 2015 19:51:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-wi0-f173.google.com with SMTP id r20so805632wiv.0 for <ospf@ietf.org>; Fri, 23 Jan 2015 19:51:29 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=qkbAv/IsDQkVGCfVn+XRQAk7khZbyvtO1KksN1CbPaM=; b=OX7xKfbnxFsuNU3mPG4qRYG9RVd5CdXcQWhG64aUAilppPl3f61o9l+QVrf9YtD/f7 N5+GGCR6Ge4q5QZ4kyC9LNpsOM5ofC0CYGQ6twKdKOcejKFvRrph0kEuNNbLwjHVTQWZ LnjcpvXT0BzO4BlRgSfFq5jm8oVLUr5854eY7KhI4fiEBpGqkkqt2BV/HYiVgVXYYryJ IgMaVg9YUzttH6UCjEFrBgmcuqES6Urrq3g9y779C1cZgte4QdKRgOQuSHwZB5/iYf8b qhoV2yYD1HMyGiV4lrgS1eGX9iPTQMtjoMVkfWPNC4TD3RYX8gaqcYgATCVQFd1riilF aJSQ==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by with SMTP id v4mr20861810wja.115.1422071489849; Fri, 23 Jan 2015 19:51:29 -0800 (PST)
Received: by with HTTP; Fri, 23 Jan 2015 19:51:29 -0800 (PST)
Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2015 22:51:29 -0500
Message-ID: <CAMC5OMJMNCPXDyfLmUx6f-20uxkcVzrez=v7g_CMJ9fTPa-ynQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Rama Darbha <rama.h.darbha@gmail.com>
To: ospf@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b5d4fe2ff6f41050d5dd155
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ospf/WcyWWBY8Uidbmx0DYmRCvAlJkKA>
Subject: [OSPF] Feedback regarding draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-autoconfig
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: Sat, 24 Jan 2015 03:51:33 -0000

A. Lindem and J. Arkko,

Some feedback on this draft. In section 5:

"5.  OSPFv3 Router ID Selection
A pseudo-random number SHOULD be used for the OSPFv3 Router ID."

I think it would be valuable to describe why a pseudo-random number should
be chosen. The [OSPFv3] document doesn't make any reference to selecting a
pseudo-random number, so it would be good to justify the reasoning.
Something along the lines of:
"The router id in OSPFv3 is a 32-bit value [OSPFv3]. As outlined in
[OSPFv3], a router running OSPFv3 may not have an IPv4 address to
automatically select as the router id. Since auto-configuration cannot
guarantee a unique router id as outlined in [OSPFv3], a pseudo-random
router id is the solution for OSPFv3 autoconfiguration to prevent router id

Also, there's a small formatting error. Section 7.2 and 7.4 are not marked
correctly as headers.


Rama Darbha
919 410 7262