Subject: [Isis-wg] FYI: small draft with TLV numbers ...

From: Tony Przygienda <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2001 10:20:03 -0700

Put a small draft together to prevent TLV conflicts, would appreciate if
the word spreads
to SIF and OSI so we have a place people can check before steping on
each others' toes.
If missed something or inexact, pls let me know and will correct and put
updated version
out ...

    thansk

    - tony

Internet Engineering Task Force                               T.
Przygienda
INTERNET DRAFT
Redback

July 2001
                       Reserved TLV Codepoints in ISIS
                 <draft-ietf-isis-wg-tlv-codepoints-00.txt>

Status of This Memo

    This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with
    all provisions of Section 10 of RFC2026.  Internet-Drafts are
working
    documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), its areas,
    and its working groups.  Note that other groups may also distribute
    working documents as Internet-Drafts.

    Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six
months
    and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at
    any time.  It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
    material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."

    The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
    http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt

    The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
    http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.

    Copyright Notice Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2000).  All
    Rights Reserved.

Abstract

    This draft describes implementation codepoints within
    IS-IS [ISO90 , Cal90a , Cal90b ] used today by several ISPs for
    routing within their clouds.  IS-IS is an interior gateway routing
    protocol developed originally by OSI and used with IP extensions as
    IGP. This draft summarizes all TLV codepoints that are being used by

    the protocol and its pending extensions.

Przygienda                     Expires Jan 2002
[Page 1]

Internet Draft                    TLV Codepoints
July 2001

1.  TLV Codepoints reserved
    ___________________________________________________________
     Name                 Value   IIH   LSP  SNP   Status

    ___________________________________________________________

     Area Addresses            1  y     y    n     RFC
     IIS Neighbors             2  n     y    n     RFC
     ES Neighbors              3  n     y    n     RFC
     Part.  DIS                4  n     y    n     RFC
     Prefix Neighbors          5  n     y    n     RFC
     IIS Neighbors             6  y     n    n     RFC
     Padding                   8  y     n    n     RFC
     LSP Entries               9  n     n    y     RFC
     Authentication           10  y     y    y     IETF-draft
     Opt.  Checksum           12  y     n    y     IETF-draft
     LSPBufferSize            14  y?    y    n     SIF-draft
     TE IIS Neigh.            22  n     y    n     IETF-draft
     MT-ISN                  222  n     y    n     IETF-draft
     IP Int.  Reach          128  n     y    n     RFC
     Prot.  Supported        129  y     y    n     RFC
     M-Topologies            229  y     y    n     IETF-draft
     IP Ext.  Address        130  n     y    n     RFC
     IDRPI                   131  n     y    y     RFC
     IP Intf.  Address       132  y     y    n     RFC
     IPv6 Intf.  Addr.       232  y     y    n     IETF-draft
     illegal                 133  n     n    n     ?
     Router ID               134  n     y    n     IETF-draft
     TE IP. Reach            135  n     y    n     IETF-draft
     MT IP. Reach            235  n     y    n     IETF-draft
     IPv6 IP. Reach          236  n     y    n     IETF-draft
     Dynamic Name            137  n     y    n     RFC
     3-Way hellos            240  y     n    n     RFC

2.  Assignment Procedures

    This document is provided to avoid possible future conflicts in
    assignment of TLV numbers.  It does not constitute or represent any
    standard or authority assigning TLV numbers.  TLV assignment happens

    on a shared, informational basis between the ISO, SIF and the IETF
    working groups.  The core ISIS protocol is being specified in the
    ISO standards body, IP extensions to it however are products of the
    ISIS working group in IETF. Since ISO does not provide a numbering
    authority and IANA is only responsible for IP related coding points,

Przygienda                     Expires Jan 2002
[Page 2]

Internet Draft                    TLV Codepoints
July 2001

    no plausible central authority to assign TLV numbers exists as of
    today.

