Re: OSPF IGP Capabilities Draft
"Manral, Vishwas" <VishwasM@NETPLANE.COM> Mon, 03 February 2003 12:35 UTC
Received: from cherry.ease.lsoft.com (cherry.ease.lsoft.com [209.119.0.109]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA05919 for <ospf-archive@LISTS.IETF.ORG>; Mon, 3 Feb 2003 07:35:09 -0500 (EST)
Received: from walnut (209.119.0.61) by cherry.ease.lsoft.com (LSMTP for Digital Unix v1.1b) with SMTP id <21.008C926F@cherry.ease.lsoft.com>; Mon, 3 Feb 2003 7:38:44 -0500
Received: from DISCUSS.MICROSOFT.COM by DISCUSS.MICROSOFT.COM (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8e) with spool id 598251 for OSPF@DISCUSS.MICROSOFT.COM; Mon, 3 Feb 2003 07:38:44 -0500
Received: from 12.27.183.253 by WALNUT.EASE.LSOFT.COM (SMTPL release 1.0i) with TCP; Mon, 3 Feb 2003 07:38:44 -0500
Received: by XOVER with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id <1C0LPPNS>; Mon, 3 Feb 2003 07:38:39 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Message-ID: <E7E13AAF2F3ED41197C100508BD6A328791E66@india_exch.hyderabad.mindspeed.com>
Date: Mon, 03 Feb 2003 07:40:42 -0500
Reply-To: Mailing List <OSPF@DISCUSS.MICROSOFT.COM>
Sender: Mailing List <OSPF@DISCUSS.MICROSOFT.COM>
From: "Manral, Vishwas" <VishwasM@NETPLANE.COM>
Subject: Re: OSPF IGP Capabilities Draft
To: OSPF@DISCUSS.MICROSOFT.COM
Precedence: list
Hi Acee, The only reservation that I have with the mechanism for OSPF is that it cannot be used as a means to define what LSA's are exchanged/whether adjacencies are to be formed etc., because the LSA's are only exchanged after the decisions have already been made. So capabilities similar to the current Opaque capability/NSSA/Stub capability cannot be exchanged using the LSA's. However if we allow the LSA to be exchanged even before the decision to form adjacencies, we can get over the issue(we would require a change in protocol). It could also help in a case similar to the unplanned hitless restart case, where LSA's are exchanged even before Hello's are exchanged. I however agree that this method is better than allowing a whole lot of LSA's(like the Grace LSA for unplanned restart being used now), to be flooded before the neighbor state, that the protocol allows it. Thanks, Vishwas -----Original Message----- From: Acee Lindem [mailto:acee@REDBACK.COM] Sent: Sunday, February 02, 2003 3:56 AM To: OSPF@DISCUSS.MICROSOFT.COM Subject: Re: OSPF IGP Capabilities Draft Abhay Roy wrote: > Acee, Hi Abhay, > > One of the questions raised was, why do we need to advertise these > capabilities? I am glad to see that, there is at least one useful > application (as in PCSD). Yes and I think there will be others in the future. > > I still have those reservations about the usefulness of many other > 'capabilities' this document describes. IMHO, if the receivers of > these capabilities are just going to display it in a 'show' > command, we should NOT specify them in this document. Since these are existing mechanisms we really can't make the receivers have any dependence on them. However, I'm not sure that is a reason not to allow the bits to be advertised with other router capabilities which are dependent on the IGP capabilities mechanism. > > Regards, > -Roy- > > On 01/30/03-0500 at 9:28pm, Acee Lindem writes: > > >>As many of you recall, we've discussed this draft at both >>the Yokohama and Atlanta OSPF WG meetings. I wasn't in Yokohama >>but apparently there were some present who voiced reservations >>with the draft. In Atlanta, there wasn't a lot of discussion (other >>than strong support from the authors ;^). We agreed to discuss this >>draft further on the OSPF list. >> >>Are there still people who have reservations with the draft? >> >>http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-raggarwa-igp-cap-01.txt >> >>[Speaking as a WG member] >> >>I think the draft is a natural mechanism for advertising new OSPF >>capabilities now that the LSA option bits have been exhausted. >>We've already extended OSPF to support traffic engineering (TE) >>information and this mechanism is slated to be used for propagating >>an OSPF router's ability to act as an MPLS TE path computation >>server (PCS). >> >>Thanks, >>-- >>Acee > -- Acee
- OSPF IGP Capabilities Draft Acee Lindem
- Re: OSPF IGP Capabilities Draft Abhay Roy
- Re: OSPF IGP Capabilities Draft Acee Lindem
- Re: OSPF IGP Capabilities Draft Manral, Vishwas
- Re: OSPF IGP Capabilities Draft Acee Lindem
- Re: OSPF IGP Capabilities Draft Jean Philippe Vasseur
- unsubscribe Patricia macedo (NC)