Subject: [Isis-wg] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-isis-caps-00.txt

From: Christian Hopps <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2005 12:41:09 -0800

We are starting the WG last call for "IS-IS extensions for advertising 
router information".

<http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-isis-caps-00.txt>

Given the upcoming IETF meeting we will extend the last call period to 
3 weeks following the IETF meeting.

Chris & Dave.

_______________________________________________
Isis-wg mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/isis-wg

---

From: "Adrian Farrel" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 10:44:10 -0000

Hi,

There's some boilerplate nonsense to be sorted out, and a host of
non-ASCII characters.

Section 2. Note that your text is not consistent with your table. The text
says that you should have...
  TYPE: 242 (To be assigned by IANA)
  LENGTH: from 5 to 255
  FLAGS (1 octet)
  VALUE:
    Router ID (4 octets)
    Set of optional sub-TLVs (0-250 octets)
But this is clearly not what the table says.

Section 2. Although we should all know how ISIS TLVs are formed, it
appears that you cannot go wrong by being incredibly clear about the
meaning of the value contained in the Length field. You say that it
specifies the TLV length, but you also say that it has a minimum value of
5 which suggests it is actually the length of the V *and* that the Flags
are part of the V.

Section 5. Seems like this draft is proposing a mechanism for advertising
the capabilities of routers more widely. Since there is plenty of scope
for people to snoop on ISIS advertiesements (from way across the network)
this mechanism necessarily makes available to any listener more
information about routers than was previously available. This is a change
in the security, I think.

Section 8. It is usual to give section numbers to the subsections in the
references section.

Cheers,
Adrian

---

From: Les Ginsberg <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 13:42:00 -0800

>5 which suggests it is actually the length of the V *and* that the Flags

Adrian -

Seems like all of your concerns would be addressed by simply removing the 
phrase "1 octet of bit flags" from the first sentence of the first 
paragraph, which would then read:

"The IS-IS Router CAPABILITY TLV is composed of 1 octet for the type,
   1 octet specifying the TLV length,  and a
   variable length value field, starting with 4 octets of Router ID,
   indicating the source of the TLV, and followed by 1 octet of flags. A
   set of optional sub-TLVs may follow the flag field.

??

    Les

---

From: "Adrian Farrel" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 18:38:28 -0000

Les,

Yes, I think the intention is that the flags are part of the V.
Then the L covers the whole of the V including the flags.

If this is the intention and all the text is made consistent, I'll be
happy. I think slightly more work is needed to achieve consistency than
you suggest, but that's just editorial noise.

A