Re: [OSPF] Eric Rescorla's No Objection on draft-ietf-ospf-link-overload-12: (with COMMENT)

Shraddha Hegde <shraddha@juniper.net> Mon, 22 January 2018 05:48 UTC

Return-Path: <shraddha@juniper.net>
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 6D2CE127241; Sun, 21 Jan 2018 21:48:40 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.7
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 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_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=juniper.net
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 xy9FteWhL8gD; Sun, 21 Jan 2018 21:48:37 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mx0b-00273201.pphosted.com (mx0b-00273201.pphosted.com [67.231.152.164]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 51A8A126BFD; Sun, 21 Jan 2018 21:48:33 -0800 (PST)
Received: from pps.filterd (m0108160.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-00273201.pphosted.com (8.16.0.22/8.16.0.22) with SMTP id w0M5mVJ6020514; Sun, 21 Jan 2018 21:48:31 -0800
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=juniper.net; h=from : to : cc : subject : date : message-id : references : in-reply-to : content-type : mime-version; s=PPS1017; bh=14n9U1KyO/pfuo8OFtJD/78/3S/GZufTpRMt8VgpzE8=; b=jyLI0cqNvEpQZ5jbhbIRtx/KCv+qFKBDmhzrz9Npkgu1cZ40THRmQiVKs0FbtTPaWKhn Ny6HnQWSotx2x/s9GhNYMFhURsB+vH4N19h09/CHsUYqOevy3+6Dz6mXz/8R352QP259 HYKme/H6EwnuEFD9U8f5IN7sBYOMh4fMszf6gusfBgNg33jM4MT8Pg9Vmf3MBOUjpg9H iyYZvlufOerkUirgAluCsetnDH4pLnHz57L32TpDtobNzBBAp1I17GjjI+cINTdqpLrh jOqMOPSdOma/KTBMw8XkKhbMNOuwb0Klw9lQBjZD8DneeuHo1y/o3B34OqzWc2QeEGKs ew==
Received: from nam03-dm3-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-dm3nam03lp0020.outbound.protection.outlook.com [207.46.163.20]) by mx0b-00273201.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2fmg2msgdt-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Sun, 21 Jan 2018 21:48:31 -0800
Received: from BN3PR05MB2706.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.167.2.135) by BN3PR05MB2434.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.167.3.11) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA384_P256) id 15.20.444.5; Mon, 22 Jan 2018 05:48:29 +0000
Received: from BN3PR05MB2706.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([10.167.2.135]) by BN3PR05MB2706.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([10.167.2.135]) with mapi id 15.20.0444.008; Mon, 22 Jan 2018 05:48:29 +0000
From: Shraddha Hegde <shraddha@juniper.net>
To: Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>
CC: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-ospf-link-overload@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-ospf-link-overload@ietf.org>, "ospf-chairs@ietf.org" <ospf-chairs@ietf.org>, "acee@cisco.com" <acee@cisco.com>, "ospf@ietf.org" <ospf@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: Eric Rescorla's No Objection on draft-ietf-ospf-link-overload-12: (with COMMENT)
Thread-Index: AQHTkHsleGAI3hVMz0OpFXeiLIYjPaN58oPwgAADtICABXF3EA==
Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2018 05:48:29 +0000
Message-ID: <BN3PR05MB27065A6F4BC1689EFD4B2F41D5EC0@BN3PR05MB2706.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
References: <151629366736.20596.6495227203632608509.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <BN3PR05MB270626FDDAB9E5879FCE0CE7D5E80@BN3PR05MB2706.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> <CABcZeBPEZy+wwgph5p02kCPWnDBOQc5MiCTjJiHAvzoDSSkzbA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CABcZeBPEZy+wwgph5p02kCPWnDBOQc5MiCTjJiHAvzoDSSkzbA@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [116.197.184.12]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; BN3PR05MB2434; 7:HdUTnBf0dZGzDhmhRCrb+S8CYU4OWOLlv2vNBTUxaza8styRIVQtlv3M3ZDQjdu3BpqztRcfuibPwzQTFiDWtIcgUOOrq9FpPx7o6gUoLu/npW5kHdWljtPvTDgI68BO5Ms422yc6CZZ49tkt+7/VdURjGYAAF9xr4el7nN12Jx3FQidl3ywkAQ92yDjXoP2nWWZlrFTyyXWxRGgp7MqML07qps1ujv0K1svciGs7N8DTLM/runFj1EElZ5Pn01M
x-ms-exchange-antispam-srfa-diagnostics: SSOS;
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: db37330c-1b82-4fa5-0f85-08d5615bc3db
x-ms-office365-filtering-ht: Tenant
x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(7020095)(4652020)(5600026)(4604075)(3008032)(4534125)(4602075)(4627221)(201703031133081)(201702281549075)(48565401081)(2017052603307)(7153060)(7193020); SRVR:BN3PR05MB2434;
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: BN3PR05MB2434:
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <BN3PR05MB2434B38FBDFD920C105FD416D5EC0@BN3PR05MB2434.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:(28532068793085)(278428928389397)(138986009662008)(95692535739014)(21748063052155)(10436049006162);
x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(6040501)(2401047)(8121501046)(5005006)(10201501046)(3231023)(2400081)(944501161)(3002001)(93006095)(93001095)(6055026)(6041288)(201703131423095)(201702281528075)(20161123555045)(201703061421075)(201703061406153)(20161123560045)(20161123562045)(20161123558120)(20161123564045)(6072148)(201708071742011); SRVR:BN3PR05MB2434; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(100000803101)(100110400095); SRVR:BN3PR05MB2434;
x-forefront-prvs: 0560A2214D
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(39380400002)(376002)(346002)(39860400002)(396003)(366004)(13464003)(189003)(199004)(53936002)(478600001)(97736004)(33656002)(2900100001)(74316002)(76176011)(606006)(7736002)(6506007)(26005)(77096007)(19609705001)(53546011)(14454004)(7696005)(966005)(3280700002)(2906002)(3660700001)(59450400001)(102836004)(105586002)(99286004)(575784001)(81166006)(8676002)(66066001)(86362001)(68736007)(54906003)(106356001)(2950100002)(6916009)(4326008)(6246003)(25786009)(790700001)(6116002)(3846002)(81156014)(8936002)(6306002)(9686003)(54896002)(6436002)(230783001)(316002)(236005)(55016002)(5660300001)(229853002); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:BN3PR05MB2434; H:BN3PR05MB2706.namprd05.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; MX:1; A:1; LANG:en;
received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: juniper.net does not designate permitted sender hosts)
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: 36vMrj6Tm1FQzILWj+TraYfN8ZLVwLtXL/VzS7aop6WO2PGYbTZ3bnRLqgqwVVLs4PXuS9CMw/1XaWQiyzIvcQ==
spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:99
spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_BN3PR05MB27065A6F4BC1689EFD4B2F41D5EC0BN3PR05MB2706namp_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: juniper.net
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: db37330c-1b82-4fa5-0f85-08d5615bc3db
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 22 Jan 2018 05:48:29.8156 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: bea78b3c-4cdb-4130-854a-1d193232e5f4
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BN3PR05MB2434
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:, , definitions=2018-01-22_02:, , signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_spam_notspam policy=outbound_spam score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1011 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 impostorscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1711220000 definitions=main-1801220083
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ospf/ca9U-hcykkj44Lk6OslRjiXGQxI>
Subject: Re: [OSPF] Eric Rescorla's No Objection on draft-ietf-ospf-link-overload-12: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: ospf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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 Jan 2018 05:48:47 -0000

