+1 to Peter's, Les's opinion here (as individual, no hat, not even a
surgical mask, Acee ;-) ...
--- tony
On Thu, 17 Mar 2016 08:17:55 +0100, Peter Psenak <[email protected]>
wrote:
I agree with Les and share the same concerns.
Peter
On 3/17/16 05:40 , Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) wrote:
My opinion of the draft has not changed.
It is defining a way to utilize OSPF to send application information
- which is not something the protocol should be used to do.
Further, it leaves definition of the new codepoints and formats of
the information advertised completely unspecified - the latest draft
revision states:
" The meaning of the operator-defined sub-TLV is totally opaque to
OSPF
and is defined by the network local policy and is controlled via
configuration. "
How interoperability is achieved is not addressed at all.
IS-IS has taken a much more stringent approach to a similar request.
RFC 6823 (GENAPP) requires that information sent in the generic
container TLV MUST be based on a public specification - and that an
application specific ID for the application using this mechanism be
assigned by IANA. This addresses the interoperability issue.
GENAPP further specifies that such information SHOULD be advertised
by a separate instance of the routing protocol (as specified in RFC
6822(MI)) so as to minimize the impact of the application information
flooding on the performance of the routing protocol.
Without addressing both of these issues I cannot support the draft.
Les
-----Original Message-----
From: OSPF [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Acee Lindem
(acee)
Sent: Wednesday, March 16, 2016 7:09 PM
To: OSPF WG List
Subject: [OSPF] WG Adoption Poll for "Using Operator-defined TLVs
for Agile
Service Deployment"
We’ve discussed this draft a number of times. In my opinion, it
seems like a
useful mechanism if one envisions a generalized API between OSPF
and user
and third-party applications to convey application-specific
information
learned from other OSPF routers. In many respects, this has already
been
envisioned for OSPF Node Tags. Please indicate your opinion on this
draft
before March 31st, 2016.
Thanks,
Acee
_______________________________________________
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
