Re: [OSPF] OSPFv3 Autoconfiguration - draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-autoconfig-05.txt

So, I am one person who raised this concern to Acee - but the proposal outlined by Acee is not what I had in mind. There is no need to use "uptime" or to invent some unusual exchange of LSAs prior to Exchange state. Also, in regards to Curtis's comment - it is not DOS attacks that I am trying t

Re: [OSPF] OSPFv3 Autoconfiguration - draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-autoconfig-05.txt

whether it has a duplicate router-id or not and if so it can assign itself a new router-id without affecting forwarding behavior at all. Les > -Original Message- > From: OSPF [mailto:ospf-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Les Ginsberg > (ginsberg) > Sent: Friday, February 07, 2

Re: [OSPF] OSPFv3 Autoconfiguration - draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-autoconfig-05.txt

ill be many different > implementations some of them are going to be subpar. And bad > implementation may make probability of RID conflict close to 1. > Is this what you are worried about? > > Anton > > > On 02/07/2014 09:31 AM, Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) wrote: > > S

Re: [OSPF] OSPFv3 Autoconfiguration - draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-autoconfig-05.txt

gineering for a case which is admittedly very unlikely to occur - we are adding a modest extension to make our solution less disruptive. Les > -Original Message- > From: Curtis Villamizar [mailto:cur...@ipv6.occnc.com] > Sent: Friday, February 07, 2014 9:22 AM > To: Le

Re: [OSPF] OSPFv3 Autoconfiguration - draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-autoconfig-05.txt

Curtis - > -Original Message- > From: Curtis Villamizar [mailto:cur...@ipv6.occnc.com] > Sent: Saturday, February 08, 2014 7:30 AM > To: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) > Cc: cur...@ipv6.occnc.com; Acee Lindem; OSPF List > Subject: Re: [OSPF] OSPFv3 Autoconfiguration - draf

Re: [OSPF] OSPFv3 Autoconfiguration - draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-autoconfig-05.txt

izar [mailto:cur...@ipv6.occnc.com] > Sent: Sunday, February 09, 2014 12:39 PM > To: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) > Cc: cur...@ipv6.occnc.com; Acee Lindem; OSPF List > Subject: Re: [OSPF] OSPFv3 Autoconfiguration - draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3- > autoconfig-05.txt > > > Les, > &g

Re: [OSPF] OSPFv3 Autoconfiguration - draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-autoconfig-05.txt

Hopefully what I have provided makes that clear. Les > -Original Message- > From: Acee Lindem [mailto:a...@lindem.com] > Sent: Monday, February 10, 2014 2:55 PM > Cc: cur...@ipv6.occnc.com; Les Ginsberg (ginsberg); OSPF List > Subject: Re: [OSPF] OSPFv3 Autoconfiguration - dr

Re: [OSPF] OSPFv3 Autoconfiguration - draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-autoconfig-05.txt

Curtis - Inline... > -Original Message- > From: Curtis Villamizar [mailto:cur...@ipv6.occnc.com] > Sent: Monday, February 10, 2014 12:03 PM > To: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) > Cc: cur...@ipv6.occnc.com; Acee Lindem; OSPF List > Subject: Re: [OSPF] OSPFv3 Autoconfiguration

Re: [OSPF] [Isis-wg] Upcoming IETF Last Call on draft-ietf-mpls-extended-admin-group

(Resending w corrected OSPF/CCAMP WG addresses) Loa - In reading Section 2.3.1 the text seems contradictory: If a node advertises both AG and EAG then the first 32 bits of the EAG MUST be identical to the advertised AG. If a receiving node notices that the AG differs from the first 32 bi

Re: [OSPF] [sunset4] IPv6 router IDs

Xiaohu – RFC 5316 already has defined this – see sub-TLVs 11 and 12. If the concern is that these are defined as TE specific it would be better to make an explicit statement to allow these to be used for purposes other than TE as has been done in RFC 5305 and RFC 6119 than to define a duplicate

Re: [OSPF] OSPFv2 Segment Routing Draft WG Document Acceptance Poll

Support Les From: OSPF [mailto:ospf-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Acee Lindem Sent: Monday, June 09, 2014 12:40 PM To: OSPF - OSPF WG List Subject: [OSPF] OSPFv2 Segment Routing Draft WG Document Acceptance Poll Given the progress made in the SRING WG on problem statement and use caseWG doc

Re: [OSPF] New Version Notification for draft-psenak-ospf-segment-routing-ospfv3-extension-02.txt

Support. Les > -Original Message- > From: OSPF [mailto:ospf-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Acee Lindem > Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2014 8:45 AM > Cc: OSPF List > Subject: Re: [OSPF] New Version Notification for draft-psenak-ospf- > segment-routing-ospfv3-extension-02.txt > > Hi, > >

Re: [OSPF] Poll for WG Adoption of draft-bhatia-ospf-sbfd-discriminator

Support. Les From: OSPF [mailto:ospf-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Acee Lindem (acee) Sent: Monday, August 25, 2014 2:30 PM To: ospf@ietf.org Subject: [OSPF] Poll for WG Adoption of draft-bhatia-ospf-sbfd-discriminator The BFD WG has adopted all the seamless BFD base documents as WG document

Re: [OSPF] Poll for WG adoption of draft-hegde-ospf-node-admin-tag

I support making this draft a WG item - but I do think a much more complete discussion regarding the tradeoffs between using node tags vs capability identifiers needs to be included - if for no other reason than if/when this draft were to become an RFC we would have two mechanisms and it is not

Re: [OSPF] Poll for WG adoption of draft-xu-ospf-routable-ip-address

Support. Les From: OSPF [mailto:ospf-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Abhay Roy (akr) Sent: Monday, August 25, 2014 12:09 PM To: ospf@ietf.org Subject: [OSPF] Poll for WG adoption of draft-xu-ospf-routable-ip-address This is a simple document with a few strong drivers (ELC and S-BFD) requiring

Re: [OSPF] New Version Notification for draft-liang-ospf-flowspec-extensions-01.txt

Adding the IS-IS WG since there is an equivalent draft for IS-IS submitted by the same authors. "IF" this were something the respective WGs decide the protocol should support, then running a separate instance of the protocol so that the flowspec advertisements can be isolated from the primary

[OSPF] WG Draft QA review of draft-ietf-ospf-routable-ip-address-00

Hello, I have been selected as the Routing Directorate QA reviewer for draft-ietf-ospf-routable-ip-address-00. The Routing Directorate QA reviews are intended to be a support to improve the quality of RTG Area documents as they pass through the IETF process. This is the QA review just afte

Re: [OSPF] OSPF WG Poll for adoption of "Yang Data Model for OSPF Protocol" (resent in plan text mode)

Support. Les -Original Message- From: OSPF [mailto:ospf-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Acee Lindem (acee) Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2014 4:57 PM To: OSPF WG List Subject: [OSPF] OSPF WG Poll for adoption of "Yang Data Model for OSPF Protocol" (resent in plan text mode) We¹ve been w

Re: [OSPF] [Isis-wg] Mail regarding draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions

Shraddha - When performing a best path calculation whether a given link is in the set of best paths (to be protectedED) or not (could be used as a protectING path) is a function of the topology - not the link. If there is a topology change it is quite likely that a given link will change from

Re: [OSPF] [Isis-wg] Mail regarding draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions

ronger negative message - not only do I think the flag is not useful - I think it does not achieve the goal Shraddha has in mind. Les -Original Message- From: Peter Psenak (ppsenak) Sent: Friday, January 02, 2015 12:18 AM To: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg); Shraddha Hegde; draft-ietf-ospf-s

Re: [OSPF] [Isis-wg] Mail regarding draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions

s the links which meet the constraints of that class of service. Identifying a particular prefix as protected or unprotected won't achieve that. Les -Original Message- From: Shraddha Hegde [mailto:shrad...@juniper.net] Sent: Friday, January 02, 2015 10:54 AM To: Les Ginsberg

Re: [OSPF] [Isis-wg] Mail regarding draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions

w a node-sid - which is what this discussion has been about. Les -Original Message- From: Pushpasis Sarkar [mailto:psar...@juniper.net] Sent: Sunday, January 04, 2015 8:51 AM To: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg); Shraddha Hegde; Peter Psenak (ppsenak); draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-ex

Re: [OSPF] [Isis-wg] Mail regarding draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions

pose you have in mind. Les -Original Message- From: Pushpasis Sarkar [mailto:psar...@juniper.net] Sent: Sunday, January 04, 2015 8:34 PM To: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg); Shraddha Hegde; Peter Psenak (ppsenak); draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensi...@tools.ietf.org; draft-ietf-isis-segment-rou

Re: [OSPF] [Isis-wg] Mail regarding draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions

Shraddha - Inline. -Original Message- From: Shraddha Hegde [mailto:shrad...@juniper.net] Sent: Sunday, January 04, 2015 9:27 PM To: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg); Pushpasis Sarkar; Peter Psenak (ppsenak); draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensi...@tools.ietf.org; draft-ietf-isis-segment

Re: [OSPF] [Isis-wg] Mail regarding draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions

Pushpasis - Inline. -Original Message- From: Pushpasis Sarkar [mailto:psar...@juniper.net] Sent: Sunday, January 04, 2015 10:13 PM To: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg); Shraddha Hegde; Peter Psenak (ppsenak); draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensi...@tools.ietf.org; draft-ietf-isis-segment

Re: [OSPF] [Isis-wg] Mail regarding draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions

=> less traffic interruption. Les -Original Message- From: Shraddha Hegde [mailto:shrad...@juniper.net] Sent: Monday, January 05, 2015 12:49 AM To: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg); Pushpasis Sarkar; Peter Psenak (ppsenak); draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensi...@tools.ietf.org; draft-i

[OSPF] Comments on draft-ietf-ospf-node-admin-tag-00

I have some comments in this draft. Introduction I think the last sentence should be removed. It is providing an example of a use case - and as such is more appropriate for Section 5. Also, node-tags are a property of the node - not of the routing protocol used to advertise th

Re: [OSPF] How to handle multiple overlapping SRGB ranges

Bruno - I am thinking that the behavior you prefer below requires further specification. Consider an example. We receive the following set of SRGB ranges: 2-22000 21000-24000 26000-28000 In such a case no one would consider using any of the ranges because the first two overlap - and using

Re: [OSPF] OSPF GR and BFD operability

https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc5882.txt Section 4.3 is relevant here. Les From: OSPF [mailto:ospf-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Acee Lindem (acee) Sent: Tuesday, August 25, 2015 7:54 AM To: Anil Raj; OSPF WG List Subject: Re: [

Re: [OSPF] OSPF GR and BFD operability

need to treat it as a real failure. Les From: Anil Raj [mailto:anilra...@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, August 25, 2015 8:51 AM To: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) Cc: Acee Lindem (acee); OSPF WG List Subject: Re: [OSPF] OSPF GR and BFD operability Thanks Acess, Les. So ideally it is recommended to tear

Re: [OSPF] OSPF Link Overload - draft-hegde-ospf-link-overload-01

In the discussion of this document thus far two major concerns have been expressed: 1)Advertising information which is of use only to the neighbor in an advertisement which is area scoped is wrong 2)The scope of the problem to be addressed is not yet well defined. In particular whether TE attr

Re: [OSPF] OSPF Link Overload - draft-hegde-ospf-link-overload-01

Shraddha - The draft currently states that when overload is signaled that the neighbors on both ends of the link are supposed to advertise max-metric. So it is not clear to me why you are arguing that you should not change the metric. Do you have a revision of the draft which no longer mandate

Re: [OSPF] OSPF Link Overload - draft-hegde-ospf-link-overload-01

Shraddha - > -Original Message- > From: Shraddha Hegde [mailto:shrad...@juniper.net] > Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2015 8:05 PM > To: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg); Pushpasis Sarkar; Acee Lindem (acee) > Cc: Hannes Gredler; OSPF WG List; Mohan Nanduri; Jalil, Luay > Subj

Re: [OSPF] H-bit Support for OSPFv2 - draft-keyupate-ospf-ospfv2-hbit-01 WG Document Adoption Poll

Support - similar functionality has proven to be useful in both IS-IS and OSPFv3. Les > -Original Message- > From: OSPF [mailto:ospf-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Acee Lindem > (acee) > Sent: Saturday, September 26, 2015 12:05 PM > To: OSPF WG List > Subject: [OSPF] H-bit Support for

Re: [OSPF] OSPF Operator-Defined TLVs (https://www.ietf.org/id/draft-chunduri-ospf-operator-defined-tlvs-01.txt)

I have two major issues w the draft as it currently stands: 1)It seems to depend upon clairvoyance for interoperability since it claims that no standardization of the format of the values associated w an operator defined TLV is necessary. Note that here I am NOT talking about what specific cod

Re: [OSPF] OSPF Operator-Defined TLVs (https://www.ietf.org/id/draft-chunduri-ospf-operator-defined-tlvs-01.txt)

etely non-functional. The specification is certainly not an OSPF specification - but there clearly needs to be one. Les > -Original Message- > From: mohamed.boucad...@orange.com > [mailto:mohamed.boucad...@orange.com] > Sent: Tuesday, October 27, 2015 12:08 AM > To: L

Re: [OSPF] More Comments on OSPF S-BFD Discriminator

Acee – While I can understand your struggle as to how to select one S-BFD discriminator from multiple advertised by a given node, I do not understand why you believe the IGPs have a responsibility to address this issue. At the time both the OSPF and IS-IS S-BFD drafts were first being written t

