Subject: [Lsr] Éric Vyncke's No Objection on draft-ietf-ospf-xaf-te-06: (with COMMENT)

From: Éric Vyncke via Datatracker <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 05 Aug 2019 04:52:00 -0700

Éric Vyncke has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-ospf-xaf-te-06: No Objection

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)

Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ospf-xaf-te/

----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Alvara, Anton, Michael,

Thank you for the work done for this document.

Just curious about section 3: OSPFv2 routers send their IPv6 address(es) and
OSPFv3 routers send their IPv4 address(es). But, what happens when OSPFv3
routers are multi-topology ? Should they also send their IPv6 address(es)? Of
course, in this case, the issue fixed by your memo does not exist ;-) Probably
worth mentioning anyway that OSPFv3 multi-topology does not need this feature.

Regards,

-éric

---

From: "Acee Lindem (acee)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 5 Aug 2019 12:52:07 +0000

Hi Eric,

On 8/5/19, 7:52 AM, "Éric Vyncke via Datatracker" <[email-masked]> wrote:

    
    
    Alvara, Anton, Michael,

With https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc5838/, separate instances are required for IPv4 and IPv6 topologies. With this enhancement, you'd only need to advertise TE information in one of those instances. 

Thanks,
Acee
    
    Regards,
    
    -éric

---

From: Alvaro Retana <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 2019 07:07:45 -0400

On August 5, 2019 at 8:52:19 AM, Acee Lindem (acee) ([email-masked]) wrote:

With https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc5838/, separate instances are
required for IPv4 and IPv6 topologies. With this enhancement, you'd only
need to advertise TE information in one of those instances.

Right.

I think there’s an opportunity to clarify; the text talks about OSPFv2/IPv4
+ OSPFv3/IPv6: I think we could add a sentence or two (maybe at the start
of the Operation section) to clarify.

Thanks!!

Alvaro.