[Lsr] LSR IETF 113 Agenda Published

Hi, The LSR agenda for IETF 113 has been published: https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/113/session/lsr Please let us know if you have any comments. Thanks, Yingzhen___ Lsr mailing list

Re: [Lsr] OSPF Monitor Node (draft-retana-lsr-ospf-monitor-node)

Hi Aijun, From: Aijun Wang Date: Monday, March 7, 2022 at 9:41 PM To: Acee Lindem , Robert Raszuk , 'Alvaro Retana' Cc: 'Lin Han' , "lsr@ietf.org" Subject: RE: [Lsr] OSPF Monitor Node (draft-retana-lsr-ospf-monitor-node) Hi, Acee: The R-bit/H-bit is used to divert the transit traffic, but

Re: [Lsr] OSPF Monitor Node (draft-retana-lsr-ospf-monitor-node)

Hi, Acee: The R-bit/H-bit is used to divert the transit traffic, but there still be traffic to the advertising node itself. It seems that the monitor node just want to the topology information from the network, but not any other forwarding traffic? In my POV, these special nodes are all

Re: [Lsr] OSPF Monitor Node (draft-retana-lsr-ospf-monitor-node)

Speaking as WG member: I was going to wait to comment on this due to more important tasks but it appears the discussion is under way. This requirement surfaced about 25-30 years back. In fact, there was one SP (who will remain anonymous) that actually had a OSPF monitoring function that kept

Re: [Lsr] OSPF Monitor Node (draft-retana-lsr-ospf-monitor-node)

Hi Alvaro, Practically speaking, yes Monitor nodes are cool to have. But so are the Controller nodes. The difference would be that in both cases there is no topology information being injected by such nodes, however in the latter case the additional information could be injected. Such

[Lsr] OSPF Monitor Node (draft-retana-lsr-ospf-monitor-node)

Hi! Lin and I just published a draft that specifies mechanisms for an active OSPF monitor: one that can be authenticated into the network but does not affect the topology.  This mechanism contrasts to a passive monitor: listen-only node on a multiaccess link. The primary prompt for this