Re: [OSPF] More Comments on OSPF S-BFD Discriminator

Acee - From: Acee Lindem (acee) Sent: Monday, November 09, 2015 4:08 PM To: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg); Manav Bhatia Cc: draft-ietf-ospf-sbfd-discrimina...@ietf.org; OSPF WG List Subject: Re: [OSPF] More Comments on OSPF S-BFD Discriminator Hi Les, From: "Les Ginsberg (ginsberg)" ma

Re: [OSPF] More Comments on OSPF S-BFD Discriminator

but the IS-IS Draft still has this state: “Has a DISCUSS. Has enough positions to pass once DISCUSS positions are resolved.” ??? Les From: Acee Lindem (acee) Sent: Friday, February 05, 2016 5:00 AM To: Carlos Pignataro (cpignata); Manav Bhatia Cc: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg); draft-ietf-ospf

Re: [OSPF] More Comments on OSPF S-BFD Discriminator

move forward as is. Les From: Acee Lindem (acee) Sent: Friday, February 05, 2016 7:52 AM To: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg); Carlos Pignataro (cpignata); Manav Bhatia Cc: draft-ietf-ospf-sbfd-discrimina...@ietf.org; OSPF WG List; isis...@ietf.org list; rtg-...@ietf.org Subject: Re: [OSPF] More Comments

Re: [OSPF] WG Adoption Poll for "Using Operator-defined TLVs for Agile Service Deployment"

My opinion of the draft has not changed. It is defining a way to utilize OSPF to send application information - which is not something the protocol should be used to do. Further, it leaves definition of the new codepoints and formats of the information advertised completely unspecified - the lat

Re: [OSPF] WG Adoption Poll for "Using Operator-defined TLVs for Agile Service Deployment"

Uma - > -Original Message- > From: Uma Chunduri [mailto:uma.chund...@ericsson.com] > Sent: Thursday, April 07, 2016 8:03 PM > To: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg); Acee Lindem (acee); OSPF WG List > Subject: RE: WG Adoption Poll for "Using Operator-defined TLVs for Agile

Re: [OSPF] draft-ppsenak-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse-01 for IS-IS?

No - there isn't an IS-IS equivalent - though I agree that conceptually the same arguments (for and against) apply to both protocols. For my part I am happy to let the discussion continue to a conclusion in OSPF WG before deciding what should be done in IS-IS. Les From: OSPF [mailto:ospf-b

Re: [OSPF] [RTG-DIR] Rtg Dir review of draft-ietf-ospf-sbfd-discriminator-04.txt

Adrian – As an interested bystander (given I am co-author on the companion IS-IS S-BFD draft) I share the concerns expressed by Carlos and Manav. Churning S-BFD discriminator assignments is about as likely as churning IP/IPv6 address assignments on a node – it is simply not something that any d

Re: [OSPF] [RTG-DIR] Rtg Dir review of draft-ietf-ospf-sbfd-discriminator-04.txt

Sorry, while I respect you both I don’t agree. Base protocol specifications have controls on the rate of generation of LSAs – those apply here as they do to all protocol advertisements. A “BFD Reflector” is defined in S-BFD Base draft as: “SBFDReflector - an S-BFD session on a network node that

Re: [OSPF] Solicit feedbacks on draft-dong-ospf-maxage-flush-problem-statement

Jie - The draft says (Section 2): "Since cryptographic authentication is executed at the OSPF packet level, it can only protect the assembled LSU packet for one hop and does not provide any additional protection for the corruption of LS age field." But as authentication is calculated at

Re: [OSPF] Solicit feedbacks on draft-dong-ospf-maxage-flush-problem-statement

wei.com] Sent: Sunday, July 31, 2016 11:48 PM To: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg); ospf@ietf.org Cc: Zhangxudong (zhangxudong, VRP); lizhenqi...@chinamobile.com Subject: RE: [OSPF] Solicit feedbacks on draft-dong-ospf-maxage-flush-problem-statement Hi Les, Thanks for your comments. OSPF packet level checks

Re: [OSPF] Solicit feedbacks on draft-dong-ospf-maxage-flush-problem-statement

Jie - From: Dongjie (Jimmy) [mailto:jie.d...@huawei.com] Sent: Monday, August 01, 2016 1:44 AM To: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg); ospf@ietf.org Cc: Zhangxudong (zhangxudong, VRP); lizhenqi...@chinamobile.com Subject: RE: [OSPF] Solicit feedbacks on draft-dong-ospf-maxage-flush-problem-statement Hi

Re: [OSPF] Solicit feedbacks on draft-dong-ospf-maxage-flush-problem-statement

#x27;t see much ROI here. Les From: Dongjie (Jimmy) [mailto:jie.d...@huawei.com] Sent: Monday, August 01, 2016 9:43 PM To: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg); ospf@ietf.org Cc: Zhangxudong (zhangxudong, VRP); lizhenqi...@chinamobile.com Subject: RE: [OSPF] Solicit feedbacks on draft-dong-ospf-maxage-flus

Re: [OSPF] Solicit feedbacks on draft-dong-ospf-maxage-flush-problem-statement

From: Dongjie (Jimmy) [mailto:jie.d...@huawei.com] Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2016 9:24 PM To: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg); ospf@ietf.org Cc: Zhangxudong (zhangxudong, VRP); lizhenqi...@chinamobile.com Subject: RE: [OSPF] Solicit feedbacks on draft-dong-ospf-maxage-flush-problem-statement Hi Les

Re: [OSPF] Solicit feedbacks on draft-dong-ospf-maxage-flush-problem-statement

: Tuesday, August 16, 2016 6:16 AM To: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg); ospf@ietf.org Cc: Zhangxudong (zhangxudong, VRP); lizhenqi...@chinamobile.com Subject: RE: [OSPF] Solicit feedbacks on draft-dong-ospf-maxage-flush-problem-statement Hi Les, It seems that after these days discussion, now we are clear

Re: [OSPF] Solicit feedbacks on draft-dong-ospf-maxage-flush-problem-statement

Jie - My opinion is: Problem statement draft should NOT move forward. There is no problem which we intend to solve. Les From: Dongjie (Jimmy) [mailto:jie.d...@huawei.com] Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2016 2:45 AM To: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg); ospf@ietf.org Cc: Zhangxudong (zhangxudong, VRP

Re: [OSPF] OSPFv2 SR draft

Chris/Peter - > -Original Message- > From: OSPF [mailto:ospf-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Peter Psenak > (ppsenak) > Sent: Thursday, August 25, 2016 1:45 AM > To: Chris Bowers; OSPF List > Subject: Re: [OSPF] OSPFv2 SR draft > > Hi Chris, > > On 24/08/16 20:31 , Chris Bowers wrote: > >

Re: [OSPF] WG Adoption Poll for "Signaling MSD (Maximum SID Depth) using OSPF"

I have read the draft and believe the simple protocol extension advertises information which is useful. I support WG adoption. Les From: OSPF [mailto:ospf-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Acee Lindem (acee) Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2016 11:57 AM To: OSPF WG List Subject: [OSPF] WG Adoption

Re: [OSPF] WG Adoption Poll for draft-ppsenak-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse

Support adoption as co-author. I am not aware of any relevant IPR. Les > -Original Message- > From: OSPF [mailto:ospf-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Abhay Roy (akr) > Sent: Tuesday, October 25, 2016 10:28 PM > To: ospf@ietf.org; draft-ppsenak-ospf-te-link-attr-re...@tools.ietf.org >

Re: [OSPF] WG Adoption Poll for draft-ppsenak-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse

Folks – I am adding the IS-IS WG to this thread because the issues discussed below apply equally to IS-IS. There is currently one draft in IS-IS: https://www.ietf.org/id/draft-hegde-isis-advertising-te-protocols-01.txt which has the same shortcomings as its OSPF counterpart: https://www.ietf

[OSPF] Moving Forward with link attribute advertisement extensions

There is general agreement that protocol extensions are required to address new requirements related to the use of link attributes historically associated only with RSVP-TE. That is why we have two drafts in OSPF on the subject: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ppsenak-ospf-te-link-att

Re: [OSPF] draft-ppsenak-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse-03

Stephane - > -Original Message- > From: OSPF [mailto:ospf-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of > stephane.litkow...@orange.com > Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2016 10:53 PM > To: Peter Psenak (ppsenak); DECRAENE Bruno IMT/OLN > Cc: OSPF WG List; draft-ppsenak-ospf-te-link-attr-re...@tools.ietf.o

Re: [OSPF] Working group last call on draft-ietf-mpls-residence-time

Loa - The change for IS-IS encoding to utilize a sub-TLV of TLV 22 et al to advertise RTM capability is a better solution than the previous proposal and this has my support. However, there are some details as regards the proposed sub-TLV that should be revised. 1)Rather than use a fixed 1

Re: [OSPF] Working group last call on draft-ietf-mpls-residence-time

: Greg Mirsky [mailto:gregimir...@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, January 30, 2017 10:36 PM To: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) Cc: Loa Andersson; m...@ietf.org; TEAS WG; ospf@ietf.org; Isis-wg; ospf-cha...@ietf.org; draft-ietf-mpls-residence-t...@tools.ietf.org; TEAS WG Chairs; isis-cha...@ietf.org; mpls-cha

