From prz@net4u.ch Wed Jul 7 01:43:39 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ospf@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ospf@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E6B533A659C for ; Wed, 7 Jul 2010 01:43:37 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.001 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5g1f3vF1Dkor for ; Wed, 7 Jul 2010 01:43:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from net4u.net4u.ch (net4u.net4u.ch [194.191.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 841AB3A657C for ; Wed, 7 Jul 2010 01:43:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by net4u.net4u.ch (8.13.1/8.13.4) with ESMTP id o678nR5R009097 for ; Wed, 7 Jul 2010 10:49:28 +0200 X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at net4u.ch Received: from net4u.net4u.ch ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (www.net4u.ch [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id Im9a3+yOUd4x for ; Wed, 7 Jul 2010 10:49:07 +0200 (CEST) Received: from prz-workstation.zeta2.ch (zux172-086.adsl.green.ch [80.254.172.86]) (authenticated bits=0) by net4u.net4u.ch (8.13.1/8.13.4) with ESMTP id o678fiNw028604 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Wed, 7 Jul 2010 10:41:49 +0200 Message-ID: <4C343C63.2050304@net4u.ch> Date: Wed, 07 Jul 2010 10:35:47 +0200 From: prz Organization: zeta2.ch User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.1.9) Gecko/20100430 Fedora/3.0.4-2.fc11 Thunderbird/3.0.4 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: ospf@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [OSPF] An interesting link-state project on sourceforge ... X-BeenThere: ospf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: The Official IETF OSPG WG Mailing List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 07 Jul 2010 08:43:39 -0000 Hey everyone, Tony P. mailing, people may remember me from the ISIS and OSPF times when I was tad more active than now. I would like to mention that I just released on sourceforge a link-state related package. It's something I did over couple of years on a DoD grant and was dormant for 2-3 years since I was busy with other stuff. It's basically a real-time or post-mortem analysis tool for link-state packet traces. The whole thing is LGPL so strictly speaking this is not a product blurp or anything commerical albeit of course it's blatantly self-serving since I want people to look @ it and give me feedback and I'm looking for volunteers to help me working on it possibly as well, be it implementing features, improving packaging or lots other stuff. If you want more info, look under https://sourceforge.net/projects/tiet/ please. There are job descriptions, mailing lists, forums & other trappings of an open source project there. And yes, of course a .tar.gz to go with it. RPMs will be coming up. Word of warning to the OSPF afficionados, it's supporting ISIS right now only but is architectured in a way that it abstract most of the link-state packet formatting so plugging OSPF in has been planned from day one so an OSPF & C++ expert may find his calling there. thanks -- tony From swarupn@huawei.com Wed Jul 14 01:09:25 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ospf@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ospf@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A8103A6851 for ; Wed, 14 Jul 2010 01:09:25 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.894 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.894 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.400, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RDNS_NONE=0.1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Sw4zPoR5rjja for ; Wed, 14 Jul 2010 01:09:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from szxga03-in.huawei.com (unknown [119.145.14.66]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 14AA63A67CC for ; Wed, 14 Jul 2010 01:09:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from huawei.com (szxga03-in [172.24.2.9]) by szxga03-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTP id <0L5J00IMNFWDQH@szxga03-in.huawei.com> for ospf@ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jul 2010 16:07:25 +0800 (CST) Received: from huawei.com ([172.24.2.119]) by szxga03-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTP id <0L5J00GSJFWDE8@szxga03-in.huawei.com> for ospf@ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jul 2010 16:07:25 +0800 (CST) Received: from BLRNSHTIPL3NC ([10.18.1.33]) by szxml04-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTPA id <0L5J00LGAFW9V7@szxml04-in.huawei.com> for ospf@ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jul 2010 16:07:22 +0800 (CST) Date: Wed, 14 Jul 2010 13:37:21 +0530 From: swarup To: ospf@ietf.org Message-id: <79A7977E3079453585C21DF1BA6199BC@china.huawei.com> MIME-version: 1.0 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.3790.4325 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Boundary_(ID_Z1rb0Wj7YieKV5lTJkj35w)" Thread-index: AcsjK5Xq465obkO8RBCuAYDQqZPuFg== Subject: [OSPF] Route tag role in draft-ietf-l3vpn-ospfv3-pece-05 X-BeenThere: ospf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: The Official IETF OSPG WG Mailing List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 14 Jul 2010 08:09:25 -0000 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --Boundary_(ID_Z1rb0Wj7YieKV5lTJkj35w) Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Hi, In "draft-ietf-l3vpn-ospfv3-pece-05", why in section 4.5, reference to route tag is truncated? Is it because no backward compatibility is required for OSPFv3! Ref: Section 4.5: "Of the two loop preventions mechanisms described in the sections aforementioned, only the DN bit option will be supported in the OSPFv3 implementation." Regards, Swarup **************************************************************************** *********** This e-mail and attachments contain confidential information from HUAWEI, which is intended only for the person or entity whose address is listed above. Any use of the information contained herein in any way (including, but not limited to, total or partial disclosure, reproduction, or dissemination) by persons other than the intended recipient's) is prohibited. If you receive this e-mail in error, please notify the sender by phone or email immediately and delete it! **************************************************************************** *********** --Boundary_(ID_Z1rb0Wj7YieKV5lTJkj35w) Content-type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT

