+1 The only case of ISIS as PE-CE known so far to me is the ISOVPN deployments. Don’t see how this proposal add any considerable value.
On 10/9/14, 10:45 AM, "Les Ginsberg (ginsberg)" <[email protected]> wrote: >Adding the IS-IS WG since there is an equivalent draft for IS-IS >submitted by the same authors. > >"IF" this were something the respective WGs decide the protocol should >support, then running a separate instance of the protocol so that the >flowspec advertisements can be isolated from the primary function of the >IGP (routing) would be the right way to implement it - and this is >precisely what GENINFO/MI (RFC 6823/6822) were defined to address. OSPF >Transport instance would be the analogous mechanism for OSPF. > >But the first question is whether this is something the IGPs should >support at all. As Acee has indicated this was proposed previously in >OSPF and there was little interest. In the case of IS-IS there is even >less reason to consider it since IS-IS is NOT deployed as a PE-CE >protocol. > > Les > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: OSPF [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Acee Lindem >> (acee) >> Sent: Wednesday, October 08, 2014 9:36 AM >> To: Peter Psenak (ppsenak) >> Cc: [email protected] >> Subject: Re: [OSPF] New Version Notification for >>draft-liang-ospf-flowspec- >> extensions-01.txt >> >> Hi Peter, et al, >> I’ve also seen many OSPF PE-CE deployments as well. One question is >> whether the CE is under the administrative control of the provider or >>the >> customer? >> Note that this was proposed at least once before - >> http://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-shrivastava-ospf-flow-spec-01.txt >>bit >> it didn’t gain momentum. >> >> With respect to Hannes’ comment, Les Ginsberg said he sees this as a >> candidate for the ISIS Generic Information instance (RFC 6823). We >>could do >> the same and push it to the OSPF transport instance which has also lost >> momentum as a draft. >> >> We’ve heard from one provider (Eric) who doesn’t think this is useful - >>any >> other input? >> >> One thing I hope is that no sees this a generic flow-spec distribution >> mechanism for SDN. The reason being that you really need per peer >> granularity of advertisement and policy, e.g. BGP. >> >> Thanks, >> Acee >> >> On Oct 8, 2014, at 12:16 PM, Peter Psenak <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> > Hi Eric, >> > >> > there are definitely deployments using OSPF as PE-CE. It's typically >>used >> for enterprise customers, that use OSPF as their IGP and use L3 VPN >>service >> to interconnect their sites. >> > >> > thanks, >> > Peter >> > >> > On 10/8/14 17:45 , 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 >> >> _______________________________________________ >> OSPF mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf >_______________________________________________ >Isis-wg mailing list >[email protected] >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/isis-wg _______________________________________________ OSPF mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf
