Hi Hannes, Usually there're no more than 100K routes in an area. Route advertisement is related to the network scale, for directly connected neighbors, OSPF's convergence time is about 1 minute for 100K routes. Actually, the signaling for FlowSpec routes and IP prefix routes are almost same. FlowSpec routes can be seen as more specific routing entries. Furthermore in this document, FlowSpec routes are mainly used in DDOS scenarios, instead of replacing the IP prefix routes.
Thanks, Jianjie -----邮件原件----- 发件人: Hannes Gredler [mailto:[email protected]] 发送时间: 2014年10月8日 23:54 收件人: Osborne, Eric 抄送: Youjianjie; [email protected] 主题: Re: [OSPF] New Version Notification for draft-liang-ospf-flowspec-extensions-01.txt +1 it would be furthermore interesting to hear from the authors how OSPF behaves once a massive scale of flow-routes (lets say in the order of > 100K is injected into OSPF). /hannes On Wed, Oct 08, 2014 at 03:45:24PM +0000, Osborne, Eric wrote: | I'm not sure this has much value. The vast majority of dynamic PE-CE is done with BGP; the little bit that isn't BGP is, in my experience, RIP. I don't think I've seen many (any?) OSPF PE-CE deployments. | | | | | eric | | -----Original Message----- | From: OSPF [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Youjianjie | Sent: Tuesday, October 07, 2014 10:11 PM | To: [email protected] | Subject: [OSPF] 转发: New Version Notification for | draft-liang-ospf-flowspec-extensions-01.txt | | Hi all, | | This document discusses the use cases that OSPF is used to distribute FlowSpec routes. This document also defines a new OSPF FlowSpec Opaque Link State Advertisement (LSA) encoding format. | Your comments are appreciated. | | Best Regards, | Jianjie | | -----邮件原件----- | 发件人: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] | 发送时间: 2014年9月28日 10:32 | 收件人: Youjianjie; Youjianjie; liuweihang; liuweihang | 主题: New Version Notification for | draft-liang-ospf-flowspec-extensions-01.txt | | | A new version of I-D, draft-liang-ospf-flowspec-extensions-01.txt | has been successfully submitted by Jianjie You and posted to the IETF repository. | | Name: draft-liang-ospf-flowspec-extensions | Revision: 01 | Title: OSPF Extensions for Flow Specification | Document date: 2014-09-27 | Group: Individual Submission | Pages: 11 | URL: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-liang-ospf-flowspec-extensions-01.txt | Status: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-liang-ospf-flowspec-extensions/ | Htmlized: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-liang-ospf-flowspec-extensions-01 | Diff: http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-liang-ospf-flowspec-extensions-01 | | Abstract: | This document discusses the use cases why OSPF (Open Shortest Path | First) distributing flow specification (FlowSpec) routes is | necessary. This document also defines a new OSPF FlowSpec Opaque | Link State Advertisement (LSA) encoding format that can be used to | distribute FlowSpec routes. | | For the network only deploying IGP (Interior Gateway Protocol) (e.g. | OSPF), it is expected to extend IGP to distribute FlowSpec routes. | One advantage is to mitigate the impacts of Denial-of-Service (DoS) | attacks. | | | | | | Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. | | The IETF Secretariat | | _______________________________________________ | OSPF mailing list | [email protected] | https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf | _______________________________________________ | OSPF mailing list | [email protected] | https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf _______________________________________________ OSPF mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf
