Re: [OSPF] OSPFv2 SR draft
Peter Psenak <ppsenak@cisco.com> Mon, 22 August 2016 07:32 UTC
Return-Path: <ppsenak@cisco.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 6B6A312B00C for <ospf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 22 Aug 2016 00:32:20 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -15.07
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-15.07 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, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.548, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.com
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 RjIX0vmSlwBC for <ospf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 22 Aug 2016 00:32:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from aer-iport-3.cisco.com (aer-iport-3.cisco.com [173.38.203.53]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F368D12B00B for <ospf@ietf.org>; Mon, 22 Aug 2016 00:32:17 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=4421; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1471851138; x=1473060738; h=message-id:date:from:mime-version:to:subject:references: in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=78z5LyzexcUmYuf6lEUceRIBqqfOc4ZFUpQGoueN8ws=; b=BhawuplTucqkIAMBha+eauq/pj1ZQD0sT2sUwpG2nyn/2f2PZ+JZPctX 6/c8gD2+cFO+JhhjnC56ctBo8Z19pd382SCwBxRG/0XhLHPFRJ1PsADSc o9ltfP1qP7IjnYR9ef+JZBef9QH2YLm1JXv11rCjSFLFx7fE8I0KcyKfL s=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0DPAQAPqrpX/xbLJq1dhBp8t3eBfSSFeQKBeBQCAQEBAQEBAV4nhF4BAQUBATY2Cg0ECw4DBAEBAQkWCAcJAwIBAgEVHwkIBgEMBgIBAYgtDr0HAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBFwWGK4RNhECFWwEEmUiPH4FthFyDECOFVIZphVaDeB42ghIcgU46NIZ7AQEB
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.28,558,1464652800"; d="scan'208";a="643818371"
Received: from aer-iport-nat.cisco.com (HELO aer-core-2.cisco.com) ([173.38.203.22]) by aer-iport-3.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 22 Aug 2016 07:31:53 +0000
Received: from [10.60.140.53] (ams-ppsenak-nitro4.cisco.com [10.60.140.53]) by aer-core-2.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id u7M7VrKB012179; Mon, 22 Aug 2016 07:31:53 GMT
Message-ID: <57BAAA6D.1070905@cisco.com>
Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2016 09:31:57 +0200
From: Peter Psenak <ppsenak@cisco.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.11; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Chris Bowers <cbowers@juniper.net>, OSPF List <ospf@ietf.org>
References: <5791D96B.6080907@cisco.com> <MWHPR05MB2829B34A5B8AB2F4489DC2AFA9060@MWHPR05MB2829.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> <57B1AA09.3070008@cisco.com> <MWHPR05MB28296BF24F47EB6889CEE186A9130@MWHPR05MB2829.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> <57B32AF0.5060300@cisco.com> <MWHPR05MB2829450CD2E99F6996A10A44A9160@MWHPR05MB2829.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
In-Reply-To: <MWHPR05MB2829450CD2E99F6996A10A44A9160@MWHPR05MB2829.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ospf/YQipvUObqWUxkyQe8Q04a8FnsgE>
Subject: Re: [OSPF] OSPFv2 SR draft
X-BeenThere: ospf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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: Mon, 22 Aug 2016 07:32:20 -0000
Chris, what about this to be added in the Section 3.1: "A router receiving a Prefix-SID (defined in section 5) from a remote node and with an SR algorithm value that such remote node has not advertised in the SR-Algorithm sub-TLV MUST ignore the Prefix-SID sub-TLV." thanks, Peter On 19/08/16 23:33 , Chris Bowers wrote: > Peter, > > Please share the updated text that you plan to use with the WG, since this is a reasonably significant clarification. > > Thanks, > Chris > > -----Original Message----- > From: Peter Psenak [mailto:ppsenak@cisco.com] > Sent: Tuesday, August 16, 2016 10:02 AM > To: Chris Bowers <cbowers@juniper.net>; OSPF List <ospf@ietf.org> > Subject: Re: [OSPF] OSPFv2 SR draft > > Hi Chris, > > I'll update the draft along those lines. > > thanks, > Peter > > > On 16/08/16 16:02 , Chris Bowers