Eric,

I added more text to introduction section . Pls check if it helps improve readability.

“Many OSPFv2 or OSPFv3 deployments run on overlay networks provisioned
   by means of pseudo-wires or L2-circuits.  Prior to devices in the
   underlying network going offline for maintenance, it is useful to
   divert the traffic away from the node before the maintenance is
   actually performed.  Since the nodes in the underlying network are
   not visible to OSPF, the existing stub router mechanism described in
   [RFC6987] cannot be used.  In a service provider's network, there may
   be many CE-to-CE connections that run over a single PE.  It is
   cumbersome to change the metric on every CE-to-CE connection in both
   directions.  This document provides a mechanism to change metric in
   other direction of the link and also use the link as a last-resort-link if
   no alternate paths are available.  An application specific to this
   use case is described in detail in Section 7.1.”



rgds
Shraddha
From: Eric Rescorla [mailto:ekr@rtfm.com]
Sent: Friday, January 19, 2018 12:09 AM
To: Shraddha Hegde <shraddha@juniper.net>
Cc: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>; draft-ietf-ospf-link-overload@ietf.org; ospf-chairs@ietf.org; acee@cisco.com; ospf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: Eric Rescorla's No Objection on draft-ietf-ospf-link-overload-12: (with COMMENT)

On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 10:31 AM, Shraddha Hegde <shraddha@juniper.net<mailto:shraddha@juniper.net>> wrote:
Hi Eric,

Introduction section does have a brief description and refers to 7.1 for detailed description of the use case. Moving detailed use case description to introduction section will make it cluttered.
Also there are other applications apart from 7.1 which also have a brief description in the
Introduction and refer to application section for detailed description.

Well, it's a comment, so you're free to ignore it, but as a consume of this document, I found the current structure hard to follow.

-Ekr


Rgds
Shraddha

-----Original Message-----
From: Eric Rescorla [mailto:ekr@rtfm.com<mailto:ekr@rtfm.com>]
Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2018 10:11 PM
To: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org<mailto:iesg@ietf.org>>
Cc: draft-ietf-ospf-link-overload@ietf.org<mailto:draft-ietf-ospf-link-overload@ietf.org>; Acee Lindem <acee@cisco.com<mailto:acee@cisco.com>>; ospf-chairs@ietf.org<mailto:ospf-chairs@ietf.org>; acee@cisco.com<mailto:acee@cisco.com>; ospf@ietf.org<mailto:ospf@ietf.org>
Subject: Eric Rescorla's No Objection on draft-ietf-ospf-link-overload-12: (with COMMENT)

Eric Rescorla has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-ospf-link-overload-12: No Objection

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.)


Please refer to https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.ietf.org_iesg_statement_discuss-2Dcriteria.html&d=DwICaQ&c=HAkYuh63rsuhr6Scbfh0UjBXeMK-ndb3voDTXcWzoCI&r=NyjLsr7JA7mvpCJa0YmPdVKcmMXJ31bpbBaNqzCNrng&m=3MyT2IBHmmEmtejJI2o73p3zIjhzSmGtffDprR-DdD0&s=TufjwL4DRLGVAWd56qU-6DaDDRfPsgeHp8JmN2XrdTE&e=
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.


The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__datatracker.ietf.org_doc_draft-2Dietf-2Dospf-2Dlink-2Doverload_&d=DwICaQ&c=HAkYuh63rsuhr6Scbfh0UjBXeMK-ndb3voDTXcWzoCI&r=NyjLsr7JA7mvpCJa0YmPdVKcmMXJ31bpbBaNqzCNrng&m=3MyT2IBHmmEmtejJI2o73p3zIjhzSmGtffDprR-DdD0&s=avFGB5zEal090OxCbLLU5A1NvjlOJREQPCY-yP7GTDk&e=



----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I think this document would be clearer if the example in S 7.1 were in the intro. I was scratching my head a bit at the beginning and then got to 7.1 and it made more sense.