Re: OSPF Capabilities Draft

[Acee Lindem <[e-mail]>]

Peter Psenak wrote:
> Vishwas,
>
> Manral, Vishwas wrote:
>
>> Hi Acee,
>>
>> Are you talking of some sort of a translation mechanism where you have
>> ABR's
>> send area-scope LSA's into stub/NSSA for each global scope LSA?
>>
>>
> no. We talked with Acee about a case where NSSA ABR  needs to generate
> multiple Capability LSA  - one Type-11 plus one Type-10 per each
> stub/NSSA area attached.
> Similar to Type-5 plus Type-7 LSAs case on NSSA ABR/ASBR.

This seemed reasonable to me for attached NSSA/stubs (even though unattached
NSSA/stubs would not get the advertisements).


>
> thanks,
> Peter
>
>> Thanks,
>> Vishwas
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Acee Lindem [mailto:[e-mail]]
>> Sent: Monday, June 02, 2003 19:51
>> To: [e-mail]
>> Subject: Re: OSPF Capabilities Draft
>>
>>
>> I received one comment from Peter Psenack on this draft. A router
>> with attached stub or NSSA areas should also originate an area scoped
>> capability LSAs for these area when the domain wide flooding
>> option is selected. I think this is a good idea.and will add it
>> as we more forward. Any more discussion?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Acee
>>
>> Acee Lindem wrote:
>>
>>
>>> The draft draft-raggarwal-igp-cap-0x.txt has been discussed at the
>>> last three IETFs. At the last two IETFs, there was mild support and
>>> we agreed to take the discussion to the OSPF WG list. In order to remove
>>> one of the barriers to making this draft a WG document, I have split out
>>> the OSPF specific portion into a separate draft. Rahul has done the same
>>> for ISIS.
>>>
>>> <Speaking as a WG Member>
>>>
>>> I beleive the time has come to accept this as a WG document. The
>>> described mechanism is consistent with other OSPF features and is
>>> backward compatible. All the OSPF options been have been allocated and
>>> new proposal will be able to make use of this mechanism without
>>> solving the option bit problem. One example is
>>> draft-vasseur-mpls-ospf-te-cap-00.txt.
>>>
>>> </Speaking as a WG Member>
>>>
>>> Link to draft below:
>>>
>>> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-lindem-ospf-cap-00.txt
>>>
>>> Further discussion? Any opposition to accepting this draft as a WG
>>> document?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> --
>>> Acee
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Acee
>>
>>
>>
>


--
Acee