Re: [OSPF] Dynamic Hostname Exchange Mechanism for OSPF -draft-venkata-ospf-dynamic-hostname-02.txt

["Adrian Farrel" <adrian at olddog.co.uk>]

Acee,

I missed the last two OSPF meetings because of agenda clashes, and I haven't 
seen much discussion on the list.

I support the idea of being able to exchange a textual name for routers, and 
having this I-D in the working group may provide a way to get the mechanism 
right.

I am worried as Nitin was about the idea of using the RI LSA since the name 
of a router is not a router capability. And we wouldn't want the 255 byte 
reflooded every time some other routing capability was modified. Indeed, the 
consumer of the router name is unlikely to be the IP routing and forwarding 
component. So the information should be moved to some other LSA that can be 
handled with different refresh rules and potentially moved into a separate 
OSPF instance per

I note that you said
> This isn't the type of information we are envisioning needing
> to be split out. It is only a single name and will be an optional
> TLV for an existing LSA. The separate instance would be
> more for flooding larger volumes of non-routing information
> associated with new applications (once we have this instance,
> it also would be nice to move some existing opaque LSAs to
> it as well).

The fact that it is optional for an LSA, doesn't seem relevant. Once it is 
in the LSA it has to be flooded.

Additionally, this could well be the thin end of the wedge. Wouldn't it be 
useful for network management tools if the routers flooded some geographical 
coordinate? Wouldn't it be handy for operators if the postal address and 
phone number of the maintenance site were flooded? Where will this lead?

Take the clean approach now. Recognise that information not used for IP 
routing does not belong in the primary instance of the IGP.

So, I guess I give you a qualified "yes" to your question. Make this a WG ID 
if the debate about moving the information out of the RI LSA is still open.

Cheers,
Adrian

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Acee Lindem" <acee at redback.com>
To: "OSPF List" <ospf at ietf.org>
Sent: Thursday, March 20, 2008 8:02 PM
Subject: [OSPF] Dynamic Hostname Exchange Mechanism for 
OSPF -draft-venkata-ospf-dynamic-hostname-02.txt


> This draft was presented in Vancouver and with an update in
> Philadelphia. At both WG meetings there was interest in making this a
> WG document and no opposition. Is there any one now who has a
> compelling reason why this should not be a WG document? If not, I
> plan to have the authors submit it as a WG document on Monday. Note
> that there will be plenty of time to comment on the technical
> contents of the draft.
> _______________________________________________
> OSPF mailing list
> OSPF at ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf
> 


_______________________________________________
OSPF mailing list
OSPF at ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf