Re: [OSPF] proposed text for draft-ppsenak-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse

"Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee@cisco.com> Fri, 04 December 2015 21:50 UTC

Return-Path: <acee@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 1F0E11A9231 for <ospf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 4 Dec 2015 13:50:22 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.51
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.51 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, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, 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 9d1IxSrrHyaZ for <ospf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 4 Dec 2015 13:50:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: from alln-iport-6.cisco.com (alln-iport-6.cisco.com [173.37.142.93]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0C5741A9171 for <ospf@ietf.org>; Fri, 4 Dec 2015 13:50:20 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=9133; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1449265820; x=1450475420; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:mime-version; bh=kElysnY5813xrnBtUeDoBG5bOdilXbqFf6ShEPPRS4s=; b=iKi0GZf1LTG+GqHXgY6rwAACeKJHNAXq8euksopR9ZtuSmd/+wGSYLvv QRFFCSSwMGtPW2QYTjUPnI5HO24ZWPe3yzHG6erWiHjnYNkGk96PBjETF OEjDkccCiywdKj58GUKJgsufBzIDUo0+5vMHnFryue69Cje9WOr9DcTW4 o=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0ABAgAoCWJW/51dJa1egm5MU24GvT8BD?= =?us-ascii?q?YFuFwEJgj2DMAIcgQ44FAEBAQEBAQGBCoQ0AQEBBAEBASAKOgcLEAIBCBEDAQI?= =?us-ascii?q?oAwICAiULFAkIAQEEAQ0FG4gUDa9GkGMBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEUB?= =?us-ascii?q?ItRhEswDYJvgUQFlmEBjTuBW5cgg3EBHwEBQoQEcoQnQYEHAQEB?=
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.20,382,1444694400"; d="scan'208,217";a="214859503"
Received: from rcdn-core-6.cisco.com ([173.37.93.157]) by alln-iport-6.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 04 Dec 2015 21:50:18 +0000
Received: from XCH-RTP-014.cisco.com (xch-rtp-014.cisco.com [64.101.220.154]) by rcdn-core-6.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id tB4LoIrM031875 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Fri, 4 Dec 2015 21:50:18 GMT
Received: from xch-rtp-015.cisco.com (64.101.220.155) by XCH-RTP-014.cisco.com (64.101.220.154) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1104.5; Fri, 4 Dec 2015 16:50:17 -0500
Received: from xch-rtp-015.cisco.com ([64.101.220.155]) by XCH-RTP-015.cisco.com ([64.101.220.155]) with mapi id 15.00.1104.009; Fri, 4 Dec 2015 16:50:17 -0500
From: "Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee@cisco.com>
To: Jeff Tantsura <jeff.tantsura@ericsson.com>, Chris Bowers <cbowers@juniper.net>
Thread-Topic: [OSPF] proposed text for draft-ppsenak-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse
Thread-Index: AdEuuVWGMPE2YtM+Qkqm7ANnmAmrvwAS7NMA//+xZoA=
Date: Fri, 4 Dec 2015 21:50:17 +0000
Message-ID: <D2877495.410E0%acee@cisco.com>
References: <DM2PR05MB62385A916E792E20E1EB583A90C0@DM2PR05MB623.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> <9908429A-3B31-4E44-8B24-6EDE883C051A@ericsson.com>
In-Reply-To: <9908429A-3B31-4E44-8B24-6EDE883C051A@ericsson.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [10.116.152.199]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_D2877495410E0aceeciscocom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ospf/XqD9uI3xWo_02am-H70I5aXPGjU>
Cc: OSPF WG List <ospf@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [OSPF] proposed text for draft-ppsenak-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Fri, 04 Dec 2015 21:50:22 -0000

Jeff, Chris,

These additions look reasonable to me as well.
Thanks,
Acee

From: OSPF <ospf-bounces@ietf.org<mailto:ospf-bounces@ietf.org>> on behalf of Jeff Tantsura <jeff.tantsura@ericsson.com<mailto:jeff.tantsura@ericsson.com>>
Date: Friday, December 4, 2015 at 4:31 PM
To: Chris Bowers <cbowers@juniper.net<mailto:cbowers@juniper.net>>
Cc: OSPF WG List <ospf@ietf.org<mailto:ospf@ietf.org>>
Subject: Re: [OSPF] proposed text for draft-ppsenak-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse

Hi Chris,

Thanks for your comments - sounds reasonable to me.
With inclusion of your comments - would you be satisfied with the solution proposed?

Thanks and have a great weekend!

Regards,
Jeff

On Dec 4, 2015, at 9:33 AM, Chris Bowers <cbowers@juniper.net<mailto:cbowers@juniper.net>> wrote:

Draft authors,

I would like to suggest the following text for the Backwards Compatibility section of this document.

-------
Some deployments of LFA and remote LFA currently rely on link attributes (such as SRLG and admin groups) being carried in the TE Opaque LSA.  These applications are described in RFC 5286, RFC 7490,  draft-ietf-rtgwg-lfa-manageability, and draft-psarkar-rtgwg-rlfa-node-protection.  When a network is using an application that relies on link attributes being carried in the TE Opaque LSA , care should be taken to continue to advertise the appropriate link attributes in the TE Opaque LSA.

Note that a node that does not directly participate in remote LFA by originating repair tunnels itself may still need to continue originating link attributes in the TE Opaque LSA for use by other nodes in the network.   Therefore, when evaluating software upgrades or configuration changes which may result in changes to which link attributes are being advertised in the TE Opaque LSA, even for a subset of routers in the network,  care should be taken to evaluate the impact of that change across the entire network.
-------

Thanks,
Chris


_______________________________________________
OSPF mailing list
OSPF@ietf.org<mailto:OSPF@ietf.org>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf