Re: OSPFv3 Applications Support

[Kireeti Kompella <kireeti at JUNIPER.NET>]

Hi Rohit,

On Tue, 4 Mar 2003, Rohit Dube wrote:

> This issue has been around for a while and it is time that
> we picked one of the proposals as the WG document.

Before we do that, let me try to summarize what the _real_ issue is.
The read that I got at the last IETF is that OSPFv2 and OSPFv3 are
*different* protocols; that one is focussed on IPv4 and the other
on IPv6.

So, the real question is, do we want to go down this path: create a
major split, and declare v2 and v3 are different protocols.  IMO,
they are very closely related, and building on that closeness rather
than emphasizing the differences is a better path.

So, for example, carrying IPv4 prefixes in OSPFv3 the same way
that they are carried in OSPFv2, carrying OSPFv2 opaque LSAs in v3
as is, etc. seems a cleaner path.  On the other hand, defining new
formats for TE in v3 emphasizes the difference.

I can't speak for all the authors of OSPFv3, but there was a mail by
Dennis Ferguson that seemed to indicate that he would like to see v3
include v2, not as different protocols.  I could be wrong -- but it
would be nice to at least get the opinions of the authors before we
declare a major fork in the road.

Kireeti.