Re: [OSPF] WG adoption poll for draft-ppsenak-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse
Yingzhen Qu <yingzhen.qu@huawei.com> Fri, 07 July 2017 21:29 UTC
Return-Path: <yingzhen.qu@huawei.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 49F0212EC30 for <ospf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 7 Jul 2017 14:29:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.221
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.221 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 WTOGcEo59h_E for <ospf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 7 Jul 2017 14:29:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [194.213.3.17]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9F0E012EB8E for <ospf@ietf.org>; Fri, 7 Jul 2017 14:29:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from 172.18.7.190 (EHLO lhreml708-cah.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.7.190]) by lhrrg01-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.3.7-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id DQP88760; Fri, 07 Jul 2017 21:29:33 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from DFWEML702-CAH.china.huawei.com (10.193.5.176) by lhreml708-cah.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.49) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.301.0; Fri, 7 Jul 2017 22:29:32 +0100
Received: from DFWEML501-MBX.china.huawei.com ([10.193.5.178]) by dfweml702-cah.china.huawei.com ([10.193.5.176]) with mapi id 14.03.0301.000; Fri, 7 Jul 2017 14:29:30 -0700
From: Yingzhen Qu <yingzhen.qu@huawei.com>
To: Jeff Tantsura <jefftant.ietf@gmail.com>, "Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee@cisco.com>, "Abhay Roy (akr)" <akr@cisco.com>, "ospf@ietf.org" <ospf@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [OSPF] WG adoption poll for draft-ppsenak-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse
Thread-Index: AQHS9CuXrGdyFVfvnEOuBLOzkr2KkKJH1jkAgAFB4YCAABIlgP//vYNg
Date: Fri, 07 Jul 2017 21:29:29 +0000
Message-ID: <594D005A3CB0724DB547CF3E9A9E810B4F58B2@dfweml501-mbx>
References: <f50ebb8f-0edd-9fb2-bfdb-f095e613980e@cisco.com> <D5842D5C.B7424%acee@cisco.com> <D5853AE9.B7505%acee@cisco.com> <8375EBBF-F835-4916-9166-D22DBA4C66F8@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <8375EBBF-F835-4916-9166-D22DBA4C66F8@gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.213.49.84]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
X-Mirapoint-Virus-RAPID-Raw: score=unknown(0), refid=str=0001.0A090205.595FFD3D.00D7, ss=1, re=0.000, recu=0.000, reip=0.000, cl=1, cld=1, fgs=0, ip=0.0.0.0, so=2013-06-18 04:22:30, dmn=2013-03-21 17:37:32
X-Mirapoint-Loop-Id: 5b6cbf0a98a36af5399515132109e345
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ospf/p9sC80TzMMVYl79o2apWcPY0Krk>
Subject: Re: [OSPF] WG adoption poll for draft-ppsenak-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse
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: Fri, 07 Jul 2017 21:29:38 -0000
Support the adoption of this draft. Thanks, Yingzhen -----Original Message----- From: OSPF [mailto:ospf-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Jeff Tantsura Sent: Friday, July 07, 2017 11:27 AM To: Acee Lindem (acee) <acee@cisco.com>; Abhay Roy (akr) <akr@cisco.com>; ospf@ietf.org Subject: Re: [OSPF] WG adoption poll for draft-ppsenak-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse +10 to Acee’s comments OSPF community would greatly benefit from the draft being adopted and implemented (stated as co-author) Cheers, Jeff On 7/7/17, 10:22, "OSPF on behalf of Acee Lindem (acee)" <ospf-bounces@ietf.org on behalf of acee@cisco.com> wrote: OSPF Evolution and the role of draft-ppsenak-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse The document draft-ppsenak-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse-05.txt not-only provides flexible and compact mechanisms and encodings for advertising link attributes for single or multiple applications. It is also part of the wider goal of transforming OSPF to a TLV-based protocol that is every bit as extendable as the other IGPs while affording the distinct advantage of optimally partitioning the advertised information into multiple LSAs of different types. This draft represents the last piece of our vision to achieve this outcome. For OSPFv2, we have the base LSAs that cannot be extended in a backward compatible fashion. Additionally, we have RFC 7770 (OSPF Router Information Advertisement) and RFC 7684 (OSPF Prefix/Link Attributes). The former has been extended to support distribution of non-OSPF information in addition to OSPF Router-level protocol information. The extended OSPF Prefix/Link LSAs are being used to support segment routing and other technologies. They are now part of the OSPF base and will be advertised in many OSPF domains. The major implementations have the capability to correlate the base LSAs and the OSPF Prefix/Link LSAs for segment routing. This correlation requires handling lots of chicken and egg complexities that have all been overcome. It has been suggested that since the OSPF TE LSAs (RFC 3630) contain some generally useful link attributes, this be the only means by which this information is advertised in OSPF routing domains. This will be both unwieldy and inefficient due to the advertisement, processing, and storage of the TE LSAs in networks not utilizing RSVP-based TE. There is also the added complexity with this approach as you have not only the chicken and the egg, but the chicken, egg, and the rooster to correlate. For OSPFv3 and OSPFv3 Extended LSAs (draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-lsa-extend-14.txt), we have made the difficult choice to extend the base RFC 5340 LSAs (OSPF for IPv6) in a non-compatible fashion. After an initial delay, we have implementations of the OSPFv3 Extended LSAs draft and will soon be advancing it. With the OSPFv3 extended LSAs, we are finally at the point where all the information (other than RSVP TE information) for a given prefix or link is advertised in a single LSA rather than multiple LSAs. Would those who argue for making OSPFv2 TE LSAs generally applicable also want to require the advertisement of RFC 5329 (OSPFv3 Traffic Engineering) LSAs? If so, we would miss a tremendous opportunity. Thanks, Acee On 7/6/17, 6:10 PM, "OSPF on behalf of Acee Lindem (acee)" <ospf-bounces@ietf.org on behalf of acee@cisco.com> wrote: >Support as co-author. More to come… >Acee > >On 7/3/17, 2:37 PM, "OSPF on behalf of Abhay Roy (akr)" ><ospf-bounces@ietf.org on behalf of akr@cisco.com> wrote: > >>We would like to kick-off a poll for WG adoption of the following >>document (per Authors request): >> >>https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ppsenak-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse >> >>Please let us know if you support or have concerns with OSPF WG adopting >>this work. >> >>Regards, >>-Abhay >> >>_______________________________________________ >>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 _______________________________________________ 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
- [OSPF] WG adoption poll for draft-ppsenak-ospf-te… Abhay Roy
- Re: [OSPF] WG adoption poll for draft-ppsenak-osp… Jeff Tantsura
- Re: [OSPF] WG adoption poll for draft-ppsenak-osp… Ketan Talaulikar (ketant)
- Re: [OSPF] WG adoption poll for draft-ppsenak-osp… Peter Psenak
- Re: [OSPF] WG adoption poll for draft-ppsenak-osp… Les Ginsberg (ginsberg)
- Re: [OSPF] WG adoption poll for draft-ppsenak-osp… Acee Lindem (acee)
- Re: [OSPF] WG adoption poll for draft-ppsenak-osp… Acee Lindem (acee)
- Re: [OSPF] WG adoption poll for draft-ppsenak-osp… Keyur Patel
- Re: [OSPF] WG adoption poll for draft-ppsenak-osp… Naiming Shen (naiming)
- Re: [OSPF] WG adoption poll for draft-ppsenak-osp… Jeff Tantsura
- Re: [OSPF] WG adoption poll for draft-ppsenak-osp… Robert Raszuk
- Re: [OSPF] WG adoption poll for draft-ppsenak-osp… Yingzhen Qu
- Re: [OSPF] WG adoption poll for draft-ppsenak-osp… tte
- Re: [OSPF] WG adoption poll for draft-ppsenak-osp… Huaimo Chen
- Re: [OSPF] WG adoption poll for draft-ppsenak-osp… Qin Wu
- [OSPF] 答复: WG adoption poll for draft-ppsenak-osp… Xuxiaohu
- Re: [OSPF] 答复: WG adoption poll for draft-ppsenak… Shraddha Hegde
- Re: [OSPF] 答复: WG adoption poll for draft-ppsenak… Peter Psenak
- Re: [OSPF] WG adoption poll for draft-ppsenak-osp… Abhay Roy