Re: [rbridge] [Isis-wg] draft-ietf-trill-clear-correct-00

Donald Eastlake <d3e3e3@gmail.com> Tue, 06 March 2012 19:10 UTC

Return-Path: <rbridge-bounces@postel.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-trill-archive-Osh9cae4@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-trill-archive-Osh9cae4@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0CE8221E807C for <ietfarch-trill-archive-Osh9cae4@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 6 Mar 2012 11:10:30 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -105.862
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-105.862 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.737, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 GgwKIDGXAsgX for <ietfarch-trill-archive-Osh9cae4@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 6 Mar 2012 11:10:29 -0800 (PST)
Received: from boreas.isi.edu (boreas.isi.edu [128.9.160.161]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 55ECD21F8678 for <trill-archive-Osh9cae4@lists.ietf.org>; Tue, 6 Mar 2012 11:10:28 -0800 (PST)
Received: from boreas.isi.edu (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by boreas.isi.edu (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q26Ij3eB028627; Tue, 6 Mar 2012 10:45:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-lpp01m010-f52.google.com (mail-lpp01m010-f52.google.com [209.85.215.52]) by boreas.isi.edu (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q26IibZJ028586 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=NOT) for <rbridge@postel.org>; Tue, 6 Mar 2012 10:44:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: by lahi5 with SMTP id i5so11195146lah.39 for <rbridge@postel.org>; Tue, 06 Mar 2012 10:44:36 -0800 (PST)
Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of d3e3e3@gmail.com designates 10.152.104.43 as permitted sender) client-ip=10.152.104.43;
Authentication-Results: mr.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of d3e3e3@gmail.com designates 10.152.104.43 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=d3e3e3@gmail.com; dkim=pass header.i=d3e3e3@gmail.com
Received: from mr.google.com ([10.152.104.43]) by 10.152.104.43 with SMTP id gb11mr1496873lab.8.1331059476707 (num_hops = 1); Tue, 06 Mar 2012 10:44:36 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=KEIdf9Z4U31L4yZFmiU8E28ttv2hz8KsMEKhGj19tCg=; b=t1LKS/NzBUWIv2GnaH+QcgtwBK8GeazgzxgTBFEEDF7j7mn39b530dCVjuyUcHOWnb Qnreq14sRvzzuDO9uaXKX8+oI7g0xD+ODDYQkR7Qi0BxrSCHhyYOm4K0xrTuMKTU1sL8 uk7j2pjncZHpKUczdnd3NmH/9Qr8nIVYu1PC4DFxsDQqUUs+1yzec7qNXvDcK+7kO8f1 NB8NBUkCAgMPu45xX7MXoEA7IyaDYFmOOkZ7WAqOGbx+LgnmMtbtHiH8d3diJPXuXN/T Df2lUMCfQaga6UqnNNbvr0JuwmiMI/3kCrfVJjM0UlKdQB42IXUx8OTj0LWw9Xdsl+OB 7kCw==
Received: by 10.152.104.43 with SMTP id gb11mr1233638lab.8.1331059476599; Tue, 06 Mar 2012 10:44:36 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.152.29.76 with HTTP; Tue, 6 Mar 2012 10:44:16 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <4F55F0C9.3090200@googlemail.com>
References: <CAF4+nEHWQ=D9d1ZcaL2mXXBGrFg59_E__risunvYH4-He0r4OA@mail.gmail.com> <4F55F0C9.3090200@googlemail.com>
From: Donald Eastlake <d3e3e3@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 06 Mar 2012 13:44:16 -0500
Message-ID: <CAF4+nEGmiZ481S3ThiGi=9Myq4R95xhRqf41p-K60MTFKUCjpQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Mike Shand <imc.shand@googlemail.com>
X-ISI-4-43-8-MailScanner: Found to be clean
X-MailScanner-From: d3e3e3@gmail.com
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by boreas.isi.edu id q26IibZJ028586
Cc: rbridge@postel.org, isis-wg@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [rbridge] [Isis-wg] draft-ietf-trill-clear-correct-00
X-BeenThere: rbridge@postel.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.6
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Developing a hybrid router/bridge." <rbridge.postel.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://mailman.postel.org/mailman/listinfo/rbridge>, <mailto:rbridge-request@postel.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://mailman.postel.org/pipermail/rbridge>
List-Post: <mailto:rbridge@postel.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rbridge-request@postel.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://mailman.postel.org/mailman/listinfo/rbridge>, <mailto:rbridge-request@postel.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Sender: rbridge-bounces@postel.org
Errors-To: rbridge-bounces@postel.org

