Hi Lou,
My main comment is on section 5 (6 is your draft). The draft adds
mandatory reachability checking for AS scoped opaque LSAs.
If we add mandatory reachability checking, it should be for all
opaque types rather reading like the constraint is unique to AS scoped
opaque LSAs (type 11s).
I also think we should put the question as to whether the checking
should be madatory or relaxed a bit to allow an application to check
less frequently if the opaque data is stale.
Detailed comments:
Section 2, third paragraph - "aligned" rather than "qaligned".
Section 3, "Section 7" rather than "Section 7."
Section 3.1 - Type 9 LSA - "keep" rather than "keepk". I believe we
should discard a link-local LSA received from a
neighbor not
on the interface (text similiar to type 11).
Section 3.1, Since the area ID is not in the LSA header, the bullet on
area flooding is confusing. It should say something
to the
effect of only flooding type 10 LSAs out interfaces
in the
LSA's associated area. I don't care if it said this
in RFC 2370
and everyone knew what it implied.
Section 3.1, 2nd to last paragraph: "An opaque" rather than "a opaque".
Swap sections 5 and 6 since "inter-area" is more the "meat" of the draft.
In fact, if the opaque MIB objects are all covered in the new MIB, we can
probably remove the "management section".
Section 6 (will be 5)
5. Opaque LSA Validation
Opaque LSAs are not processed during the SPF calculation as described in
section 16 of [OSPF]. However, they are subject to the same reachability
constraints as the base LSA types. This implies that originating router
MUST be reachable for the advertised application specific data to be
considered valid.
5.1 Inter-Area Considerations
......
Section 5.1
Type-9 opaque LSAs and type-10 opaque LSAs do not have this problem
as a receiving router can detect an a loss of reachability through
the intra-area
SPF calculation.
Section 5.1
To enable OSPF routers in remote areas to check availability of the
originator of link-state type 11 opaque LSAs, the orignators of
type-11 opaque LSAs are considered Autonomous System Border
Routers (ASBRs) and will advertise themselves as such.
Section 5.1 - Remove "It is important to note that this solution MUST
NOT ..."
This is redundant.
Remove numbered items (1) and (2), these actions ARE NOT new to
opaque LSAs. Make (3) a separate paragraph rather than numbered
item.
Section 10.1 - Correct NSSA reference to RFC 3101.
Section 12.1 - Add D and MT bits with informative references to [RFC 4576]
and the [OSPF-MT] drafts. "All eight bit ..." rather than "Six bits..".
General - Replace "stub area" with "stub or NSSA areas".
Thanks,
Acee
_______________________________________________
OSPF mailing list
[email protected]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf
