From nobody Fri Apr 5 02:39:47 2019 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 365CB1201C0 for ; Fri, 5 Apr 2019 02:39:46 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id G_b6tg_5wmpm for ; Fri, 5 Apr 2019 02:39:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-qk1-x72a.google.com (mail-qk1-x72a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::72a]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 55893120045 for ; Fri, 5 Apr 2019 02:39:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-qk1-x72a.google.com with SMTP id s81so3379221qke.13 for ; Fri, 05 Apr 2019 02:39:44 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to :content-transfer-encoding; bh=SDoftdf4IdRr3A0y3wz0OuW9VTmim+I6Cu2/eQT5I3A=; b=XkKO02W/4XmeJ7I2KOGERccxd1aUGurmPU/FoGmCyj8jdSG5lYmzNnNW97ObpyKdKX lGN0h/pDFZaNwm9OfolscmeJ5bPH5IvjMDQ9WRcDKbnQ31YxqjKHM90TZjdVvCSKWPfF Wl8Ab5Cq1T/HWZu1UBqzJXPPusOL/wRFhrPExn30zMWZfXN8lSBKMBdNtW3Ru/itnEzr 7QZ8yhvvL4S8em7byOIbJUmbB5g/YVvzxK74EzPhkD1jPNaIVC0y6i33L3M1y7QKtaF8 oWzlpdJ+FSt7xAmhOiZQN7LXHf35rE263ZwsaGcXsJuPD7eH1cW2AgsE6m/yFSJSqLUA Ysug== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to :content-transfer-encoding; bh=SDoftdf4IdRr3A0y3wz0OuW9VTmim+I6Cu2/eQT5I3A=; b=p+uXklsj5AEA/qOTq9D68vHnJ7fHuw4Fdqp3w7A1ZwP6pG2gOn0cGMVnr38huVpMt7 RM3HjM8GUFF4l41dLhhhu+L0fd/1kvoOwpKA8cdeXEeDEGRA+yYttox3Lfr42YWToSHI gu3pHINhyY9mdk/iESlvbewaoEbJdqkAZvjNYWKBKuwsOMDtb5FIIHAWW5sEnHeoTPi8 +17Jey2iz3oNA6WYKtn+sLY+OB4i2lhlvVv6qRn9IyelGN1KFpBHHA3RrNLXnXnBRNgm n0Bp7yozZQT23TvAC1X4lbNIwX2jloFcunCYigEXL8eSgJNbr7fgsVo/iWF4RgVgUoMv U3Yg== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAUR0PmnsqLw+HnKwJj7FmgzTL6ZVLPVIffbi7r2YlctYqxV6gPF LCvCMO0dttYm8+lBW/dy8wkK8pmRrwsvramtHzfMaB43Gq8= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwdpG4noJTBCfhEFXfHFcukTwT23e/quDxGTJUeGqa/U+k10/PN6g8114LKt+qieB2IfmD8tJJGAVGppCK/JVo= X-Received: by 2002:a37:a5d8:: with SMTP id o207mr9463755qke.0.1554457182642; Fri, 05 Apr 2019 02:39:42 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 From: Dave Taht Date: Fri, 5 Apr 2019 11:39:31 +0200 Message-ID: To: Babel at IETF , babel-users Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Archived-At: Subject: [babel] short rtt metrics and unicast and flow control X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 05 Apr 2019 09:39:46 -0000 I've had, oh, 4 hours per year to work on short rtt metrics for babel. If it's of any help, this is the only public commit I ever made on the subject. https://github.com/dtaht/babeld-shortrtt-metrics/commit/10a081f70cd89c3ad13= d74c5587d308d0fb7d46d Elsewhere I've oft talked about the possibilities/problems of unicast and rtt measurements, in my usual fragmentary and chaotic way. Two good references are: https://alioth-lists.debian.net/pipermail/babel-users/2015-April/001974.htm= l and I can't find the really long rant I'd written during the usec debate... and an old wishlist: https://alioth-lists.debian.net/pipermail/babel-users/2015-December/002194.= html --=20 Dave T=C3=A4ht CTO, TekLibre, LLC http://www.teklibre.com Tel: 1-831-205-9740 From nobody Tue Apr 9 20:12:03 2019 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C1ED912009C; Tue, 9 Apr 2019 20:12:00 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.749 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.749 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id hCbFl1tMZCiw; Tue, 9 Apr 2019 20:11:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-it1-x129.google.com (mail-it1-x129.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::129]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2C94F1200B3; Tue, 9 Apr 2019 20:11:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-it1-x129.google.com with SMTP id 139so1006603ita.4; Tue, 09 Apr 2019 20:11:59 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=e/DEdB51Ud/benR6PDhUjCOTFRagnHoOxhateZG7M9I=; b=sZBptEZY86RS8Bml+EyzN0tg5ZEMxek96NMaXv8CdEhvPmAvpK/ikOdmmZzcz2GFlc LifboZz3JUTAHxoZAesk95tovG+5TOXfM6k9wt5lUO+UQ6IWbgn9/3lCXM+yrRciiH7A qs5f1vRBFdTNqypk4ge8024WUERgufkeEuT1Fmi+9xgWiVCwsOOUk6srpvy/i+kWBMpO FK5GdCVL7MyAZoQFD2paWKe0Ea+zFZAmWWsAOqg6OSio7Khxidnxlt1sEHH5OSs0ip/j yBDMmYWYHW7XjW6b1LGUjyWLT2CFGa4oRVHjN2GHBllsxOSM/j6lwdiIrU8HzJ00IEMv b0dw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=e/DEdB51Ud/benR6PDhUjCOTFRagnHoOxhateZG7M9I=; b=Im8bl6MSCK6UxhyZgF5PIhC+k4M8v/NHdzpFpDFPdMnTX+8GvwzUidcfKEQlbd9RKO LYvJEhlVdU+uxVNujALAOmGHmAx7+laB4FbCQJ5oidRv91F9NxozxLWVdx+BeihJ7DaM q2XE8uLHKF6k6VmtM+xM5xH1E12anuHUGLe6U5RslDZFdsEN9kNMyHI4RiO6rh3Omar4 