Subject: Comments on draft-ietf-ospf-2547-dnbit-00.txt

From: Acee Lindem <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 17:25:03 -0400

Eric,

Here are my comments:

   Section 2 Introduction

      The terminology is somewhat confusing. Normally, we
      "export" or "redistribute" routes rather than "convert"
      them. In this case routes are being installed from
      backbone BGP into the VPN route table. When
      they are redistributed (or exported) into the OSPF in the
      VPN they are advertised as summary and AS external LSAs.
      Similarly, routes that OSPF installs into the VPN route
      table will be redistributed and advertised across the VPN
      backbone.

   Section 3

      Replace all instances of "decision process" with "routing computation".

      The text in parenthesis (The reader will note...) should be explained
      better or removed. The OSPF-VPN draft dictates that a PE router
      has to be part of area 0. If it is part of area 0, the summaries in
      area 0 are used for the route computation and hence feedback is
      prevented if the PE-CE connection is not in area 0.

      With the generalized use of the DN bit, the PE area 0 restriction
      could be relaxed a bit to say that the PE router must advertise itself
      as an ABR (via its router bits in its router LSA) and the CE routers
      must not have any area 0 connections when the PE router connection isn't
      an area 0 connection. However, I'm not sure there is a requirement since
      no has complained heretofore.

   Section 4

      Please add a diagram of the OSPF options bits with the DN bit included.

--
Acee