3.  Acknowledgments

4.  Security Consideration

    ISIS security applies to the work presented.  No specific security
    issues are being introduced.
References

    [Cal90a]  R. Callon.  OSI ISIS Intradomain Routing Protocol.
              INTERNET-RFC, Internet Engineering Task Force, February
              1990.

    [Cal90b]  R. Callon.  Use of OSI ISIS for Routing in TCP/IP and Dual

              Environments.  INTERNET-RFC, Internet Engineering Task
              Force, December 1990.

    [ISO90]   ISO.  Information Technology - Telecommunications and
              Information Exchange between Systems - Intermediate System

              to Intermediate System Routing Exchange Protocol for
              Use in Conjunction with the Protocol for Providing the
              Connectionless-Mode Network Service.  ISO, 1990.

5.  Authors' Addresses

     Tony Przygienda
     Redback Networks
     350 Holger Way
     San Jose, CA, 95134-1362
     [email-masked]

6.   Full Copyright Statement

    Copyright (C) The Internet Society (1997).  All Rights Reserved.

    This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to
    others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it

    or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published
    and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any
    kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph
    are included on all such copies and derivative works.  However,
Przygienda                     Expires Jan 2002
[Page 3]

Internet Draft                    TLV Codepoints
July 2001

    this document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by
    removing the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society
    or other Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose
    of developing Internet standards in which case the procedures
    for copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process must be
    followed, or as required to translate it into languages other than
    English.

    The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be
    revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assigns.

    This document and the information contained herein is provided on an

    "AS IS" basis and THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING
    TASK FORCE DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING
    BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION
    HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF
    MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE."

Przygienda                     Expires Jan 2002
[Page 4]

_______________________________________________
Isis-wg mailing list  -  [email-masked]
http://external.juniper.net/mailman/listinfo/isis-wg

---

From: mike shand <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2001 19:21:21 +0100

You missed 42. DECnet PhaseIV :-)

But this is a VERY good idea. Thanks.

         Mike

---

From: Micah Bartell <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2001 13:52:15 -0500

Just replacing SIF w/ ISO should be sufficient.  Along with the other TLV's 
marked RFC that are actually ISO defined.

/mpb

At 14:39 07/17/2001 -0400, Jeff Learman wrote:

>FYI,
>
>SIF, the SONET Interoperability Forum, rechartered themselves as
>NSIF, the Network and Services Integration Forum.  (For more info,
>see "http://www.atis.org/atis/sif/sifhom.htm".)
>
>SIF did not allocate TLV IDs; rather, member company contributors
>directed their requests through their ISO member organizations.
>There should be no need to mention SIF in this document.
>
>Regards,
>Jeff
>
>At 01:20 PM 7/17/2001, Tony Przygienda wrote:

---

From: Jeff Learman <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2001 14:39:36 -0400

FYI,

Regards,
Jeff

---

From: Tony Przygienda <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2001 15:11:19 -0700

> But this is a VERY good idea. Thanks.

will do, don't want to get into trouble with anyone out there still
running it. Do we put DEC or Compaq as the authority that assigned
that number ;-)) ?

    ---- tony

---

From: "David R. Oran" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2001 14:03:35 -0400

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email-masked] 
> [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of mike shand
> Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2001 2:21 PM
> To: Tony Przygienda
> Cc: [email-masked]
> Subject: Re: [Isis-wg] FYI: small draft with TLV numbers ...
> 
> 
As I recall, that particular value was chosen with care too!

> >Put a small draft together to prevent TLV conflicts, would 
> appreciate 
> >if the word spreads to SIF and OSI so we have a place people 
> can check 
> >before steping on each others' toes.
> >     IGP. This draft summarizes all TLV codepoints that are 
> being used 
> > by
> >
> >     others, and derivative works that comment on or 
> otherwise explain 
> > it
> >
> >     This document and the information contained herein is 
> provided on 
> > an
> >
> http://external.juniper.net/mailman/listinfo/i> sis-wg
>