Re: [OSPF] Working group last call on draft-ietf-mpls-residence-time

. Les From: Greg Mirsky [mailto:gregimir...@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, January 30, 2017 11:43 PM To: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) Cc: Loa Andersson; m...@ietf.org; TEAS WG; ospf@ietf.org; Isis-wg; ospf-cha...@ietf.org; draft-ietf-mpls-residence-t...@tools.ietf.org; TEAS WG Chairs; isis-cha...@ietf.org

Re: [OSPF] Working group last call on draft-ietf-mpls-residence-time

Greg – Looks good. Les From: Greg Mirsky [mailto:gregimir...@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2017 8:06 AM To: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) Cc: Loa Andersson; m...@ietf.org; TEAS WG; ospf@ietf.org; Isis-wg; ospf-cha...@ietf.org; draft-ietf-mpls-residence-t...@tools.ietf.org; TEAS WG Chairs

Re: [OSPF] [mpls] Working group last call on draft-ietf-mpls-residence-time

Greg – This looks fine to me. Thanx for all the quick revisions. Les From: Greg Mirsky [mailto:gregimir...@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2017 7:19 PM To: Uma Chunduri Cc: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg); m...@ietf.org; isis-cha...@ietf.org; Isis-wg; draft-ietf-mpls-residence-t

[OSPF] FW: New Version Notification for draft-ginsberg-isis-te-app-00.txt

...@ietf.org] Sent: Monday, February 27, 2017 8:23 AM To: Stefano Previdi (sprevidi); Wim Henderickx; Peter Psenak (ppsenak); Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) Subject: New Version Notification for draft-ginsberg-isis-te-app-00.txt A new version of I-D, draft-ginsberg-isis-te-app-00.txt has been successfully

Re: [OSPF] New Version Notification for draft-bryant-rtgwg-param-sync-01.txt

Stewart - This draft discusses two things: 1)You propose to advertise "convergence time" so that routers utilizing a form of FRR can determine when it is safe to start utilizing the post convergence path. All this requires is advertisement of a value and definition of how routers in the networ

Re: [OSPF] [Isis-wg] New Version Notification for draft-bryant-rtgwg-param-sync-01.txt

From: Isis-wg [mailto:isis-wg-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Alia Atlas Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2017 7:43 PM To: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) Cc: isis...@ietf.org; rtgwg-cha...@ietf.org; internet-dra...@ietf.org; ospf@ietf.org; rt...@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Isis-wg] New Version Notification for

Re: [OSPF] [Isis-wg] New Version Notification for draft-bryant-rtgwg-param-sync-01.txt

Alia - From: Alia Atlas [mailto:akat...@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 01, 2017 8:33 AM To: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) Cc: OSPF List; isis...@ietf.org; rtgwg-cha...@ietf.org; rt...@ietf.org Subject: RE: [Isis-wg] New Version Notification for draft-bryant-rtgwg-param-sync-01.txt On Feb 28, 2017

[OSPF] FW: New Version Notification for draft-ginsberg-isis-te-app-00.txt

solutions. Les -Original Message- From: internet-dra...@ietf.org [mailto:internet-dra...@ietf.org] Sent: Monday, February 27, 2017 8:23 AM To: Stefano Previdi (sprevidi); Wim Henderickx; Peter Psenak (ppsenak); Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) Subject: New Version Notification for draft-ginsberg

Re: [OSPF] draft-ppsenak-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse

Alia (and everyone) – Let’s focus on the relevant questions. 1)Disruption to existing deployments draft-ppsenak-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse is non-disruptive i.e. legacy systems are not impacted draft-hegde-ospf-advertising-te-protocols is disruptive – all legacy routers have to have additional c

Re: [OSPF] [Isis-wg] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC5309 (5007)

Addresses belonging to the assigned subnet.” Les From: Acee Lindem (acee) Sent: Thursday, May 04, 2017 7:20 AM To: Alexander Vainshtein; Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) Cc: alex.zi...@alcatel-lucent.com; isis...@ietf.org; db3...@att.com; cho...@chopps.org; RFC Errata System; OSPF WG List Subject: Re

Re: [OSPF] [Isis-wg] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC5309 (5007)

Acee - From: Acee Lindem (acee) Sent: Thursday, May 04, 2017 8:20 AM To: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg); Alexander Vainshtein Cc: alex.zi...@alcatel-lucent.com; isis...@ietf.org; db3...@att.com; cho...@chopps.org; RFC Errata System; OSPF WG List Subject: Re: [Isis-wg] [Technical Errata Reported

Re: [OSPF] WG Adoption Poll for "OSPF LLS Extensions for Local Interface ID Advertisement"

A strong +1 here. Acee has captured very well the compelling(sic) reasons for defining these extensions. Use of RFC 4302 extensions are only a workaround for functionality which is missing in the protocol. We need to close that gap. Les From: OSPF [mailto:ospf-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf

