[OSPF] OSPFv3 Extended LSAs

"Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee@cisco.com> Thu, 19 November 2015 01:14 UTC

Return-Path: <acee@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8894F1B3AB7 for <ospf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 18 Nov 2015 17:14:36 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -15.086
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-15.086 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.585, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham
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 LRj8v8a3JXiC for <ospf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 18 Nov 2015 17:14:34 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rcdn-iport-3.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-3.cisco.com [173.37.86.74]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 482CB1B3AC1 for <ospf@ietf.org>; Wed, 18 Nov 2015 17:14:32 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=358; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1447895672; x=1449105272; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:content-id: content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=CSwekCAj8ELDtjux7kjdAEBLJUsblTQ/VhcmpZfWmZg=; b=ERa1NRG+lnfRU2ZyIjUwb0Peqw9cBASBG71k4Yf0+Dac2plBVAOvbd+B 3G4qFeypEJ6L4sylrwLAUKt6SG2TOUDWWFkvX8qfP7Ga7qY9y6fNToNIo IUnJntWBft4nz6nxLydEDHmledcgyfPxYKAtLqjC7oyZeUQwwvApzwkBV A=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0AKAgALIU1W/4UNJK1egzuBSL5iAQ2BZYYtgS84FAEBAQEBAQGBCoQ7IxFXASICJgIEMBUSBIhBnwiPcJA5AQEIAgEggQGSRoFEBZZKAY0qgVuEQJYpAR8BAUKEBIULgQcBAQE
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.20,315,1444694400"; d="scan'208";a="51660591"
Received: from alln-core-11.cisco.com ([173.36.13.133]) by rcdn-iport-3.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA; 19 Nov 2015 01:14:31 +0000
Received: from XCH-RTP-011.cisco.com (xch-rtp-011.cisco.com [64.101.220.151]) by alln-core-11.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id tAJ1EVaY015728 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL) for <ospf@ietf.org>; Thu, 19 Nov 2015 01:14:31 GMT
Received: from xch-rtp-015.cisco.com (64.101.220.155) by XCH-RTP-011.cisco.com (64.101.220.151) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1104.5; Wed, 18 Nov 2015 20:14:30 -0500
Received: from xch-rtp-015.cisco.com ([64.101.220.155]) by XCH-RTP-015.cisco.com ([64.101.220.155]) with mapi id 15.00.1104.000; Wed, 18 Nov 2015 20:14:30 -0500
From: "Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee@cisco.com>
To: OSPF WG List <ospf@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: OSPFv3 Extended LSAs
Thread-Index: AQHRImekjWROiZIMVUGbFbSPG0u/iw==
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2015 01:14:30 +0000
Message-ID: <D2728CA2.3E926%acee@cisco.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [10.116.152.196]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-ID: <F28E1522588F7F4580B94558B95FA86A@emea.cisco.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ospf/tDNa9nMdtnIZO9PH9lKrjPdQ8BU>
Subject: [OSPF] OSPFv3 Extended LSAs
X-BeenThere: ospf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: Thu, 19 Nov 2015 01:14:36 -0000

As discussed in the OSPF WG meeting at IETF 94, I intend to move the
complex mixed-mode backward compatibility to an appendix. Hopefully, this
will lower the bar for implementation. Please respond ASAP if you are
opposed to this change.
Thanks,
Acee