8XC3T7LzVBE+Fj+FYY+P0ywGMDX7xcVCoLMIhTCM/juu8M+EAMUXSVgkpmL5I3/193YR 31N2vhsv7WIOfjRkENFBmusvmESPTZhbdcvVClkSA7w94Mf+i0+baKXHMoDKnpTZ36G4 2hAw== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAVNzL0OKhySClB3riCOX6PhOIgb/HpX/jqbtfK7e/Mb0HNppweN PgwyxEwflCf8o/dgHEyGcdqUCeTi8zvM1iCdhxEB+kFK X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxKcNB9QKINRE440IQ5l1Y5uaO4hbQmlKJP5yuWBB11qU+k5cmIM+Sra2dRgslzF3/h6LNUctuGv9xRFur2HcM= X-Received: by 2002:a24:383:: with SMTP id e125mr1435889ite.96.1554865918125; Tue, 09 Apr 2019 20:11:58 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 From: Donald Eastlake Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2019 23:11:46 -0400 Message-ID: To: Babel at IETF Cc: babel-chairs Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000b931a70586246ed0" Archived-At: Subject: [babel] Shepherd Review of draft-ietf-babel-source-specific-04 X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2019 03:12:01 -0000 --000000000000b931a70586246ed0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Hi, Possible technical issues: =================== Section 6, page 7, first parenthetical: I think instead of "and all of its extensions" it should say something a bit more limited. How about "and all previously standardized extensions"? Section 7, page 8, 2nd paragraph: Generally, cases where different routers can interpret routing protocol messages differently make me very nervous. It is almost always possible to construct a situation where this causes persistent looping. It seems to me that you need to unambiguously specify what is done if there is a malformed TLV with multiple Source Prefix sub-TLVs. Such TLVs could always be ignored or the first or the last Source Prefix sut-TLV could be the effective sub-TLV with other Source Prefix sub-TLVs ignored. But whatever is specified, it needs to be mandatory unambiguous behavior. Section 7.1, Page 9: What do you do when you get a malformed Source Prefix sub-TLV with a zero Source Plen? I guess this is answered below where it says the TLV is ignored if the sub-TLV is malformed. (I guess it could also be malformed by Source Plen being too large.) Perhaps it should say "This MUST NOT be 0. If it is 0, the enclosing TLV is ignored." For completeness, whether the Source Prefix is left-justified or right-justified should be specified. Section 7.3, Page 9: Continuing the theme of some of the comments above, what do you do with a wildcard request that does contain a Source Prefix sub-TLV? Typos: ===== Section 5.2, page 7, top line: "that is has" -> "that it has" Section 7.2, Page 9, third line: "than" -> "as" Minor textural comments: =================== These are just minor cases where I think the draft would read slightly better with a wording change. Abstract: OLD source address. This document describes an extension for source- specific routing to the Babel routing protocol. NEW source address. This document describes an extension to the Babel routing protocol for source-specific routing . Section 1, page 3, 1st paragraph, next to last line: "in case of equality" -> "in case of equally specific destination addresses" Section 5.1, page 6, last line: "sub-TLV" -> "source specific sub-TLV" Section 6.2, pag 8, first line: ", discarding source specific" -> ", the discarding of source-specific" Thanks, Donald =============================== Donald E. Eastlake 3rd +1-508-333-2270 (cell) 1424 Pro Shop Court, Davenport, FL 33896 USA d3e3e3@gmail.com --000000000000b931a70586246ed0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi,

Possible technical issues:
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
Secti= on 6, page 7, first parenthetical:
=C2=A0 =C2=A0I think instead o= f "and all of its extensions" it should say something a bit more = limited. How about "and all previously standardized extensions"?<= /div>

Section 7, page 8, 2nd paragraph:
=C2=A0= =C2=A0Generally, cases where different routers can interpret routing proto= col messages differently make me very nervous. It is almost always possible= to construct a situation where this causes persistent looping. It seems to= me that you need to unambiguously specify what is done if there is a malfo= rmed TLV with multiple Source Prefix sub-TLVs. Such TLVs could always be ig= nored or the first or the last Source Prefix sut-TLV could be the effective= sub-TLV with other Source Prefix sub-TLVs ignored. But whatever is specifi= ed, it needs to be mandatory unambiguous behavior.