Hi Mike,

Thanks for the review and comments. See below.

On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 6:11 AM, Mike Shand <imc.shand@googlemail.com> wrote:
> Hi Donald,
>
> I had a quick skim through this and noticed the following, which you may
> wish to address.
>
> 2. Overloaded and/or Unreachable RBridges para 3
>
> TYPO "They can do reasonable well" ->  reasonably

OK.

> 2.1 Reachability para 3
>
> "which could be tens of seconds or longer."
>
> The default value for MaxAge in ISO/IEC 10589 is 20 minutes (1200 seconds),
> so "tens of seconds" is something of an underestimate, unless TRILL is
> proposing running with a MUCH smaller value of MaxAge (and hence
> maximumLSPGenerationInterval).

I'll change seconds to minutes. I think the existing text was written
erroneously thinking about 30 or 40 second holding times.

> It is confusing to have the statement that "As a result, RB1 will be aware
> of the partition." after the statement that the stale LSPs will hang around
> for a long time, since it sounds as if this very delay is the cause of the
> knowledge of the partition. I THINK what you are trying to say is that it
> doesn't matter that you don't receive the new LSPs from the far side of the
> partition, since you WILL receive the updated LSPs from the nodes adjacent
> to the failure(s) on the near side of the partition, and this is sufficient
> to determine the lack of connectivity.

Right.

> This may be clearer if you put the "As a result..." sentence before the
> "However, LSPs held..." sentence.

Yes, it reads much better that way.

> Or perhaps I am completely misunderstanding the point you are making.

Nope, you have it right.

> 2.4.2.1 An Example Network para 2
>
> TYPO "has such a neighbor that signal it is willing" ->  signals (or has
> signalled)

OK.

> 5.2 Ethernet MTU Values para 1
>
> "originatingL1LSPBufferSize is the maximum permitted size of LSPs after the
> eight byte fixed IS-IS PDU header."
>
> I don't know where this idea came from but it is not correct.
> originatingL1LSPBufferSize refers to the size of the entire LSP starting
> with the protocol discriminator.
>
> I suspect this may be an erroneous deduction from the fortuitous fact that
> adding 8 to 1492 gives 1500.

Precisely.

> In fact the 1492 is a relic of the origins of ISO/IEC 10589 in DECnet Phase
> V, where before its adoption as a standard,
> the frames were encoded using the SNAP SAP, which necessarily limited the
> maximum available payload to 1492.
> This length was never changed when the encoding was changed, although it
> could have been made 1497.

OK. I'll correct the definition and adjust the numbers appropriately.

Thanks again,
Donald
=============================
 Donald E. Eastlake 3rd   +1-508-333-2270 (cell)
 155 Beaver Street, Milford, MA 01757 USA
 d3e3e3@gmail.com

> Mike
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 06/03/2012 04:25, Donald Eastlake wrote:
>>
>> Participant in the ISIS WG my want to look at this draft, which is
>> currently in WGLC in the TRILL WG as it has some IS-IS aspects:
>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-trill-clear-correct/
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Donald
>> =============================
>>  Donald E. Eastlake 3rd   +1-508-333-2270 (cell)
>>  155 Beaver Street, Milford, MA 01757 USA
>>  d3e3e3@gmail.com
>> _______________________________________________
>> Isis-wg mailing list
>> Isis-wg@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/isis-wg
>
>

_______________________________________________
rbridge mailing list
rbridge@postel.org
http://mailman.postel.org/mailman/listinfo/rbridge