Hi Tony, The authors will cover this in the next revision. Based on discussions, the usage of link-scoped TE LSAs is limited to unnumbered point-to-point links. If this is the case, the backward compatibility is much simpler than the other discussions we’ve been having.
Thanks, Acee From: prz <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Date: Friday, May 5, 2017 at 11:09 AM To: Acee Lindem <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Cc: OSPF WG List <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Subject: Re: [OSPF] WG Adoption Poll for "OSPF LLS Extensions for Local Interface ID Advertisement" Not sure it made it from my other address so rtx to the list ... A conditional against here ... I am fine with adoption if I see a version that spells the detailed behavior and especially interactions between RFC4302 and this draft in a detailed section, i.e. both on, RFC4302 gets configured/unconfigured, are the LLS extensions advertised on every hello or just until a specific state (like ISIS padding thingies) and so on ... I'd rather have this now than a LC discussion ... The idea is deceptively simple but it is a redundant mechanism and those always end causing inter-op problems unless cleanly spelled out ... --- tony On Thu, 4 May 2017 20:27:27 +0000, "Acee Lindem (acee)" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: Speaking as a WG member: I believe we should move forward with this simple mechanism for OSPFv2 neighbors to learn each other’s interface ID. Both IS-IS and, more importantly, OSPFv3 learn the interface ID via their respective hello mechanisms. Just because one implementation has repurposed the Generalized MPL (GMPL) extensions described in RFC 4302 for interface ID learning is not a reason to preclude using the more generally accepted IGP Hello packet learning. Additionally, there is the undesirable side effect of TE LSAs resulting in inclusion in the TE topology for multiple implementations. Finally, when the right technical direction is clear and there is rough consensus, the OSPF WG MUST NOT be obstructed. Thanks, Acee From: Acee Lindem <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Date: Thursday, May 4, 2017 at 2:45 PM To: OSPF WG List <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Subject: WG Adoption Poll for "OSPF LLS Extensions for Local Interface ID Advertisement" This draft was presented in Chicago and there was acknowledgment that a solution was needed. The authors have asked for WG adoption and we are now doing a WG adoption poll. Please indicate your support or objection by May 20th, 2017. Thanks, Acee
_______________________________________________ OSPF mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf
