Transparent Interconnection of Lots of Links (TRILL): Pseudo-Nickname for Active-Active Access
draft-ietf-trill-pseudonode-nickname-07
Yes
(Alia Atlas)
No Objection
(Alvaro Retana)
(Barry Leiba)
(Benoît Claise)
(Deborah Brungard)
(Jari Arkko)
(Joel Jaeggli)
(Kathleen Moriarty)
(Terry Manderson)
Note: This ballot was opened for revision 06 and is now closed.
Alia Atlas Former IESG member
Yes
Yes
(for -06)
Unknown
Alissa Cooper Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(2015-09-17 for -06)
Unknown
Agree with Spencer's first comment.
Alvaro Retana Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(for -06)
Unknown
Barry Leiba Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(for -06)
Unknown
Ben Campbell Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(2015-09-15 for -06)
Unknown
-- section 12, last paragraph: Elaboration on the details would be useful. This draft adds new procedures; what analysis was done to show those new procedures have no new security impact? Editorial: -- 1.1, definition of AAE, "AAE is also referred to as edge group or Virtual RBridge in this document" Why use multiple terms for the same thing? This seems to create awkward wording in several places, where the text repeats things like “In an AAE group (i.e. RBv)…”
Benoît Claise Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(for -06)
Unknown
Deborah Brungard Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(for -06)
Unknown
Jari Arkko Former IESG member
(was Discuss)
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown
Joel Jaeggli Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(for -06)
Unknown
Kathleen Moriarty Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(for -06)
Unknown
Spencer Dawkins Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(2015-09-15 for -06)
Unknown
This was an easy document for me to read through (I have some exposure to TRILL but am not skilled in the art). Thank you for that. I did have some questions, but nothing at Discuss level. In this text: Introduction Other methods are possible; for example the specification in this document and the specification in [MultiAttach] could be simultaneously deployed for different AAE groups in the same campus. It is RECOMMENDED that only one method be adopted in a TRILL ^^^^^^^^^^^ campus. For example, if the method is [MultiAttach] is used, TRILL switches need to support the capability indicated by the Capability Flags APPsub-TLV as specified in Section 4.2 of [MultiAttach]. If the method defined in this document is adopted, TRILL switches need to support the Affinity sub-TLV defined in [RFC7176] and [CMT]. For a TRILL campus that deploys both AAE methods, TRILL switches are required to support both methods. I'm not thinking that RECOMMENDED is an RFC 2119 RECOMMENDED, but more broadly, I THINK this paragraph is saying, "using multiple methods on a TRILL campus will work, but if you use multiple methods, all of the TRILL switches on the campus MUST support both methods". Did I get that right? If so ... you might give some justification for adopting only one method (my guesses were capital expense? operating expense? complexity in troubleshooting?), and perhaps even some explanation why you might adopt more than one method (I was guessing that you'd use more than one because some of your equipment doesn't support the method you want to use, but if TRILL switches have to support both methods, that isn't the reason, is it?) In this text: 3. Virtual RBridge and its Pseudo-nickname Since RBv is not a physical node and no TRILL frames are forwarded between its ports via an LAALP, pseudo-node LSP(s) MUST NOT be created for an RBv. RBv cannot act as a root when constructing distribution trees for multi-destination traffic and its pseudo- nickname is ignored when determining the distribution tree root for TRILL campus [CMT]. So the tree root priority of RBv's nickname MUST be set to 0, and this nickname SHOULD NOT be listed in the "s" ^^^^^^^^^^ nicknames (see Section 2.5 of [RFC6325]) by the RBridge holding the highest priority tree root nickname. what happens if this SHOULD NOT is ignored? Do things still work?
Stephen Farrell Former IESG member
(was Discuss)
No Objection
No Objection
(2015-09-28)
Unknown
Thanks for addressing my discuss points.
Terry Manderson Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(for -06)
Unknown