Re: [OSPF] WG Adoption Poll for "OSPF LLS Extensions for Local Interface ID Advertisement"

Tony – It is known that link identifiers are useful even in cases of numbered links e.g. some telemetry applications prefer to use link identifiers to identify all links (numbered and unnumbered). So I share Acee’s expectations. Les From: OSPF [mailto:ospf-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Ac

Re: [OSPF] Fwd: Last Call: (Advertising L2 Bundle Member Link Attributes in IS-IS) to Proposed Standard

Acee – Did you look at the Appendix – which has ASCII art for some example encodings? Les From: rtgwg [mailto:rtgwg-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Acee Lindem (acee) Sent: Thursday, May 11, 2017 11:58 AM To: Alia Atlas; OSPF List; rt...@ietf.org; idr@ietf. org Subject: Re: [OSPF] Fwd: Last C

Re: [OSPF] IETF OSPF YANG and BFD Configuration

Jeff - Inline. > -Original Message- > From: Rtg-bfd [mailto:rtg-bfd-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Jeffrey Haas > Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2017 7:17 AM > To: Mahesh Jethanandani > Cc: Jeffrey Haas; Reshad Rahman (rrahman); OSPF WG List; draft-ietf-ospf- > y...@ietf.org; rtg-...@ietf.org; d

Re: [OSPF] WG adoption poll for draft-ppsenak-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse

Support as co-author. Les > -Original Message- > From: OSPF [mailto:ospf-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Abhay Roy (akr) > Sent: Monday, July 03, 2017 11:37 AM > To: ospf@ietf.org > Subject: [OSPF] WG adoption poll for draft-ppsenak-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse > > We would like to kick-off

Re: [OSPF] draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment-routing-extensions

Acee - OSPF draft currently says: "The G-Flag: Group Flag. When set, the G-Flag indicates that the Adj-SID refers to a group of adjacencies (and therefore MAY be assigned to other adjacencies as well)." IS-IS draft currently says: "S-Flag. Set flag. When set, the S-Flag ind

Re: [OSPF] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions-19

In regards to > > 4. Section 3.3: > > > > 'The originating router MUST NOT advertise overlapping ranges.' > > > > How are conflicts resolved at receiver? > > SRLB sub-TLV is not used by routers running ISIS. The advertisement is only > there for the benefit of external entities such as controller

Re: [OSPF] [Isis-wg] Comments on draft-ietf-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse-01.txt and draft-ietf-isis-te-app-01.txt

Olivier - Thanx for the discussion. The authors of draft-ietf-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse-01.txt and draft-ietf-isis-te-app-01.txt are in discussions and we will resolve the discrepancies between the two drafts as regards the set of link attributes which are supported. As regards issues associated

Re: [OSPF] [Isis-wg] Comments on draft-ietf-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse-01.txt and draft-ietf-isis-te-app-01.txt

same value with all applications enabled in your network if you wish. Thanx for calling our attention to these points. Please let us know of any additional concerns . Les > -Original Message- > From: Isis-wg [mailto:isis-wg-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Les Ginsberg > (ginsberg)

Re: [OSPF] [Isis-wg] Comments on draft-ietf-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse-01.txt and draft-ietf-isis-te-app-01.txt

accomplished by using a legacy advertisement or by using the new sub-TLV. In the latter case only the RSVP-TE bit can be set. Les From: olivier.dug...@orange.com [mailto:olivier.dug...@orange.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 29, 2017 10:28 AM To: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) ; Acee Lindem (acee

Re: [OSPF] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-ospf-link-overload-11

> >Minor issues: > >I understand the WG likes using the term "overload" for a link > >being taken > >out of service. I think people will learn what we mean. I do wish > >we had > >not chosen to misuse the words in this fashion. This is much more a > >graceful-link-close ind

Re: [OSPF] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-ospf-link-overload-11

Acee - From: Acee Lindem (acee) Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2018 6:44 PM To: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) ; Joel Halpern ; gen-...@ietf.org Cc: ospf@ietf.org; i...@ietf.org; draft-ietf-ospf-link-overload@ietf.org Subject: Re: Genart last call review of draft-ietf-ospf-link-overload-11 Hi Les

Re: [OSPF] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-ospf-link-overload-11

Ketan – “maintenance” I could live with. “GIR” seems to not be generic enough. Les From: Ketan Talaulikar (ketant) Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2018 8:09 PM To: Acee Lindem (acee) ; Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) ; Joel Halpern ; gen-...@ietf.org Cc: ospf@ietf.org; i...@ietf.org; draft-ietf-ospf

