My concern is that we would be introducing a new feature which won't work with some existing feature!. Could be a pain for operators who already use forwarding address for some optimization and want to use network hiding for security.
Rgds Shraddha -----Original Message----- From: Acee Lindem [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, February 09, 2012 8:43 PM To: Shraddha Hegde Cc: OSPF List Subject: Re: [OSPF] OSPF WG Last Call for "Hiding Transit-only Networks in OSPF " - <draft-ietf-ospf-prefix-hiding-02.txt> Hi Shraddha, You raise a very good point. On Feb 9, 2012, at 4:33 AM, Shraddha Hegde wrote: > In case of p2mp networks, type 3 links used to describe the interface > address is omitted to hide the network. > > This can cause problems in the next hop calculation in certain cases and in > my opinion it is better to avoid installing a certain route (as done in case > of broadcast networks in this draft) rather than completely omitting it. > > Consider a scenario when p2mp interfaces are configured in the NSSA area. > > A---------B > | > ------C > > A,B and C are connected over a p2mp network configured in NSSA area. > B & C are ASBRs importing external routes. B & C will have to include > forwarding address corresponding to interface address when they advertise > external LSA to A. > We cannot hide the p2mp network in the above scenario as type 3 stub-links > are completely omitted, we cannot resolve the forwarding address for the > external LSAs originated by B & C. I think there should just be a general statement that a forwarding address MUST not be advertised when prefix-hiding is configured on the next-hop interface. However, we'll see what the authors have to say. Thanks, Acee > > Rgds > Shraddha > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf > Of Acee Lindem > Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2012 10:37 PM > Cc: OSPF List > Subject: [OSPF] OSPF WG Last Call for "Hiding Transit-only Networks in > OSPF " - <draft-ietf-ospf-prefix-hiding-02.txt> > > As I have heard no objections, I'm beginning the 2 week OSPF Working Group > last call for draft-ietf-ospf-prefix-hiding-02.txt. > Please review the draft and post your last call comments prior to 12:00 AM > PDT on February 23nd, 2012. > Here is a URL for your convenience: > > http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-ospf-prefix-hiding-02.txt > > Thanks, > Acee > > On Jan 26, 2012, at 11:19 AM, Acee Lindem wrote: > >> As WG co-chair, I have reviewed this document and believe it is ready for >> OSPF WG last call. Any other opinions? >> There is at least one implementation. Here is a URL for you convenience: >> >> http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-ospf-prefix-hiding-01.txt >> >> There is an IPR disclosure on this draft: >> >> http://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/1423/ >> >> I will start WG last call next week if I don't hear any objections. >> >> 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