Section 7.1, Page 9:
=C2=A0 =C2=A0What do you do when you get a = malformed Source Prefix sub-TLV with a zero Source Plen? I guess this is an= swered below where it says the TLV is ignored if the sub-TLV is malformed. = (I guess it could also be malformed by Source Plen being too large.) Perhap= s it should say "This MUST NOT be 0. If it is 0, the enclosing TLV is = ignored."
=C2=A0 =C2=A0For completeness, whether the Source = Prefix is left-justified or right-justified should be specified.
=
Section 7.3, Page 9:
=C2=A0 =C2=A0Continuing the t= heme of some of the comments above, what do you do with a wildcard request = that does contain a Source Prefix sub-TLV?

Ty= pos:
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
Section 5.2, page 7, top line:
=C2=A0 =C2=A0"that is has" -> "that it has"

Section 7.2, Page 9, third line:
=C2=A0 = =C2=A0"than" -> "as"

Minor = textural comments:
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D
=C2=A0 =C2=A0These are just minor cases where I thin= k the draft would read slightly better with a wording change.
Abstract:
OLD
source address. This document describes an ext= ension for source-
specific routing to the Babel routing protocol.
NEW
source address. This document d= escribes an extension to the Babel
routing protocol for source-specific routing .

Section 1, page 3, 1st paragraph, next to last line:
=C2=A0 =C2=A0"in case of equality" -> "in case of e= qually specific destination addresses"

Sectio= n 5.1, page 6, last line:
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 "sub-TLV" ->= "source specific sub-TLV"

Section 6.2, = pag 8, first line:
=C2=A0 =C2=A0", discarding source specifi= c" -> ", the discarding of source-specific"
Thanks,
Donald
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=C2=A0Donal= d E. Eastlake 3rd =C2=A0 +1-508-333-2270 (cell)
=C2=A01424 Pro Shop Cour= t, Davenport, FL 33896 USA
=C2=A0d3e3e3@gmail.com
--000000000000b931a70586246ed0-- From nobody Wed Apr 10 03:42:22 2019 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 54BCC120291 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 03:42:21 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.901 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0LQYO1qnz2zi for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 03:42:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from korolev.univ-paris7.fr (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EBE661201C7 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 03:42:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from potemkin.univ-paris7.fr (potemkin.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:1]) by korolev.univ-paris7.fr (8.14.4/8.14.4/relay1/82085) with ESMTP id x3AAgCeY016162 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 10 Apr 2019 12:42:12 +0200 Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [81.194.30.253]) by potemkin.univ-paris7.fr (8.14.4/8.14.4/relay2/82085) with ESMTP id x3AAgDPx021161; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 12:42:13 +0200 Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 416906E2F7; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 12:42:16 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at math.univ-paris-diderot.fr Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr ([127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10023) with ESMTP id PMNZxQznYS8e; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 12:42:15 +0200 (CEST) Received: from pirx.irif.fr (unknown [78.194.40.74]) (Authenticated sender: jch) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 568DE6E2E6; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 12:42:11 +0200 (CEST) Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2019 12:42:11 +0200 Message-ID: <874l76xhto.wl-jch@irif.fr> From: Juliusz Chroboczek To: Toke =?ISO-8859-1?Q?H=F8iland-J=F8rgensen?= Cc: Babel at IETF , Donald Eastlake In-Reply-To: References: User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:2]); Wed, 10 Apr 2019 12:42:12 +0200 (CEST) X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (potemkin.univ-paris7.fr [194.254.61.141]); Wed, 10 Apr 2019 12:42:13 +0200 (CEST) X-Miltered: at korolev with ID 5CADC884.001 by Joe's j-chkmail (http : // j-chkmail dot ensmp dot fr)! X-Miltered: at potemkin with ID 5CADC885.001 by Joe's j-chkmail (http : // j-chkmail dot ensmp dot fr)! X-j-chkmail-Enveloppe: 5CADC884.001 from potemkin.univ-paris7.fr/potemkin.univ-paris7.fr/null/potemkin.univ-paris7.fr/ X-j-chkmail-Enveloppe: 5CADC885.001 from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/null/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/ X-j-chkmail-Score: MSGID : 5CADC884.001 on korolev.univ-paris7.fr : j-chkmail score : . : R=. U=. O=. B=0.000 -> S=0.000 X-j-chkmail-Score: MSGID : 5CADC885.001 on potemkin.univ-paris7.fr : j-chkmail score : . : R=. U=. O=. B=0.000 -> S=0.000 X-j-chkmail-Status: Ham X-j-chkmail-Status: Ham Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] Shepherd Review of draft-ietf-babel-source-specific-04 X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2019 10:42:21 -0000 > It seems to me that you need to unambiguously specify what is done if > there is a [...] TLV with multiple Source Prefix sub-TLVs. Such TLVs > could always be ignored or the first or the last Source Prefix sut-TLV > could be the effective sub-TLV with other Source Prefix sub-TLVs > ignored. But whatever is specified, it needs to be mandatory unambiguous > behavior. [...] > What do you do when you get a malformed Source Prefix sub-TLV with a zero > Source Plen? [...] > Continuing the theme of some of the comments above, what do you do with > a wildcard request that does contain a Source Prefix sub-TLV? Toke, I could use some advice here. Please have a look at your code and let me know whether requiring (MUST) dropping the enclosing TLV in all of these cases complicates your implementation or not. (I'll do the same on my side.) Thanks, -- Juliusz From nobody Wed Apr 10 04:08:30 2019 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C8823120131 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 04:08:28 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=toke.dk Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4Al2XxfYk1qc for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 04:08:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.toke.dk (mail.toke.dk [52.28.52.200]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4D455120112 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 04:08:26 -0700 (PDT) From: Toke =?utf-8?Q?H=C3=B8iland-J=C3=B8rgensen?= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=toke.dk; s=20161023; t=1554894503; bh=Y3S/VEE1m6/FvLrTR793ED++tUY5Y+Qwn/4Q9F13moc=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=SnmdIB0I/Cb5DrNgmriHshh6dRwBzgg6XbDruYuKjmyHLym1SCGoU1KMzmOL7CGi3 BixvYMw7Jg5ka63U1MT8ly174eDcjN7VMlHtP+FdlldUpW2xlZ9CA39WbrvccwAdls AiK3nhXuhPFsBydPkjSvH899+mKqZNAlh/La3bpKwMvCA06pONgNs5lBKb5eO0Ly0w 6KCrhDlNdAzedShgiXdkOrzVOdwNKCuYJ6irGCpsn2Y7O+8+cSGXQsufZV1suQtEWN DlKrgFF+v87dL7znO/H1STEYyLjDZybakiemoHUbrm8Kybn2e1ZHBxdZN8ZRjGLLdA B9FYt/lJqwzhg== To: Juliusz Chroboczek Cc: Donald Eastlake , Babel at IETF In-Reply-To: <874l76xhto.wl-jch@irif.fr> References: <874l76xhto.wl-jch@irif.fr> Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2019 13:08:23 +0200 X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett Message-ID: <874l76w21k.fsf@toke.dk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] Shepherd Review of draft-ietf-babel-source-specific-04 X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2019 11:08:29 -0000 Juliusz Chroboczek writes: >> It seems to me that you need to unambiguously specify what is done if >> there is a [...] TLV with multiple Source Prefix sub-TLVs. Such TLVs >> could always be ignored or the first or the last Source Prefix sut-TLV >> could be the effective sub-TLV with other Source Prefix sub-TLVs >> ignored. But whatever is specified, it needs to be mandatory unambiguous >> behavior. > > [...] > >> What do you do when you get a malformed Source Prefix sub-TLV with a zero >> Source Plen? > > [...] > >> Continuing the theme of some of the comments above, what do you do with >> a wildcard request that does contain a Source Prefix sub-TLV? > > Toke, I could use some advice here. Please have a look at your code and > let me know whether requiring (MUST) dropping the enclosing TLV in all of > these cases complicates your implementation or not. (I'll do the same on > my side.) Dropping the enclosing TLV is no problem, skipping the source TLV would need patches... For reference, Bird currently does the following[0]: - Malformed sub-TLV or Source prefix plen == 0: Parse error, drop the whole packet. - Source sub-TLV on wildcard update or route request: Ignore enclosing TLV. - Source sub-TLV on any other TLV: Parse error, drop the whole packet. - Source-specific routing not configured: Ignore enclosing TLV. - Duplicate source prefix sub-TLV: Ignore enclosing TLV. -Toke [0]: https://gitlab.labs.nic.cz/labs/bird/blob/master/proto/babel/packets.c#L998 From nobody Wed Apr 10 04:34:36 2019 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AF05F120291 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 04:34:34 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.901 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id r0mCTVTAPNWO for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 04:34:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from korolev.univ-paris7.fr (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 36B8512029F for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 04:34:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from potemkin.univ-paris7.fr (potemkin.