Subject: RE: RTG area meeting in Atlanta

From: "Manral, Vishwas" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 7 Nov 2002 01:02:20 -0500

Hi Alex,

Wouldn't it be nice for someone from the IPv6 group to explain to us what
would be required of Routing protocols for "Site-Locals". I understand the
IPng group itself has been in discussion on this subject, however keeping
the routing folks updated on this front may be helpful.

However if we do intend to prevent forwarding of "Site-locals", I do have a
set of proposals for OSPF/IS-IS which I can forward to anyone who would be
interested in a read.

Thanks,
Vishwas

-----Original Message-----
From: Alex Zinin [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Thursday, October 31, 2002 4:09 AM
To: [email-masked]
Cc: Bill Fenner
Subject: RTG area meeting in Atlanta

Folks,

 We will have an open Routing Area meeting in Atlanta. It is scheduled
 for the 1930-2200 slot on Monday, Nov 18.

 If you have a topic you believe should be discussed at this meeting
 and you would like to request a slot, please send a message. So far
 the agenda is:

   1. Agenda bashing
   2. Announcements
   3. WG updates
   4. draft-kompella-rag-plp-00.txt: Kireeti
   5. AD mumbling
   6. Open mike

 As you can see, we've moved AD mumbling right before the open mike
 session to hopefully have a better conversation.

 As before, we're going to have a Bar BOF afterwards, and as before
 everyone is invited at their own expense (we do hope to see more
 people there this time).

 Finally, please do feel obliged to corner us in a hallway and tell us
 about the problems you're having in the IETF in general, RTG area in
 particular, or with any of us personally. Don't be strangers.

 See you in Atlanta!
 
-- 
Alex & Bill

_______________________________________________
routing-discussion mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/routing-discussion
_______________________________________________
routing-discussion mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/routing-discussion

---

From: Alex Zinin <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 7 Nov 2002 01:36:05 -0800

Vishwas,

  Margaret did give us a summary of the problem in Yokohama,
  but I will definitely ask her to give us an update if there
  is one. I could also summarize the discussion we had.

  If you have ideas on how to do this in OSPF/ISIS, I'd recommend
  going to the specific WGs, as mechanisms are likely to be
  somewhat protocol-dependant.

-- 
Alex

---

From: Alex Zinin <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 7 Nov 2002 01:36:05 -0800

Vishwas,

-- 
Alex

---

From: Margaret Wasserman <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2002 06:39:59 -0500

Hi Alex,

Unfortunately, the routing area meeting in Atlanta has been
scheduled opposite one of our IPv6 meetings, so I will not
be able to attend the routing area meeting.

I will come to the routing area "bar BOF" on Monday evening,
and I would be happy to discuss the status of site-local
addressing with anyone who is interested.

Here is a quick summary of our current situation:

The current state of the IPv6 scoped addressing architecture
would have some impact on routing protocols, which we
discussed in Yokohama, and which has been subsequently
discussed on various lists.  The very brief summary is that
administrators would need to configure their sites boundaries
to coincide with routing area boundaries, "dummy sites" would
be needed at IS-IS and BGP boundaries (because those protocols
cannot maintain a boundary within the router), and routing
protocols would need to be aware of which area boundaries are
also site boundaries, so that they could refrain from
propagating site-local routes across those boundaries.

If we retain the scoped addressing architecture essentially
as-is, we will put some wording in the scoped addressing
architecture that explains this, and the specifics for each
routing protocol should be documented by the appropriate
groups in the routing area.

However, there is currently a proposal on the table in the
IPv6 WG to limit the use of site-local addresses to non-Internet
connected networks.  This would effectively eliminate any need
for special treatment of site-locals by routing protocols and
other portions of the stack.  However, we do not yet have
consensus on that proposal.

It is very likely that there will be some compromise proposals
put forth (limiting the use of site-locals in some less
restrictive ways, with different implications for routing
protcols) before this discussion completes.

This topic will be discussed in depth at the IPv6 meeting in
Atlanta.  We intentionally scheduled this discussion for our
Thursday time slot so that it would _not_ conflict with the
routing area meeting, and I encourage interested routing
area people to attend, and to help us make an appropriate
decision.

Thanks,
Margaret

---

From: Margaret Wasserman <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2002 06:39:59 -0500

Hi Alex,

Thanks,
Margaret

---

From: Alex Zinin <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 12:16:38 -0800

Thanks, Margaret!

We are going to have a time slot at the meeting
to discuss this. Brian Haberman agreed to gives
us an update and start the discussion.

-- 
Alex

---

From: Alex Zinin <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 12:16:38 -0800

Thanks, Margaret!

-- 
Alex