Re: [OSPF] I-D Action: draft-ietf-ospf-encapsulation-cap-05.txt
"Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee@cisco.com> Mon, 17 July 2017 14:27 UTC
Return-Path: <acee@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 D7028131C0A for <ospf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 17 Jul 2017 07:27:00 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.522
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.522 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=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 vdB0ppymLIur for <ospf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 17 Jul 2017 07:26:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rcdn-iport-6.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-6.cisco.com [173.37.86.77]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D9CFA131BFC for <ospf@ietf.org>; Mon, 17 Jul 2017 07:26:58 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=8906; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1500301618; x=1501511218; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-id:content-transfer-encoding: mime-version; bh=4YaMgg0X03SYuquos31yTf7t732KjtiQ69cOgxLkYtM=; b=mWen5uGMQlcDqqPWPz/sq0iG81I48Y/f0Ghc2UQqe5XFiiogaZAM7T+/ v2xIrRUSgVAAvM5xbf0NimytaFoCVGFOOr+tFCvmPFt+o33QOTGb+wfW7 Yr75zjl7GXj9GYRsrJ7u534YrlGjhLw7SY6U0CZaRKxSvnmvG92Xit4KR Q=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0CYAADpyGxZ/4ENJK1cGQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBBwEBAQEBg1pkgRQHjgSRX5YEghEhDYUZAhqDLj8YAQIBAQEBAQEBayiFGAEBAQEDAQEhEToLEAIBCBEEAQEBAgIjAwICAiULFAEICAIEAQ0Fii8QrzOCJosUAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBHYELgh2FLQGDJIMmgRULBwFCgm2CYQWfNAKHSIxMggxXhHiKVJVWAR84fwt1FR8qhxZ2AYZMDxeBDIENAQEB
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.40,374,1496102400"; d="scan'208";a="271046654"
Received: from alln-core-9.cisco.com ([173.36.13.129]) by rcdn-iport-6.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA; 17 Jul 2017 14:26:57 +0000
Received: from XCH-RTP-012.cisco.com (xch-rtp-012.cisco.com [64.101.220.152]) by alln-core-9.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id v6HEQvjP026334 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Mon, 17 Jul 2017 14:26:57 GMT
Received: from xch-rtp-015.cisco.com (64.101.220.155) by XCH-RTP-012.cisco.com (64.101.220.152) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1210.3; Mon, 17 Jul 2017 10:26:56 -0400
Received: from xch-rtp-015.cisco.com ([64.101.220.155]) by XCH-RTP-015.cisco.com ([64.101.220.155]) with mapi id 15.00.1210.000; Mon, 17 Jul 2017 10:26:56 -0400
From: "Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee@cisco.com>
To: "bruno.decraene@orange.com" <bruno.decraene@orange.com>, Alia Atlas <akatlas@juniper.net>
CC: "ospf@ietf.org" <ospf@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [OSPF] I-D Action: draft-ietf-ospf-encapsulation-cap-05.txt
Thread-Index: AQHS9bhhV3imuCcRa060/qbJo4hUpKJXtTDwgABt5oA=
Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2017 14:26:56 +0000
Message-ID: <D591EA73.B9793%acee@cisco.com>
References: <149909353388.22754.5117060785642160233@ietfa.amsl.com> <D5829ECD.B7231%acee@cisco.com> <4456_1500277850_596C6C5A_4456_469_7_53C29892C857584299CBF5D05346208A4780AEFC@OPEXCLILM21.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup>
In-Reply-To: <4456_1500277850_596C6C5A_4456_469_7_53C29892C857584299CBF5D05346208A4780AEFC@OPEXCLILM21.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup>
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: [10.24.25.124]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-ID: <E70A936D4DB8094196D0C08CBCD8B225@emea.cisco.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ospf/hnuc3IUvsGexLNsayIOYfvti_xE>
Subject: Re: [OSPF] I-D Action: draft-ietf-ospf-encapsulation-cap-05.txt
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, 17 Jul 2017 14:27:01 -0000
Speaking as document shepherd: This version resolves Alia’s AD comments. The is now using 2-octet Sub-TLV type/length consistent with RFC 7770. For tunnel types, the existing RFC 5512 registry is referenced. For the Tunnel Encapsulation Attributes, we elected to take the most straightforward approach and have a separate OSPF registry. This will avoid the fact that BGP advertises at least one of these attributes in communities (e.g., color) and the fact that IS-IS has a different one-octet type/length vs OSPF’s 2-octet type/length. Speaking as WG Co-Chair: This also begins a 2-week last call on these changes (ends Tues, August 1st) at 12:00 AM UTC. This shouldn’t cause much delay (assuming consensus) as Alia is backed up right now with this week’s IETF and a queue of other documents. Thanks, Acee On 7/17/17, 3:50 AM, "bruno.decraene@orange.com" <bruno.decraene@orange.com> wrote: >Hi Alia, Acee, all > >draft-ietf-ospf-encapsulation-cap-06 has just been uploaded to address >the comments received. >Draft: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ospf-encapsulation-cap-06 >Diff: >https://tools.