Bhatia, Manav (Manav)
2014-05-30 03:20:27 UTC
Sorry for joining the party so late ..
Those of you following the BFD WG would know that BFD WG is currently being re-chartered to include S-BFD as one of the items that it will be working on.
For S-BFD to work, we need to distribute the S-BFD discriminators across the IGP routing domain. How this can be achieved with OSPF has been described in http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-bhatia-ospf-sbfd-discriminator-00.txt
With the help of this draft S-BFD clients will know what S-BFD discriminator to use when talking to the reflector or the S-BFD server.
However, it still needs a routable IP address that it can use to set up the S-BFD session.
I believe the draft http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-xu-ospf-ipv6-router-id-00 will help us in getting that information in the IPv6 context.
Unfortunately, the above draft uses an inappropriate TLV name and doesn’t seem to have a use-case that supports the need for such a TLV. I believe we have at least one use case where we need a "routable" IPv6 address.
Cheers, Manav
Those of you following the BFD WG would know that BFD WG is currently being re-chartered to include S-BFD as one of the items that it will be working on.
For S-BFD to work, we need to distribute the S-BFD discriminators across the IGP routing domain. How this can be achieved with OSPF has been described in http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-bhatia-ospf-sbfd-discriminator-00.txt
With the help of this draft S-BFD clients will know what S-BFD discriminator to use when talking to the reflector or the S-BFD server.
However, it still needs a routable IP address that it can use to set up the S-BFD session.
I believe the draft http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-xu-ospf-ipv6-router-id-00 will help us in getting that information in the IPv6 context.
Unfortunately, the above draft uses an inappropriate TLV name and doesn’t seem to have a use-case that supports the need for such a TLV. I believe we have at least one use case where we need a "routable" IPv6 address.
Cheers, Manav
-----Original Message-----
Sent: Monday, May 12, 2014 7:10 PM
To: Xuxiaohu
Subject: Re: [OSPF] 答复: [Isis-wg] 答复: 答复: [sunset4] IPv6 router
IDs
Hi Xiaohu,
Please include the precise use cases as to WHY this is needed OSPF
draft.
And by precise, I don't mean just listing MPLS applications, I mean
explaining why you need this routable address above and beyond what is
already advertised. At least in the case of OSPF, I'm not convinced.
Thanks,
Acee
-----Original Message-----
Date: Sunday, May 11, 2014 6:44 PM
OSPF
Subject: 答复: [Isis-wg] [OSPF] 答复: 答复: [sunset4] IPv6 router
IDs
Sent: Monday, May 12, 2014 7:10 PM
To: Xuxiaohu
Subject: Re: [OSPF] 答复: [Isis-wg] 答复: 答复: [sunset4] IPv6 router
IDs
Hi Xiaohu,
Please include the precise use cases as to WHY this is needed OSPF
draft.
And by precise, I don't mean just listing MPLS applications, I mean
explaining why you need this routable address above and beyond what is
already advertised. At least in the case of OSPF, I'm not convinced.
Thanks,
Acee
-----Original Message-----
Date: Sunday, May 11, 2014 6:44 PM
OSPF
Subject: 答复: [Isis-wg] [OSPF] 答复: 答复: [sunset4] IPv6 router
IDs
Hi Acee,
IMHO, segment routing could work together with the RFC3464 VPN. In
suchIMHO, segment routing could work together with the RFC3464 VPN. In
case, the segment routing just replace the role of LDP or RSVP-TE of
establishing a transport LSP between PE r
establishing a transport LSP between PE r