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:1]) by korolev.univ-paris7.fr (8.14.4/8.14.4/relay1/82085) with ESMTP id x3ABYR05026779 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 10 Apr 2019 13:34:27 +0200 Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [81.194.30.253]) by potemkin.univ-paris7.fr (8.14.4/8.14.4/relay2/82085) with ESMTP id x3ABYSiT024000; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 13:34:28 +0200 Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id F261A6F1A5; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 13:34:30 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at math.univ-paris-diderot.fr Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr ([127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10023) with ESMTP id AiYGcmNEzyFJ; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 13:34:29 +0200 (CEST) Received: from pirx.irif.fr (unknown [78.194.40.74]) (Authenticated sender: jch) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id CF2E96F19D; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 13:34:29 +0200 (CEST) Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2019 13:34:29 +0200 Message-ID: <871s2axfei.wl-jch@irif.fr> From: Juliusz Chroboczek To: Toke =?ISO-8859-1?Q?H=F8iland-J=F8rgensen?= Cc: Donald Eastlake , Babel at IETF In-Reply-To: <874l76w21k.fsf@toke.dk> References: <874l76xhto.wl-jch@irif.fr> <874l76w21k.fsf@toke.dk> User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:2]); Wed, 10 Apr 2019 13:34:27 +0200 (CEST) X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (potemkin.univ-paris7.fr [194.254.61.141]); Wed, 10 Apr 2019 13:34:28 +0200 (CEST) X-Miltered: at korolev with ID 5CADD4C3.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http : // j-chkmail dot ensmp dot fr)! X-Miltered: at potemkin with ID 5CADD4C4.002 by Joe's j-chkmail (http : // j-chkmail dot ensmp dot fr)! X-j-chkmail-Enveloppe: 5CADD4C3.000 from potemkin.univ-paris7.fr/potemkin.univ-paris7.fr/null/potemkin.univ-paris7.fr/ X-j-chkmail-Enveloppe: 5CADD4C4.002 from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/null/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/ X-j-chkmail-Score: MSGID : 5CADD4C3.000 on korolev.univ-paris7.fr : j-chkmail score : . : R=. U=. O=. B=0.000 -> S=0.000 X-j-chkmail-Score: MSGID : 5CADD4C4.002 on potemkin.univ-paris7.fr : j-chkmail score : . : R=. U=. O=. B=0.000 -> S=0.000 X-j-chkmail-Status: Ham X-j-chkmail-Status: Ham Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] Shepherd Review of draft-ietf-babel-source-specific-04 X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2019 11:34:35 -0000 > Dropping the enclosing TLV is no problem, skipping the source TLV would > need patches... For reference, Bird currently does the following[0]: I see. So your current behaviour can be described by MUST drop the enclosing TLV and MAY drop the whole packet May the MUST be a SHOULD, or must it be a MUST? -- Juliusz From nobody Wed Apr 10 04:42:07 2019 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C9A3120380 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 04:41:55 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=toke.dk Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id NMZjls9R6S6C for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 04:41:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.toke.dk (mail.toke.dk [52.28.52.200]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 365FF12032D for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 04:41:53 -0700 (PDT) From: Toke =?utf-8?Q?H=C3=B8iland-J=C3=B8rgensen?= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=toke.dk; s=20161023; t=1554896510; bh=RDo3DZ6vhSM/WLYbk+DRKHNQEBpUyzAAwymVb0sXGeA=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=h6ZtZkRLTZUDOS3b4ssek/qYLQmgJ49NHhBOZAciPU2drrphF1xUZi9xj8kAkQSSn 7sjXlRfVid29R9SZGkkk2BaQ6qD7KD097Bhuo7Xt5N08SPGPvx2rdTb5bO59vGsTVM M6L88b4KnZmfVI3y6QLPc0aSWAqyLN2HwQXHrKlTxW1hT1alraa8W8d2n4ECLgGcR5 jNG2fLKP5nuNRspXBkPWDob924fGbYVPe1coDB8UdfZPnoEYcX3syEFhdr+TVdYNf3 0iXwgSxLuBzu0q0WNekIKtVQn+Au/mgqTu9TuYvz+gn1gh5Q88EN5ibi7uobQix1+S 68707m/PMUUJg== To: Juliusz Chroboczek Cc: Donald Eastlake , Babel at IETF In-Reply-To: <871s2axfei.wl-jch@irif.fr> References: <874l76xhto.wl-jch@irif.fr> <874l76w21k.fsf@toke.dk> <871s2axfei.wl-jch@irif.fr> Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2019 13:41:50 +0200 X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett Message-ID: <87y34iulxd.fsf@toke.dk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] Shepherd Review of draft-ietf-babel-source-specific-04 X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2019 11:42:03 -0000 Juliusz Chroboczek writes: >> Dropping the enclosing TLV is no problem, skipping the source TLV would >> need patches... For reference, Bird currently does the following[0]: > > I see. So your current behaviour can be described by > > MUST drop the enclosing TLV and MAY drop the whole packet > > May the MUST be a SHOULD, or must it be a MUST? If it's a SHOULD, what is one supposed to do instead if deciding not to drop? -Toke From nobody Wed Apr 10 08:54:30 2019 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B53A41202FB for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 08:54:28 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.901 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id vVG1-RaKu-a5 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 08:54:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from korolev.univ-paris7.fr (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A3EEF1200CD for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 08:54:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [81.194.30.253]) by korolev.univ-paris7.fr (8.14.4/8.14.4/relay1/82085) with ESMTP id x3AFsKZi019425; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 17:54:20 +0200 Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C1DC73756; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 17:54:24 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at math.univ-paris-diderot.fr Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr ([127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10023) with ESMTP id TKHQ6Q2XTHS6; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 17:54:23 +0200 (CEST) Received: from pirx.irif.fr (unknown [78.194.40.74]) (Authenticated sender: jch) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0E35573754; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 17:54:23 +0200 (CEST) Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2019 17:54:22 +0200 Message-ID: <87r2a9x3dd.wl-jch@irif.fr> From: Juliusz Chroboczek To: Toke =?ISO-8859-1?Q?H=F8iland-J=F8rgensen?= Cc: Donald Eastlake , Babel at IETF In-Reply-To: <87y34iulxd.fsf@toke.dk> References: <874l76xhto.wl-jch@irif.fr> <874l76w21k.fsf@toke.dk> <871s2axfei.wl-jch@irif.fr> <87y34iulxd.fsf@toke.dk> User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [194.254.61.138]); Wed, 10 Apr 2019 17:54:20 +0200 (CEST) X-Miltered: at korolev with ID 5CAE11AC.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http : // j-chkmail dot ensmp dot fr)! X-j-chkmail-Enveloppe: 5CAE11AC.000 from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/null/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/ X-j-chkmail-Score: MSGID : 5CAE11AC.000 on korolev.univ-paris7.fr : j-chkmail score : . : R=. U=. O=. B=0.000 -> S=0.000 X-j-chkmail-Status: Ham Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] Shepherd Review of draft-ietf-babel-source-specific-04 X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2019 15:54:29 -0000 >> I see. So your current behaviour can be described by >> >> MUST drop the enclosing TLV and MAY drop the whole packet >> >> May the MUST be a SHOULD, or must it be a MUST? > If it's a SHOULD, what is one supposed to do instead if deciding not to > drop? It's not required to detect the situation -- we're in nasal daemons land. -- Juliusz From nobody Wed Apr 10 14:14:01 2019 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F00AD120088 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 14:13:59 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=toke.dk Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id BP7R8wAr9kjJ for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 14:13:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.toke.dk (mail.toke.dk [IPv6:2a00:7660:6da:2001::664]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 42C161202EE for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 14:13:58 -0700 (PDT) From: Toke =?utf-8?Q?H=C3=B8iland-J=C3=B8rgensen?= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=toke.dk; s=20161023; t=1554930834; bh=v7nRaWZVcbqe2B0YoG8ModRDlHVqamG5LTRo1mSJ7pU=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=ES5Z79AHglterr8OQezNG+Wa4E5t24923752n9b+LeMGcemTmJdKBMjmhE2U+xrjQ vMXppYw78TcII60uLjda4mQwAlMLqDmZdtvwTHbHBw/xYIP1fz4qdMBvXPI6qN8FHQ UNAN1Mq+8GuMFI8tkfiMUGUSVi7+ToF5hGqSCg6AA3VgJ2y+NU6d/xeeG1hTnV061b kua7yeLXINXNt+n8yt0pvMfMrcLWWpGWeuXNg2krSQ9kHP3ZLgFpMPXgDB0++EAAQ0 dcK/oZdDDbH7XO5GZDsnqweQtndaB+ToXbwnmNHt7o5vchI+iEPAJqynnn9blQI1rV KpdZfOuXMS1Sw== To: Juliusz Chroboczek Cc: Donald Eastlake , Babel at IETF In-Reply-To: <87r2a9x3dd.wl-jch@irif.fr> References: <874l76xhto.wl-jch@irif.fr> <874l76w21k.fsf@toke.dk> <871s2axfei.wl-jch@irif.fr> <87y34iulxd.fsf@toke.dk> <87r2a9x3dd.wl-jch@irif.fr> Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2019 23:13:54 +0200 X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett Message-ID: <87wok1tvfx.fsf@toke.dk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] Shepherd Review of draft-ietf-babel-source-specific-04 X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2019 21:14:00 -0000 Juliusz Chroboczek writes: >>> I see. So your current behaviour can be described by >>> >>> MUST drop the enclosing TLV and MAY drop the whole packet >>> >>> May the MUST be a SHOULD, or must it be a MUST? > >> If it's a SHOULD, what is one supposed to do instead if deciding not to >> drop? > > It's not required to detect the situation -- we're in nasal daemons > land. That sorta feels under-specified to me? -Toke From nobody Wed Apr 10 14:57:26 2019 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A52A9120610 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 14:57:25 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.901 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0y0MuU46vxBo for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 14:57:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from korolev.univ-paris7.fr (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F35D5120343 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 14:57:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from potemkin.univ-paris7.fr (potemkin.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:1]) by korolev.univ-paris7.fr (8.14.4/8.14.4/relay1/82085) with ESMTP id x3ALvGdF026334 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 10 Apr 2019 23:57:16 +0200 Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [81.194.30.253]) by potemkin.univ-paris7.fr (8.14.4/8.14.4/relay2/82085) with ESMTP id x3ALvHmv008996; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 23:57:17 +0200 Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C12876C64; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 23:57:20 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at math.univ-paris-diderot.fr Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr ([127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10023) with ESMTP id iEhUhpIaFCSG; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 23:57:14 +0200 (CEST) Received: from pirx.irif.fr (unknown [78.194.40.74]) (Authenticated sender: jch) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id EDA4976C62; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 23:57:13 +0200 (CEST) Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2019 23:57:13 +0200 Message-ID: <87ftqpwmkm.wl-jch@irif.fr> From: Juliusz Chroboczek To: Toke =?ISO-8859-1?Q?H=F8iland-J=F8rgensen?= Cc: Donald Eastlake , Babel at IETF In-Reply-To: <87wok1tvfx.fsf@toke.dk> References: <874l76xhto.wl-jch@irif.fr> <874l76w21k.fsf@toke.dk> <871s2axfei.wl-jch@irif.fr> <87y34iulxd.fsf@toke.dk> <87r2a9x3dd.wl-jch@irif.fr> <87wok1tvfx.fsf@toke.dk> User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:2]); Wed, 10 Apr 2019 23:57:16 +0200 (CEST) X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (potemkin.univ-paris7.fr [194.254.61.141]); Wed, 10 Apr 2019 23:57:17 +0200 (CEST) X-Miltered: at korolev with ID 5CAE66BC.002 by Joe's j-chkmail (http : // j-chkmail dot ensmp dot fr)! X-Miltered: at potemkin with ID 5CAE66BD.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http : // j-chkmail dot ensmp dot fr)! X-j-chkmail-Enveloppe: 5CAE66BC.002 from potemkin.univ-paris7.fr/potemkin.univ-paris7.fr/null/potemkin.univ-paris7.fr/ X-j-chkmail-Enveloppe: 5CAE66BD.000 from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/null/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/ X-j-chkmail-Score: MSGID : 5CAE66BC.002 on korolev.univ-paris7.fr : j-chkmail score : . : R=. U=. O=. B=0.000 -> S=0.000 X-j-chkmail-Score: MSGID : 5CAE66BD.000 on potemkin.univ-paris7.fr : j-chkmail score : . : R=. U=. O=. B=0.000 -> S=0.000 X-j-chkmail-Status: Ham X-j-chkmail-Status: Ham Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] Shepherd Review of draft-ietf-babel-source-specific-04 X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2019 21:57:26 -0000 >>>> I see. So your