Subject: [rbridge] TRILL Use of IS-IS

From: "Eastlake III Donald-LDE008" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 24 Feb 2008 10:05:48 -0500

Hi,

There is an individual submission draft posted at
ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-eastlake-trill-rbridge-isis-00.
txt.

This is essentially an intermediate draft between the TRILL base
protocol draft and the expired Dave Ward draft on generic use of IS-IS
for Layer 2 forwarding. An archived copy of the Ward draft is at
http://www.watersprings.org/pub/id/draft-ward-l2isis-02.txt.

The trill-rbridge-isis draft is intended to go with a -07 version of the
base protocol specification which I hope will be posted by the deadline
tomorrow however, the isis-00 and -07 protocol drafts may turn out to be
slightly out of synch with each other. In any case, this isis draft is a
-00 draft and probably needs work.

Thanks,
Donald

====================================================
 Donald E. Eastlake 3rd      +1-508-786-7554 (work)
 Motorola Laboratories
 111 Locke Drive
 Marlborough, MA 01752 USA
 [email-masked]

_______________________________________________
rbridge mailing list
[email-masked]
http://mailman.postel.org/mailman/listinfo/rbridge

---

From: Radia Perlman <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2008 15:48:22 -0800

I like this draft, which I'm just saying explicitly because in the past 
I've not been all that enthusiastic about options.

However, I'm still unconvinced about the need for critical options, but 
it doesn't seem that onerous to provide for them.

And as for the integrity protection option in the draft, (section 3.4), 
why not just protect the inner packet, which does not
get modified hop by hop? And furthermore, it seems like security ought 
to be end-to-end and not ingress-to-egress RBridge,
so I'm not sure how useful it is to provide it, especially if computing 
it is nontrivial.

As for congestion indication, or anything else (like flow ID), in theory 
we could provide for it in the main TRILL header, but
there would have to be room for it. Maybe eventually we could do a new 
version of the header that had some of the
options upgraded to be in the main header, and possibly shuffle the 
header along the lines Don proposed awhile ago (moving
the VLAN bits into the TRILL header, for instance.

Radia

---

From: "Eastlake III Donald-LDE008" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2008 11:10:43 -0500

Hi Radia,

See below at @@@

-----Original Message-----
From: Radia Perlman [mailto:[email-masked]] 
Sent: Monday, February 25, 2008 6:48 PM
To: Eastlake III Donald-LDE008
Cc: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [rbridge] TRILL Use of IS-IS

@@@ Thanks.

@@@ Sure end-to-end security is best but it is a fallacy to believe that
security should be ignored unless it can be the best. That would imply,
for example, that 802.11 (Wi-Fi) security is useless because it is just
hop by hop. But people at public hot spots really don't want everyone in
the vicinity to be able to tell what insecure web sites they are
browsing and the like.

@@@ The computations for authentication and/or encryption will be
nontrivial but how much of a burden that is depends on what hardware
assist you have. People in the wireless world generally think of
authentication and encryption as being free because there is usually
hardware built in that can do it at your maximum transmission rate. That
hardware will just be sitting idle if you choose not to use security.

Radia

@@@ Thanks,
@@@ Donald