Hi,

 

In "draft-ietf-l3vpn-ospfv3-pece-05", why in section 4.5, reference to route tag is truncated? Is it because no backward compatibility is required for OSPFv3!
 
Ref: Section 4.5:
"Of the two loop preventions mechanisms described in the sections aforementioned, only the DN bit option will be supported in the OSPFv3 implementation."

 

Regards,

Swarup

 

 

***************************************************************************************
This e-mail and attachments contain confidential information from HUAWEI, which is intended only for the person or entity whose address is listed above. Any use of the information contained herein in any way (including, but not limited to, total or partial disclosure, reproduction, or dissemination) by persons other than the intended recipient's) is prohibited. If you receive this e-mail in error, please notify the sender by phone or email immediately and delete it!

***************************************************************************************

 

--Boundary_(ID_Z1rb0Wj7YieKV5lTJkj35w)-- From acee@lindem.com Wed Jul 14 03:08:00 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ospf@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ospf@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 37BAA3A67E1 for ; Wed, 14 Jul 2010 03:08:00 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.598 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id B1NJluwSLFEX for ; Wed, 14 Jul 2010 03:07:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cdptpa-omtalb.mail.rr.com (cdptpa-omtalb.mail.rr.com [75.180.132.120]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E0F483A6998 for ; Wed, 14 Jul 2010 03:07:58 -0700 (PDT) X-Authority-Analysis: v=1.1 cv=z54FopLjrHXEMhI0cHx4gQptAyxaGpb0+Dae5S69HmE= c=1 sm=0 a=1l_UWwsugUMA:10 a=yQWWgrYGNuUA:10 a=6AczbciI+RymxYTNNKvAnw==:17 a=48vgC7mUAAAA:8 a=RZDJzdMdiTt87zJRL8cA:9 a=HmIJJR3bJl4US28xLzEA:7 a=7IAoDyikBcJekqmeMe4zRhk_8QAA:4 a=CjuIK1q_8ugA:10 a=lZB815dzVvQA:10 a=wfaT6FQ4e8PRYuZD:21 a=7yGhKcAMUFTrAFL9:21 a=FVDQBhpX9M2SR_G6IpEA:9 a=rG5FLnweJ4wsUCOb9PEA:7 a=cV7VI6L8arCOp7nLrMWsopu3FPsA:4 a=6AczbciI+RymxYTNNKvAnw==:117 X-Cloudmark-Score: 0 X-Originating-IP: 65.190.1.238 Received: from [65.190.1.238] ([65.190.1.238:35759] helo=[10.0.1.13]) by cdptpa-oedge03.mail.rr.com (envelope-from ) (ecelerity 2.2.2.39 r()) with ESMTP id 12/7A-15315-78C8D3C4; Wed, 14 Jul 2010 10:08:08 +0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1081) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-3-147176513 From: Acee Lindem In-Reply-To: <79A7977E3079453585C21DF1BA6199BC@china.huawei.com> Date: Wed, 14 Jul 2010 06:08:07 -0400 Message-Id: References: <79A7977E3079453585C21DF1BA6199BC@china.huawei.com> To: swarup X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1081) Cc: ospf@ietf.org Subject: Re: [OSPF] Route tag role in draft-ietf-l3vpn-ospfv3-pece-05 X-BeenThere: ospf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: The Official IETF OSPG WG Mailing List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 14 Jul 2010 10:08:00 -0000 --Apple-Mail-3-147176513 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Hi Swarup, On Jul 14, 2010, at 4:07 AM, swarup wrote: > Hi, > =20 > In "draft-ietf-l3vpn-ospfv3-pece-05", why in section 4.5, reference to = route tag is truncated?=20 Why would you want more than one loop prevention mechanism?=20 > Is it because no backward compatibility is required for OSPFv3! This is a draft and not an RFC. Furthermore, IIRC, this has always been = this way in this draft. Backward compatibility is not an issue. Thanks, Acee > =20 > Ref: Section 4.5: > "Of the two loop preventions mechanisms described in the sections = aforementioned, only the DN bit option will be supported in the OSPFv3 = implementation." > =20 > Regards, > Swarup > =20 > =20 > = **************************************************************************= ************* > This e-mail and attachments contain confidential information from = HUAWEI, which is intended only for the person or entity whose address is = listed above. Any use of the information contained herein in any way = (including, but not limited to, total or partial disclosure, = reproduction, or dissemination) by persons other than the intended = recipient's) is prohibited. If you receive this e-mail in error, please = notify the sender by phone or email immediately and delete it! > = **************************************************************************= ************* >=20 > =20 > _______________________________________________ > OSPF mailing list > OSPF@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf --Apple-Mail-3-147176513 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Hi = Swarup,