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-ospf-encapsulation-cap-06.t >xt > >Please see inline [Authors] more details about issues resolution > >> From: OSPF [mailto:ospf-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Acee Lindem >>(acee) > > Sent: Wednesday, July 05, 2017 7:59 PM > > To: Alia Atlas > > Cc: ospf@ietf.org > > Subject: Re: [OSPF] I-D Action: >draft-ietf-ospf-encapsulation-cap-05.txt > > > > Hi Alia, > > > > So the issues we are still discussing are: > > > > 1. Common IGP Tunnel Type/Tunnel Attribute IANA Registry or >simply > > reference the BGP registries created by RFC 5512. > >[Authors] There are 2 registries: >a) Tunnel Encapsulation Type: registry shared with BGP (since draft-05) >Tunnel types are shared with the BGP extension [RFC5512] and hence are >defined in the existing IANA registry "BGP Tunnel Encapsulation >Attribute Tunnel Types". >https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ospf-encapsulation-cap-05#section-4 > >b) Tunnel Encapsulation Attribute Sub-TLVs: registry dedicated to OSPF >(changed in draft-06) >- Difficult to share with IS-IS as IS-IS has TLV size restrictions which >do not match BGP and OSPF. Due to this restriction future sub-TLV may be >encoded in a more compact way, possibly with less information. >- Difficult to share with BGP as BGP attach the attribute to various type >of BGP routes hence needs to handle labelled/unlabeled routes, >underlay/overlay routes... The color sub-TLV already has a different >syntax. (yet the same sub-TLV code point could have been used.) > > > 2. 1-octet or 2-octet type/length in Tunnel Encapsulation >Attribute > > Sub-TLVs. I’d vote for 2-octet for RFC 7770 consistency even though the > > BGP registry code point is limited to 255 types. > >[Authors] draft-06 use 2 octets to encode the type, and 2 octets to >encode the length, as typical for OSPF. > > > 3. Addition of the RFC 5640 ECMP block suggested by Carlos > >[Authors] Done. > >Thanks >--Authors > > > Pignataro. > > > > Thanks, > > Acee > > > > > > On 7/3/17, 10:52 AM, "OSPF on behalf of internet-drafts@ietf.org" > > <ospf-bounces@ietf.org on behalf of internet-drafts@ietf.org> wrote: > > > > > > > >A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts > > >directories. > > >This draft is a work item of the Open Shortest Path First IGP of the >IETF. > > > > > > Title : Advertising Tunneling Capability in OSPF > > > Authors : Xiaohu Xu > > > Bruno Decraene > > > Robert Raszuk > > > Luis M. Contreras > > > Luay Jalil > > > Filename : draft-ietf-ospf-encapsulation-cap-05.txt > > > Pages : 10 > > > Date : 2017-07-03 > > > > > >Abstract: > > > Networks use tunnels for a variety of reasons. A large variety of > > > tunnel types are defined and the ingress needs to select a type of > > > tunnel which is supported by the egress and itself. This document > > > defines how to advertise egress tunnel capabilities in OSPF Router > > > Information Link State Advertisement (LSAs). > > > > > > > > > > > >The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: > > >https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ospf-encapsulation-cap/ > > > > > >There are also htmlized versions available at: > > >https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ospf-encapsulation-cap-05 > > >>https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-ospf-encapsulation-cap-0 >>5 > > > > > >A diff from the previous version is available at: > > >https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-ospf-encapsulation-cap-05 > > > > > > > > >Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of > > >submission > > >until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. > > > > > >Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: > > >ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > > >OSPF mailing list > > >OSPF@ietf.org > > >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf > > > > _______________________________________________ > > OSPF mailing list > > OSPF@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf > >__________________________________________________________________________ >_______________________________________________ > >Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations >confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc >pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez >recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler >a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages >electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration, >Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme >ou falsifie. Merci. > >This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged >information that may be protected by law; >they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation. >If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and >delete this message and its attachments. >As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have >been modified, changed or falsified. >Thank you. >
- [OSPF] I-D Action: draft-ietf-ospf-encapsulation-… internet-drafts
- Re: [OSPF] I-D Action: draft-ietf-ospf-encapsulat… Acee Lindem (acee)
- Re: [OSPF] I-D Action: draft-ietf-ospf-encapsulat… Alia Atlas
- Re: [OSPF] I-D Action: draft-ietf-ospf-encapsulat… bruno.decraene
- Re: [OSPF] I-D Action: draft-ietf-ospf-encapsulat… Acee Lindem (acee)