Re: [OSPF] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-ospf-link-overload-11

problems may exist. It is a mistake to assume that this mechanism is always intended to be used as a precursor to link shutdown. Les From: Acee Lindem (acee) Sent: Friday, January 05, 2018 8:47 AM To: Shraddha Hegde ; Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) ; Ketan Talaulikar (ketant) ; Joel Halpern ; gen

Re: [OSPF] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-ospf-link-overload-11

pick a name which reflects how the link is to be used while it is still up. Les From: Pushpasis Sarkar [mailto:pushpasis.i...@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, January 08, 2018 9:22 AM To: Bruno Decraene Cc: Shraddha Hegde ; Acee Lindem (acee) ; Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) ; Ketan Talaulikar (ketant

Re: [OSPF] [Isis-wg] Link-State Routing WG charter

Since a charter only provides a general definition of the work that falls within the purview of the WG it requires some adjunct to keep track of the current priorities. That could be the list of milestones (which OSPF has regularly maintained – but IS-IS has not) – or it could simply be the list

Re: [OSPF] [Isis-wg] Link-State Routing WG charter

...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2018 2:33 PM To: Stewart Bryant ; Acee Lindem (acee) ; Alia Atlas Cc: OSPF List ; isis...@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Isis-wg] Link-State Routing WG charter Since a charter only provides a general definition of the work that falls

Re: [OSPF] [Isis-wg] Link-State Routing WG charter

...@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2018 4:13 PM To: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) Cc: Stewart Bryant ; Acee Lindem (acee) ; OSPF List ; isis...@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Isis-wg] Link-State Routing WG charter Hi Les, Thanks for the suggestions! I've modified the paragraph about IS-IS to read: &quo

Re: [OSPF] [Isis-wg] Link-State Routing WG charter

Stewart - From: Stewart Bryant [mailto:stewart.bry...@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2018 4:32 AM To: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) ; Acee Lindem (acee) ; Alia Atlas Cc: OSPF List ; isis...@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Isis-wg] Link-State Routing WG charter Les I agree wrt L2 Isn't an

Re: [OSPF] [Isis-wg] Link-State Routing WG charter

statement in the charter. Les From: Stewart Bryant [mailto:stewart.bry...@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2018 11:25 AM To: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) ; Acee Lindem (acee) ; Alia Atlas Cc: OSPF List ; isis...@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Isis-wg] Link-State Routing WG charter On 25/01/2018 18:59

Re: [OSPF] draft-ietf-spring-conflict-resolution/draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions: If you please provide your inputs on the issue.

Mahendra - Similar to Peter, I don't fully understand your scenario. You claim: 10.10.10.10/SID 1 is originated by RT1 10.10.10.10/SID 3 os originated by RT3 Now you change SID config on RT1 so it advertises: 10.10.10.10/SID 4 In a short period of time RT2 should also reflect this update. So

Re: [OSPF] draft-ietf-spring-conflict-resolution/draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions: If you please provide your inputs on the issue.

, February 23, 2018 1:03 PM To: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) Cc: draft-ietf-spring-conflict-resolution ; draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions ; ospf Subject: Re: RE: draft-ietf-spring-conflict-resolution/draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions: If you please provide your inputs on the is

[OSPF] RE: [Isis-wg] CCAMP Working group last call ondraft-ietf-ccamp-te-node-cap-02.txt

In regards to the IS-IS definitions, there is (again - sorry JP...) confusion in the use of the terms TLV and subTLV. For example, in Section 2 it states: A new TLV is defined for ISIS and OSPF: the TE Node Capability Descriptor TLV, to be carried within: - The ISIS Capability TLV (

[OSPF] RE: [Isis-wg] Re: [Fwd: [mpls] WG Last Call ondraft-ietf-mpls-number-0-bw-te-lsps-02.txt]

JP - Sorry for the very belated comments - but I do have two minor, but still important, concerns regarding IS-IS. Both are in Section 3.1. 1)You have specified a 32 bit value for the number of unconstrained TE LSPs. I would prefer that this be a 16 bit value. This still provides ample range and

[OSPF] RE: [Isis-wg] Further short CCAMP WG Last Call ondraft-ietf-ccamp-te-node-cap-03.txt

1)The use of TLV and sub-TLV is not consistent throughout the document regarding IS-IS. For example, in the second and third paragraphs of Section 4.2: The IS-IS TE Node Capability Descriptor TLV is carried within an IS- IS CAPABILITY TLV which is defined in [OSPF-CAP]. The format of th

Re: [OSPF] WG LC

Sujay - I assume you wanted to copy the WG lists...have added them to the thread. Reply inline. > -Original Message- > From: sujay gupta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Sunday, June 22, 2008 10:16 PM > To: David Ward > Cc: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg); Mike Shand (mshand);