IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [OSPF] draft-acee-ospfv3-lsa-extend-00

Acee Lindem <acee.lindem@ericsson.com> Sat, 08 June 2013 11:47 UTC

Return-Path: <prvs=4871105c1b=acee.lindem@ericsson.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 1D53021F880F for <ospf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 8 Jun 2013 04:47:13 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.311
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.311 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.287, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id U6W1vLRmECnd for <ospf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 8 Jun 2013 04:47:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from usevmg21.ericsson.net (usevmg21.ericsson.net [198.24.6.65]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0DA9D21F8763 for <ospf@ietf.org>; Sat, 8 Jun 2013 04:47:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-AuditID: c6180641-b7f0e6d0000015f1-1c-51b319ba700d
Received: from EUSAAHC006.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain [147.117.188.90]) by usevmg21.ericsson.net (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id 75.14.05617.AB913B15; Sat, 8 Jun 2013 13:47:07 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from EUSAAMB101.ericsson.se ([147.117.188.118]) by EUSAAHC006.ericsson.se ([147.117.188.90]) with mapi id 14.02.0328.009; Sat, 8 Jun 2013 07:47:06 -0400
From: Acee Lindem <acee.lindem@ericsson.com>
To: Alan Davey <Alan.Davey@metaswitch.com>
Thread-Topic: [OSPF] draft-acee-ospfv3-lsa-extend-00
Thread-Index: Ac5dKNOXxrjjra7QRqKAriZTB+i9+QHNpf+A
Date: Sat, 08 Jun 2013 11:47:05 +0000
Message-ID: <94A203EA12AECE4BA92D42DBFFE0AE4715FBE3@eusaamb101.ericsson.se>
References: <C2EE31C852049D499842B19FC01C0804C1A925EC@ENFICSMBX1.datcon.co.uk>
In-Reply-To: <C2EE31C852049D499842B19FC01C0804C1A925EC@ENFICSMBX1.datcon.co.uk>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [147.117.188.135]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_94A203EA12AECE4BA92D42DBFFE0AE4715FBE3eusaamb101ericsso_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFmpkkeLIzCtJLcpLzFFi42KZXLonSne35OZAgwnTmSyeTJvFZrHt5x82 i5Z799gdmD2WLPnJ5HH05lxmjy+XP7MFMEdx2yQllpQFZ6bn6dslcGdsm32PvaDHteLKk9fM DYz7bboYOTkkBEwk5vyfwgRhi0lcuLeeDcQWEjjKKHFyl2AXIxeQvYxRYt6ir4wgCTYBHYnn j/4xg9giAloSO6Z/ZgMpYhZoYZT4d+8yC0hCWMBY4v6DNWwQRSYS7xofskPYRkDbVoMNYhFQ keh8+pcVxOYV8JZYOXMWUC8H0DY/iQsfHEDCnAL+EpvePAMrYQQ67vupNWCHMguIS9x6Mh/q aAGJJXvOM0PYohIvH/9jhbCVJb7PecQCUZ8v0Tx7PtQqQYmTM5+wTGAUnYVk1CwkZbOQlEHE DSTen5vPDGFrSyxb+BrK1pfY+OUsI4RtLXHzwxR2ZDULGDlWMXKUFqeW5aYbGW5iBMbgMQk2 xx2MCz5ZHmKU5mBREufV4V0cKCSQnliSmp2aWpBaFF9UmpNafIiRiYMTRHBJNTBuMFu4OHBy yos10TafLz+xF5OfZX2ZKXhGQ8VWo1Wcm5qfXi55kb28zqaebf7Pmbf2bj/wt0xaIPtBcvuU nPRDx6tCnr9MtLpiyNhrejz61ew1h/68DF9zzM2+zcVZPZJp46nqAL9JT9oWzt7mIL76uvK+ ffNsxGd5bnhRa3/kys5jYVutlkqsUmIpzkg01GIuKk4EAFWSdfiUAgAA
Cc: "ospf@ietf.org" <ospf@ietf.org>, "draft-acee-ospfv3-lsa-extend@tools.ietf.org" <draft-acee-ospfv3-lsa-extend@tools.ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [OSPF] draft-acee-ospfv3-lsa-extend-00
X-BeenThere: ospf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: <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: Sat, 08 Jun 2013 11:47:13 -0000

Hi Alan,

On May 30, 2013, at 7:28 AM, Alan Davey wrote:

Folks

I have read draft-acee-ospfv3-lsa-extend-00 and found it interesting.  It is clearly non-back-compatible with existing implementations of OSPFv3, but there is not much in the draft about the requirements.  Could the authors please give some more details on what is driving the need for the LSA extensions?

We can add references to the draft that are dependent on this extension.

http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-baker-ipv6-ospf-dst-flowlabel-routing-02.txt
http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-baker-ipv6-ospf-dst-src-routing-02.txt

There are other applications as well. For example, the previous draft supporting IPv4 and IPv6 in a single address family and multiple topologies in a single instance.



As an aside, the draft does not appear on the WG’s Documents page on the IETF site.  Is this because the draft should have “ospf” in its title, that is, “draft-acee-ospf-ospfv3-lsa-extend”?

This is because it not a WG document yet.

Thanks,
Acee



Regards
Alan Davey

Network Technologies
Metaswitch Networks

alan.davey@metaswitch.com<mailto:alan.davey@metaswitch.com>
+44 (0) 20 8366 1177
network-technologies.metaswitch.com<http://network-technologies.metaswitch.com/>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email