wrote: >> Peter, >> >> I suggest changing the paragraph to read as below to make this clearer. >> >> ===== >> The SR-Algorithm Sub-TLV is optional. It MAY only be advertised once >> in the Router Information Opaque LSA. If the SID/Label Range TLV, as >> defined in Section 3.2, is advertised, then the SR-Algorithm TLV MUST >> also be advertised. If a router C advertises a Prefix-SID sub-TLV for algorithm X >> but does not advertise the SR-Algorithm Sub-TLV with algorithm X, then >> a router receiving that advertisement MUST ignore the Prefix-SID >> advertisement from router C. If router B does not advertise the >> SR-Algorithm TLV for algorithm X, then other routers should not >> forward traffic destined for a prefix-SID for algorithm X advertised by >> some router D using a path that would require router B to forward traffic using >> algorithm X. >> ===== >> >> Thanks, >> Chris >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Peter Psenak [mailto:ppsenak@cisco.com] >> Sent: Monday, August 15, 2016 6:40 AM >> To: Chris Bowers <cbowers@juniper.net>; OSPF List <ospf@ietf.org> >> Subject: Re: [OSPF] OSPFv2 SR draft >> >> Hi Chris, >> >> sorry for the delay, I was on PTO during last two weeks. >> Please see inline: >> >> On 03/08/16 16:45 , Chris Bowers wrote: >>> Peter, >>> >>> Taking a looking at the whole paragraph into this sentence was added, >>> I am not sure how to interpret it. >>> >>> The SR-Algorithm Sub-TLV is optional. It MAY only be advertised once >>> in the Router Information Opaque LSA. If the SID/Label Range TLV, as >>> defined in Section 3.2, is advertised, then the SR-Algorithm TLV MUST >>> also be advertised. If the SR-Algorithm TLV is not advertised by the >>> node, such node is considered as not being segment routing capable. >>> >>> Is this sentence intended to imply that if a router does not >>> advertise the SR-Algorithm TLV including algorithm X, then any >>> prefix-SIDs for algorithm X advertised by that router will be ignored by other routers? >> >> in OSPF we do not have the SR capability TLV. We use SR-Algorithm TLV >> for that purpose. So if a router does not advertise the SR-Algorithm >> TLV for algorithm X, other routers should not send any SR traffic >> using SIDs that were advertised for algorithm X. >> >> If the router does not advertise any SR Algorithm TLV, then the node >> is not SR capable and no SR traffic should be forwarded to such a node. >> >> thanks, >> Peter >> >> >>> >>> If this is the intention, then it would be better to state is more explicitly. >>> >>> If not, then the intended meaning should be clarified. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Chris >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: OSPF [mailto:ospf-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Peter Psenak >>> Sent: Friday, July 22, 2016 3:30 AM >>> To: OSPF List <ospf@ietf.org> >>> Subject: [OSPF] OSPFv2 SR draft >>> >>> Hi All, >>> >>> following text has been added in the latest revision of the OSPFv2 SR >>> draft, section 3.1. >>> >>> "If the SR-Algorithm TLV is not advertised by node, such node is >>> considered as not being segment routing capable." >>> >>> Please let us know if there are any concerns regarding this addition. >>> >>> thanks, >>> Peter >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> OSPF mailing list >>> OSPF@ietf.org >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf >>> . >>> >> >> . >> > > . >
- Re: [OSPF] OSPFv2 SR draft Chris Bowers
- Re: [OSPF] OSPFv2 SR draft Peter Psenak
- Re: [OSPF] OSPFv2 SR draft Chris Bowers
- Re: [OSPF] OSPFv2 SR draft Peter Psenak
- Re: [OSPF] OSPFv2 SR draft Chris Bowers
- [OSPF] OSPFv2 SR draft Peter Psenak
- Re: [OSPF] OSPFv2 SR draft Peter Psenak
- Re: [OSPF] OSPFv2 SR draft Chris Bowers
- Re: [OSPF] OSPFv2 SR draft Peter Psenak
- Re: [OSPF] OSPFv2 SR draft Les Ginsberg (ginsberg)
- Re: [OSPF] OSPFv2 SR draft Chris Bowers
- Re: [OSPF] OSPFv2 SR draft Acee Lindem (acee)
- Re: [OSPF] OSPFv2 SR draft Chris Bowers
- Re: [OSPF] OSPFv2 SR draft Acee Lindem
- Re: [OSPF] OSPFv2 SR draft Chris Bowers