On Jul 14, 2010, at 4:07 AM, swarup = wrote:

In " why in section 4.5, = reference to route tag is truncated? =

Why would you want more than one loop prevention = mechanism? 



This is a draft and not an RFC. Furthermore, IIRC, this has always = been this way in this draft. Backward compatibility is not an = issue.

Thanks,
Acee




Ref: Section 4.5:
"Of the two loop preventions =
mechanisms described in the sections aforementioned, only the DN bit =
option will be supported in the OSPFv3 =
implementation."
OSPF@ietf.org
tag is truncated? > > Why would you want more than one loop prevention mechanism? > > Is it because no backward compatibility is required for OSPFv3! > > This is a draft and not an RFC. Furthermore, IIRC, this has always been this > way in this draft. Backward compatibility is not an issue. > Thanks, > Acee > > > > > > Ref: Section 4.5: > > "Of the two loop preventions mechanisms described in the sections > aforementioned, only the DN bit option will be supported in the OSPFv3 > implementation." > > > Regards, > Swarup > > > *************************************************************************************** > This e-mail and attachments contain confidential information from HUAWEI, > which is intended only for the person or entity whose address is listed > above. Any use of the information contained herein in any way (including, > but not limited to, total or partial disclosure, reproduction, or > dissemination) by persons other than the intended recipient's) is > prohibited. If you receive this e-mail in error, please notify the sender by > phone or email immediately and delete it! > > *************************************************************************************** > > > _______________________________________________ > OSPF mailing list > OSPF@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf > > > _______________________________________________ > OSPF mailing list > OSPF@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf > > From wwwrun@rfc-editor.org Thu Jul 29 03:16:48 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ospf@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ospf@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 119A83A697B for ; Thu, 29 Jul 2010 03:16:48 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.645 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.645 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.534, BAYES_05=-1.11, NO_RELAYS=-0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id AmRnPzvAYdBB for ; Thu, 29 Jul 2010 03:16:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [IPv6:2001:1890:1112:1::2f]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A5003A6967 for ; Thu, 29 Jul 2010 03:16:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: by rfc-editor.org (Postfix, from userid 30) id 261AEE06A3; Thu, 29 Jul 2010 03:17:11 -0700 (PDT) To: jmoy@casc.com, stbryant@cisco.com, adrian.farrel@huawei.com, acee@redback.com, akr@cisco.com From: RFC Errata System Message-Id: <20100729101711.261AEE06A3@rfc-editor.org> Date: Thu, 29 Jul 2010 03:17:11 -0700 (PDT) Cc: ospf@ietf.org, andrea.ceschia@maticmind.it, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org Subject: [OSPF] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC2328 (2394) X-BeenThere: ospf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: The Official IETF OSPG WG Mailing List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 29 Jul 2010 10:16:48 -0000 The following errata report has been submitted for RFC2328, "OSPF Version 2". -------------------------------------- You may review the report below and at: http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=2328&eid=2394 -------------------------------------- Type: Technical Reported by: Andrea Ceschia Section: 3.4. Original Text ------------- Table 5: Backbone distances calculated by Routers RT3 and RT4 dist from dist from RT3 RT4 to Ia 20 27 to Ib 15 22 Corrected Text -------------- Table 5: Backbone distances calculated by Routers RT3 and RT4. dist from dist from RT3 RT4 to Ia 15 22 to Ib 20 27 Notes ----- >From RT3 and RT4 perspective the Ia is the nearest interface while Ib is at the remote side of the link connecting RT6 to