Re: draft-eng-nalawade-ospf-tunnel-cap-00.txt
Rahul Aggarwal <rahul@JUNIPER.NET> Wed, 12 November 2003 05:16 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 AAA08383 for <ospf-archive@LISTS.IETF.ORG>; Wed, 12 Nov 2003 00:16:33 -0500 (EST)
Received: from PEAR.EASE.LSOFT.COM (209.119.0.19) by cherry.ease.lsoft.com (LSMTP for Digital Unix v1.1b) with SMTP id <16.00C4215A@cherry.ease.lsoft.com>; Wed, 12 Nov 2003 0:16:43 -0500
Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM by PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8e) with spool id 60234808 for OSPF@PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM; Wed, 12 Nov 2003 00:16:42 -0500
Received: from 207.17.136.150 by WALNUT.EASE.LSOFT.COM (SMTPL release 1.0i) with TCP; Wed, 12 Nov 2003 00:16:42 -0400
Received: from sapphire.juniper.net (sapphire.juniper.net [172.17.28.108]) by merlot.juniper.net (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id hAC5Gfi03377 for <OSPF@PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM>; Tue, 11 Nov 2003 21:16:41 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from rahul@juniper.net)
Received: from localhost (rahul@localhost) by sapphire.juniper.net (8.11.6/8.11.3) with ESMTP id hAC5Gff16927 for <OSPF@PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM>; Tue, 11 Nov 2003 21:16:41 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from rahul@juniper.net)
X-Authentication-Warning: sapphire.juniper.net: rahul owned process doing -bs
References: <3F9E9379.3070602@redback.com> <3F9EAD95.9050101@cisco.com> <3F9EB8F2.10002@cisco.com> <20031110084404.A84355@sapphire.juniper.net> <3FAFFBEC.7090409@cisco.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID: <20031111211412.Y12111@sapphire.juniper.net>
Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 21:16:41 -0800
Reply-To: Mailing List <OSPF@PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender: Mailing List <OSPF@PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From: Rahul Aggarwal <rahul@JUNIPER.NET>
Subject: Re: draft-eng-nalawade-ospf-tunnel-cap-00.txt
To: OSPF@PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM
In-Reply-To: <3FAFFBEC.7090409@cisco.com>
Precedence: list
Hi Sandy, On Mon, 10 Nov 2003, Sandy Eng wrote: > Rahul, > > Rahul Aggarwal wrote: > > Following up on this thread, I have the following concerns with this > > document: > > > > 1. Tunnels are used both intra and inter domains. Thus tunnel > > capabilities have to be propagated across domains as well. Hence IGP is > > imho not appropriate for this application. > > > > 2. Tunnel capabilities are not used by core routeres. > > As we are announcing specific router capabilities, it therefore infers > that only certain routers in the network are capable of some specific > capabilities. If all routers in a network have the same capability, > there is then no need for specific announcement. > The tunnel encapsulations are needed by the PE routers and are advertised by the PE routers. Different PE routers can advertise different tunnel capabailities. However P routers do not require this information. rahul > Thanks, > Sandy > > > > > > > 3. There are existing documents that specify the use of BGP for this: > > draft-raggarwa-ppvpn-tunnel-encap-sig-01.txt > > draft-nalawade-kapoor-tunnel-safi-01.txt > > > > Hence imho OSPF WG should not take on this work. > > > > Thanks, > > rahul > > > > On Tue, 28 Oct 2003, Robert Raszuk wrote: > > > > > >>Acee, > >> > >> > >>> My biggest fear would be that if this draft is accepted it > >>> would only be the first of a torrent of auto-configuration > >>> drafts. > >> > >>Second one not first ;). Notice this one submitted a while back: > >>draft-raszuk-ospf-bgp-peer-discovery-00.txt > >> > >> > 1. Should OSPF be used for tunnel auto-configuration? > >> > >>I think in general this requires a study on a case by case basis. Most > >>important factors which should be taken into consideration are: > >> > >>*A* How frequently the information advertised changed - is it static > >>configuration or dynamic in nature which triggers reflooding ? > >> > >>*B* Is the application which the uses delivered information limited to > >>IGP domain or crosses domains ? > >> > >>*C* What is the amount of information to be flooded (keeping in mind > >>that majority of P routers - those in the core - will never use it. > >> > >>*D* What are the alternatives available & _deployed_ today to deliver > >>the same information to it's users > >> > >>*E* How often area wide flooding will be sufficient versus domain wide. > >> > >>Coming back to draft-eng-nalawade-ospf-tunnel-cap-00.txt I see the > >>following: > >> > >>Reg A: Info is essentially static except the L2TPv3 cookie rollover > >>intervals which if implementation permits could be changing periodically > >> > >>Reg B: I think that in any application of tunnels we can't limit the > >>scope of use to one IGP domain. There can be a lot of customers who may > >>never need to go over a domain (which this draft is targeting though). > >> > >>Reg C: Minimal (comparing to TE at least :):). > >> > >>Reg D: It is worth noting that there is a few drafts in IDR describing > >>the ideas for the same information distribution > >> > >>Reg E: Looking at the most common OSPF topologies I would say that most > >>tunnels will be build between edge PEs and those in a lot of cases are > >>located in it's own POP areas. Not to say that there are no customers > >>who keep most of their PEs on the edges of area 0. > >> > >>Rgs, > >>R. > >> > > >
- draft-eng-nalawade-ospf-tunnel-cap-00.txt Acee Lindem
- Re: draft-eng-nalawade-ospf-tunnel-cap-00.txt Sandy Eng
- Re: draft-eng-nalawade-ospf-tunnel-cap-00.txt Gargi Nalawade
- Re: draft-eng-nalawade-ospf-tunnel-cap-00.txt Robert Raszuk
- Re: draft-eng-nalawade-ospf-tunnel-cap-00.txt Rahul Aggarwal
- Re: draft-eng-nalawade-ospf-tunnel-cap-00.txt Gargi Nalawade
- Re: draft-eng-nalawade-ospf-tunnel-cap-00.txt Sandy Eng
- Re: draft-eng-nalawade-ospf-tunnel-cap-00.txt Sastry, Ravi
- Re: draft-eng-nalawade-ospf-tunnel-cap-00.txt Sandy Eng
- Re: draft-eng-nalawade-ospf-tunnel-cap-00.txt Rahul Aggarwal
- Re: draft-eng-nalawade-ospf-tunnel-cap-00.txt Rahul Aggarwal
- Re: draft-eng-nalawade-ospf-tunnel-cap-00.txt Gargi Nalawade
- Re: draft-eng-nalawade-ospf-tunnel-cap-00.txt Sandy Eng
- Re: draft-eng-nalawade-ospf-tunnel-cap-00.txt Robert Raszuk
- Re: draft-eng-nalawade-ospf-tunnel-cap-00.txt Rahul Aggarwal
- Re: draft-eng-nalawade-ospf-tunnel-cap-00.txt Gargi Nalawade
- Re: draft-eng-nalawade-ospf-tunnel-cap-00.txt Gargi Nalawade
- draft-eng-nalawade-ospf-tunnel-cap-00.txt Yakov Rekhter
- Re: draft-eng-nalawade-ospf-tunnel-cap-00.txt Yakov Rekhter
- Re: draft-eng-nalawade-ospf-tunnel-cap-00.txt Robert Raszuk
- Re: draft-eng-nalawade-ospf-tunnel-cap-00.txt Yakov Rekhter
- Re: draft-eng-nalawade-ospf-tunnel-cap-00.txt Robert Raszuk
- Re: draft-eng-nalawade-ospf-tunnel-cap-00.txt Yakov Rekhter