Hi Ketan, With all the WG documents we have, I wouldn’t put this as a high priority. Rather, I’d like to focus on getting OSPFv3 Extended LSAs published and encouraging wider implementation.
Thanks, Acee On 7/27/17, 10:20 PM, "Ketan Talaulikar (ketant)" <[email protected]> wrote: >Hi Acee/WG, > >I would like to bring up that this draft does not cover the application >to Traffic Engineering applications (RSVP-TE/SR-TE). It only talks about >and covers the traditional OSPF SPF computation. For truly achieving the >objective, I believe this draft should also cover TE and all other types >of computations which would result in transit traffic going through the >node. > >I realized that TE applicability was never specified explicitly even for >RFC6987/RFC3137 and very likely that implementations might have adopted >different mechanisms in applying the max-metric to TE as well that can >cause interop issues. Perhaps that warrants a bis? > >Thanks, >Ketan > >-----Original Message----- >From: OSPF [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Acee Lindem (acee) >Sent: 15 June 2017 01:19 >To: OSPF WG List <[email protected]> >Subject: [OSPF] FW: I-D Action: draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv2-hbit-03.txt > >The question of OSPFv2 complete blocking of transit routing support >(similar to OSPFv3) seems to come up every year or so. I’d like to WG last >call this document. Does anyone see any issues? >Thanks, >Acee > >On 6/14/17, 12:44 PM, "OSPF on behalf of [email protected]" ><[email protected] on behalf of [email protected]> wrote: > >> >>A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts >>directories. >>This draft is a work item of the Open Shortest Path First IGP of the >>IETF. >> >> Title : H-bit Support for OSPFv2 >> Authors : Keyur Patel >> Padma Pillay-Esnault >> Manish Bhardwaj >> Serpil Bayraktar >> Filename : draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv2-hbit-03.txt >> Pages : 8 >> Date : 2017-06-14 >> >>Abstract: >> OSPFv3 defines an option field for router-LSAs known as a R-bit in >> RFC5340. If the R-bit is clear, an OSPFv3 router can participate in >> OSPF topology distribution without acting as a forwarder to forward >> the transit traffic. In such cases, an OSPF router would only accept >> traffic intended for local delivery. This draft defines R-bit >> functionality for OSPFv2 defined in RFC2328. >> >> >>The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: >>https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv2-hbit/ >> >>There are also htmlized versions available at: >>https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv2-hbit-03 >>https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv2-hbit-03 >> >>A diff from the previous version is available at: >>https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv2-hbit-03 >> >> >>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. >> >>Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: >>ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ >> >>_______________________________________________ >>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
