[Last-Call] Re: draft-ietf-lsr-anycast-flag-05 ietf last call Rtgdir review

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hi Jeffery,


Many thanks for your review! Please see inline...


BR,

Ran


From: ZhaohuiZhangviaDatatracker <noreply@xxxxxxxx>
To: rtg-dir@xxxxxxxx <rtg-dir@xxxxxxxx>;
Cc: draft-ietf-lsr-anycast-flag.all@xxxxxxxx <draft-ietf-lsr-anycast-flag.all@xxxxxxxx>;last-call@xxxxxxxx <last-call@xxxxxxxx>;lsr@xxxxxxxx <lsr@xxxxxxxx>;
Date: 2025年09月05日 04:20
Subject: [Last-Call] draft-ietf-lsr-anycast-flag-05 ietf last call Rtgdir review
Document: draft-ietf-lsr-anycast-flag
Title: OSPFv2 Anycast Property Advertisement
Reviewer: Zhaohui Zhang
Review result: Has Nits

For the following two paragraphs:

   [RFC7684] defines OSPFv2 Opaque LSAs based on Type-Length-Value (TLV)
   tuples that can be used to associate additional attributes with
   prefixes or links.  The OSPFv2 Extended Prefix TLV that is contained
   in the OSPFv2 Extended Prefix Opaque LSA is used to advertise
   additional attributes associated with an IPv4 prefix, but the
   definition of anycast flag to identify the IPv4 prefix as anycast has
   not yet been defined.

   The flags field of the OSPFv2 Extended Prefix TLV (Section 2.1 of
   [RFC7684]) can be found in "OSPFv2 Extended Prefix TLV Flags" IANA
   registry [IANA-OSPFv2-EPF].

They could be combined into the following:

   [RFC7684] defines OSPFv2 Opaque LSAs based on Type-Length-Value (TLV)
   tuples that can be used to associate additional attributes with
   prefixes or links.  The OSPFv2 Extended Prefix TLV that is contained
   in the OSPFv2 Extended Prefix Opaque LSA is used to advertise
   additional attributes associated with an IPv4 prefix, including a flags
   field (Section 2.1 of [RFC7684]) with an "OSPFv2 Extended Prefix TLV Flags"
   IANA registry [IANA-OSPFv2-EPF].

This would match the changes in the abstract (between the -04 and -05 revision)

of this draft.

Ran: Thank you for your suggestions. We've incorporated your feedback and made the following revisions. Please let us know if this addresses your concerns.

   [RFC7684] defines OSPFv2 Opaque LSAs based on Type-Length-Value (TLV)

   tuples that can be used to associate additional attributes with

   prefixes or links.  The OSPFv2 Extended Prefix TLV that is contained

   in the OSPFv2 Extended Prefix Opaque LSA is used to advertise

   additional attributes associated with a prefix.


   Extensions related to the anycast property of prefixes have been

   specified for IS-IS [RFC9352] and OSPFv3 [RFC9513], even though those

   documents are related to Segment Routing over IPv6, the anycast

   property applies to any IP prefix advertisement.  This document

   defines a flag to advertise the anycast property for a prefix

   advertisement in OSPFv2 in the Flags field of the OSPFv2 Extended

   Prefix TLV Flags (section 2.1 of [RFC7684]).



2.  Use-case

   In the absence of the N-flag, the node specific prefixes need to be
   identified from the anycast prefixs.  A prefix that is advertised by
   a single node and without an Anycast Flag (AC-flag) MUST be
   considered node specific.

The above is not a use case, and the content is present below anyway.
I would suggest to remove the section, or give a real use case example.

I have one in mind and could provide text if you would like to include it.


Ran:  Many thanks!  Ketan provided a use case, which we authors have discussed. 

Please see if the following content is suitable.

 Section 3.3 of [RFC8402] describes an IGP-Anycast Segment and its use

   with SR-MPLS.  The use of an anycast segment as a waypoint in a SR TE

   path is a use-case that requires consistent use of labels both for

   the anycast segment but also the segment following it if that is an

   adjacency SID or binding SID allocated dynamically or from the SRLB.

   However, there is no indication available in OSPFv2 to convey to the

   entity performing path computation using the OSPF LSDB that specific

   prefix segments are anycast segments.


   When computing TI-LFA [I-D.ietf-rtgwg-segment-routing-ti-lfa] repair

   paths using SR segments, the requirement is to pick specific nodes

   that need to be traversed to ensure loop free characteristics.  This

   requires picking prefix segments of those nodes that uniquely

   identify those nodes.  The selection of anycast prefix segments

   advertised by those nodes for the TI-LFA repair path may result in

   loops as the traffic may get rerouted to another node advertising the

   same anycast segment.  Hence, only node segments (with or without the

   N-flag) and not anycast segments (with the AC-flag) are to be used

   for TI-LFA repair paths.


   A prefix that is advertised by a single node and without an AC-flag

   MUST be considered node specific prefix.

  Ran: This sentence wants be be changed to:

   A prefix that is advertised by a single node and without an AC-flag

   is considered node-specific prefix.


What if a prefix is advertised by multiple nodes but w/o the AC-flag?

Ran: A prefix advertised by multiple nodes without an AC-flag is considered an anycast prefix.


5.  YANG Data Model

   module: ietf-ospf-anycast-flag

     augment /rt:routing/rt:control-plane-protocols
               /rt:control-plane-protocol/ospf:ospf/ospf:areas/ospf:area
               /ospf:interfaces/ospf:interface:
       +--rw anycast-flag?   boolean

Should it be part of the interface or prefix configuration?
An interface could have multiple addresses, and maybe only one/some of them

may need the AC-flag?

Ran:Yingzhen and Ketan are already handling the issue.


5.2.  YANG Data Model for OSPFv2 Anycast Property Advertisement

   The following is the YANG module:

   <CODE BEGINS> file "ietf-ospf-anycast-flag@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx"
   module ietf-ospf-anycast-flag {
     yang-version 1.1;
     namespace
       "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-ospf-anycast-flag";
     prefix ospf-anycast-flag;

What does "prefix ospf-anycast-flag" mean here? Is it an interface or prefix
property?
The following mentions both interface and prefix.

     import ietf-routing {
       prefix rt;
       reference
         "RFC 8349: A YANG Data Model for Routing
          Management (NMDA Version)";
     }
     import ietf-ospf {
       prefix ospf;
       reference
         "RFC 9129: YANG Data Model for the OSPF Protocol";
     }

     identity ac-flag {
       base ospf:ospfv2-extended-prefix-flag;
       description
         "Anycast flag.  When set, it indicates that the prefix
          is configured as anycast.";
     }

     /* Configuration */
     augment "/rt:routing/rt:control-plane-protocols/"
           + "rt:control-plane-protocol/ospf:ospf/"
           + "ospf:areas/ospf:area/ospf:interfaces/ospf:interface" {
       when "derived-from(/rt:routing/rt:control-plane-protocols/"
          + "rt:control-plane-protocol/rt:type, 'ospf:ospfv2')" {
         description
           "This augments the OSPFv2 interface configuration.";
       }
       description
         "This augments OSPFv2 interface configuration with anycast
          property advertisement.";
       leaf anycast-flag {
         type boolean;
         default "false";
         description
           "Sets the prefix as an anycast address.";
       }
     }
   }

Thanks.
Jeffrey



-- 
last-call mailing list -- last-call@xxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to last-call-leave@xxxxxxxx


-- 
last-call mailing list -- last-call@xxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to last-call-leave@xxxxxxxx

[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Mhonarc]     [Fedora Users]

  Powered by Linux