Subject: [mif] Question about draft-liu-mif-api-extension-06

From: Brian E Carpenter <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2011 15:02:36 +1300

I realise that this is a description of a conceptual API, not a concrete one,
but I still have a concrete question.

A provisioning domain is defined in RFC 6418 as
"A set of consistent configuration information (e.g., default
router, network prefixes, DNS) and the corresponding interface."

Don't we need a notion of Provisioning Domain Identifier to
go with that? Interfaces are identified by Zone Identifiers
according to RFC 4007. Is there any reason that the existing concept
of Zone Identifier can't be extended to cover provisioning domains?

I would like some clarity about this, to ensure that
draft-carpenter-6man-uri-zoneid is also valid for MIF.

Regards
   Brian Carpenter

---

From: Ted Lemon <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2011 06:07:26 +0000

On Dec 15, 2011, at 9:02 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote:

Send text.

---

From: Brian E Carpenter <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2011 11:17:35 +1300

>> of Zone Identifier can't be extended to cover provisioning domains?

OK. At the moment the draft says:

3.5.7.  Provisioning Domain Announcement

   This message is sent by the MIF API to the subscriber to indicate
   that a new Provisioning Domain has successfully been configured on an
   interface.  The announcement includes the interface identifier and
   the provisioning domain identifier.

So let's add

   According to [RFC4007], a scope zone is identified by a Zone Identifier.
   In practice, a scope zone often corresponds to a single interface, so
   interfaces are also identified by Zone Identifiers. For consistency,
   provisioning domains too are identified by Zone Identifiers. In the
   simplest case, a single Zone Identifier will name an interface, a scope
   zone, and a provisioning domian. In more complex cases, an interface,
   the scope zone it reaches, and the corresponding provisioning domain
   will have different Zone Identifiers.

    Brian

---

From: Ted Lemon <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 18 Dec 2011 22:49:55 +0000

On Dec 18, 2011, at 5:17 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote:

So you're proposing to identify three different things with the same kind of identifier?

---

From: Brian E Carpenter <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2011 13:25:04 +1300

> So you're proposing to identify three different things with the same kind of identifier?

Yes. RFC4007 and current practice already mean that interfaces and scopes
use the same namespace, and this would be a seamless extension.

Note that it's a completely unstructured namespace that's local to
the host. It maps straight into draft-carpenter-6man-uri-zoneid
in a very natural way, too.

(We are still far from having a proper handle on naming and addressing
scopes; but that is a very different question that I've been poking at
uselessly for a while:
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-carpenter-referral-ps )

   Brian

---

From: Ted Lemon <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2011 01:12:46 +0000

On Dec 18, 2011, at 7:25 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
Note that it's a completely unstructured namespace that's local to
the host. It maps straight into draft-carpenter-6man-uri-zoneid
in a very natural way, too.

Okay, I'll take a look at it.   Thanks for the pointer.