RT10. Instructions: ------------- This errata is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, please use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party (IESG) can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary. -------------------------------------- RFC2328 (no draft string recorded) -------------------------------------- Title : OSPF Version 2 Publication Date : April 1998 Author(s) : J. Moy Category : STANDARD Source : Open Shortest Path First IGP Area : Routing Stream : IETF Verifying Party : IESG From acee.lindem@ericsson.com Thu Jul 29 05:21:38 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ospf@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ospf@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0611728C1DF for ; Thu, 29 Jul 2010 05:21:38 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.498 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.498 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.102, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id we9IYSjz4Q-P for ; Thu, 29 Jul 2010 05:21:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from imr3.ericy.com (imr3.ericy.com [198.24.6.13]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E3D9928C0FF for ; Thu, 29 Jul 2010 05:21:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from eusaamw0712.eamcs.ericsson.se ([147.117.20.181]) by imr3.ericy.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o6TCLQgk013264 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Thu, 29 Jul 2010 07:21:56 -0500 Received: from EUSAACMS0702.eamcs.ericsson.se ([169.254.1.34]) by eusaamw0712.eamcs.ericsson.se ([147.117.20.181]) with mapi; Thu, 29 Jul 2010 08:21:26 -0400 From: Acee Lindem To: RFC Errata System Date: Thu, 29 Jul 2010 08:21:22 -0400 Thread-Topic: [OSPF] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC2328 (2394) Thread-Index: AcsvGI+YUHsOZ9b0Q2WjxeK3xjHmLg== Message-ID: <8DA389C0-4E4C-4DE8-996D-0B81D58B93C3@ericsson.com> References: <20100729101711.261AEE06A3@rfc-editor.org> In-Reply-To: <20100729101711.261AEE06A3@rfc-editor.org> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: "jmoy@casc.com" , "andrea.ceschia@maticmind.it" , "ospf@ietf.org" , Adrian Farrel , Acee Lindem Subject: Re: [OSPF] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC2328 (2394) X-BeenThere: ospf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: The Official IETF OSPG WG Mailing List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 29 Jul 2010 12:21:38 -0000 This Errata looks correct to me.=20 Thanks, Acee=20 On Jul 29, 2010, at 6:17 AM, RFC Errata System wrote: >=20 > The following errata report has been submitted for RFC2328, > "OSPF Version 2". >=20 > -------------------------------------- > You may review the report below and at: > http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=3D2328&eid=3D2394 >=20 > -------------------------------------- > Type: Technical > Reported by: Andrea Ceschia >=20 > Section: 3.4. >=20 > Original Text > ------------- > Table 5: Backbone distances calculated by Routers RT3 and RT4 >=20 > dist from dist from > RT3 RT4 >=20 > to Ia 20 27 > to Ib 15 22 >=20 > Corrected Text > -------------- > Table 5: Backbone distances calculated by Routers RT3 and RT4. >=20 > dist from dist from > RT3 RT4 >=20 > to Ia 15 22 > to Ib 20 27 >=20 > Notes > ----- > From RT3 and RT4 perspective the Ia is the nearest interface while Ib is = at the remote side of the link connecting RT6 to RT10. >=20 > Instructions: > ------------- > This errata is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, please > use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or > rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party (IESG) > can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary.=20 >=20 > -------------------------------------- > RFC2328 (no draft string recorded) > -------------------------------------- > Title : OSPF Version 2 > Publication Date : April 1998 > Author(s) : J. Moy > Category : STANDARD > Source : Open Shortest Path First IGP > Area : Routing > Stream : IETF > Verifying Party : IESG > _______________________________________________ > OSPF mailing list > OSPF@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf