Re: [OSPF] OSPF Hybrid Broadcast and P2MP Interface Type

Peter Psenak <ppsenak@cisco.com> Tue, 23 November 2010 18:09 UTC

Return-Path: <ppsenak@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: ospf@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ospf@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E4C4028C12D for <ospf@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 23 Nov 2010 10:09:45 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.299
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.299 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.300, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6CzKa9VbILHF for <ospf@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 23 Nov 2010 10:09:45 -0800 (PST)
Received: from av-tac-bru.cisco.com (weird-brew.cisco.com [144.254.15.118]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D75128C120 for <ospf@ietf.org>; Tue, 23 Nov 2010 10:09:44 -0800 (PST)
X-TACSUNS: Virus Scanned
Received: from strange-brew.cisco.com (localhost.cisco.com [127.0.0.1]) by av-tac-bru.cisco.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id oANIAgPE000831; Tue, 23 Nov 2010 19:10:42 +0100 (CET)
Received: from dhcp-10-61-100-84.cisco.com (dhcp-10-61-100-84.cisco.com [10.61.100.84]) by strange-brew.cisco.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id oANIAbIr023492; Tue, 23 Nov 2010 19:10:38 +0100 (CET)
Message-ID: <4CEC039D.8010305@cisco.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2010 19:10:37 +0100
From: Peter Psenak <ppsenak@cisco.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; en-US; rv:1.9.2.12) Gecko/20101027 Thunderbird/3.1.6
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "Jeffrey (Zhaohui) Zhang" <zzhang@juniper.net>
References: <13205C286662DE4387D9AF3AC30EF456B028963031@EMBX01-WF.jnpr.net>
In-Reply-To: <13205C286662DE4387D9AF3AC30EF456B028963031@EMBX01-WF.jnpr.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: "ospf@ietf.org" <ospf@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [OSPF] OSPF Hybrid Broadcast and P2MP Interface Type
X-BeenThere: ospf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: The Official IETF OSPG WG Mailing List <ospf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf>, <mailto:ospf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Tue, 23 Nov 2010 18:09:46 -0000

Hi Jeffrey,

one potential issue with this approach is the possible suboptimal 
traffic path if the L3 p2p topology created as you described do not 
match the L2 forwarding topology. With large L2 domains it may be be 
nontrivial to assign L3 metric correctly so that the L2/L3 forwarding match.

One possible method to address the problem in hand is to create p2p 
connections between the routers via the L2 domain, using dedicated 
VLANs. This way the L2 forwarding is forced to match the L3 p2p topology.

thanks,
Peter

On 22.11.2010 17:36, Jeffrey (Zhaohui) Zhang wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I presented the draft http://www.ietf.org/draft-nsheth-ospf-hybrid-bcast-and-p2mp-01.txt in Beijing (slides http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/79/slides/ospf-9.ppt) and it was deferred to the mailing list on whether the problem is worth the working group effort (some who reviewed the draft agreed that the proposed solution is reasonable for the problem).
>
> I'd like to request folks to review the draft/slides and voice your opinion. We developed the solution for a real network situation and would like to see that it gets consensus and standardized so that more operators/vendors can benefit from this.
>
> Thanks.
> Jeffrey
> _______________________________________________
> OSPF mailing list
> OSPF@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf
>