current behaviour can be described by >>>> >>>> MUST drop the enclosing TLV and MAY drop the whole packet >>>> >>>> May the MUST be a SHOULD, or must it be a MUST? >>> If it's a SHOULD, what is one supposed to do instead if deciding not to >>> drop? >> It's not required to detect the situation -- we're in nasal daemons >> land. > That sorta feels under-specified to me? Babel is a distributed algorithm, and its correctness relies on all nodes in a routing domain behaving correctly. There are many ways in which a buggy or malicious node can disrupt a Babel network, and an implementation is not required to detect most of them. (The most common in production is a node that announces a route but doesn't actually forward packets, e.g. due to a mis-configured firewall.) What Donald is requesting here is that we add a requirement that every implementation should detect one particular (and rather unlikely) instance of incorrect behaviour, and work around it. I don't necessarily agree with this requirement, but I am willing to put it in if the implementation cost is low enough. Assuming we put that requirement in, should we mandate (MUST) that all implementations detect that incorrect situation and work around it, or should we merely recommend (SHOULD) that they do? Please keep in mind that the situation identified by Donald is rather unlikely to occur in practice, while the implementation cost will be carried by all implementations. -- Juliusz From nobody Wed Apr 10 19:14:40 2019 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8840C12008F for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 19:14:37 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.748 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.748 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 22uouDaCXuXA for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 19:14:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-it1-x12e.google.com (mail-it1-x12e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::12e]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1BF3F12000F for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 19:14:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-it1-x12e.google.com with SMTP id y204so7073395itf.3 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 19:14:36 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=bZ+I3lIpilFrHlweXJDQq7GtZuyY4rA7TZNWXglOWdY=; b=V/R+sF5cV9JvjuxSMinblmJGNj0FOFR2KqHaw5Oaun+AGzzBb+59JweGVldIepqeCM odEPCAhK/lhG987Eaeb4RFmOfH4DUw6O6CAtYUpo9kTMptdiNtIBxyyJWVg68gd1HGor YTn7GxuLnlbFcJAYMs/A4Q2JJbmcH4wlpB2jjL9MYsFMPmTRafsLxPuyetWA1LbJg1M6 N2rE2ijHEHetdeinMWI+9Sp+amXjzsHApOrueMC/ZtxzTSjZLdxk9XZ/Urd5iUeHL3oF asgykNdMaar3btlhEpUkReWfm87k944TFL/1+aTdVxoP6RX/tWpMLtf4yn5i/xZIz+RT 1MBg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=bZ+I3lIpilFrHlweXJDQq7GtZuyY4rA7TZNWXglOWdY=; b=s+srLpFDUe5KVu4mGl0/MpT4R52qg6b+Q9HPDHhpHVBbJrNpTL+JvtjjcKi73AWKPb TUzC6DmWur+kh1mQ28YC2hVLGYWJgU0tOemWc+zbTjLZ/vRR51LcGMNeiSaElLCbglIK spM1LqFTBWzrFT7nNqbktmP+Iygi/gNlIVcqH0RWGX+q7CW+uGIW4jCWWl2XgI3QGeBz tuSi2s1s+SVQUXJzo8ZzUW3Qq77HRzF76LOJl6jPYc0dSAIpmmihCASJrQvNXlW0ILvx q1LVPGuE9fjUxxPxxV6UkqXNNgm+E6ehRa0uPOzzbPVkJPKyVUtLTmXpiGus5nv56POT j7fg== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAXw/SmLXzJS01YS+UhCcV0sVh5zuxF2QqY3yq0mcUATgfE2IYUK 38jSgKmYckwzi6d13wAOGWCwN5U1YkXnjWs/Uig= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqz8KzQExRDeFGeU8DYbIG1nYidvItj2AvdBVKfa/csM8mST/MD93TokShXyiMITc9yVg2QyCViULvsPyK81Cvw= X-Received: by 2002:a24:383:: with SMTP id e125mr5814498ite.96.1554948875328; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 19:14:35 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <874l76xhto.wl-jch@irif.fr> <874l76w21k.fsf@toke.dk> <871s2axfei.wl-jch@irif.fr> <87y34iulxd.fsf@toke.dk> <87r2a9x3dd.wl-jch@irif.fr> <87wok1tvfx.fsf@toke.dk> <87ftqpwmkm.wl-jch@irif.fr> In-Reply-To: <87ftqpwmkm.wl-jch@irif.fr> From: Donald Eastlake Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2019 22:14:23 -0400 Message-ID: To: Juliusz Chroboczek Cc: =?UTF-8?B?VG9rZSBIw7hpbGFuZC1Kw7hyZ2Vuc2Vu?= , Donald Eastlake , Babel at IETF Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000005ba474058637bf22" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] Shepherd Review of draft-ietf-babel-source-specific-04 X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2019 02:14:37 -0000 --0000000000005ba474058637bf22 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Hi, On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 5:57 PM Juliusz Chroboczek wrote: > ... Babel is a distributed algorithm, and its correctness relies on all nodes > in a routing domain behaving correctly. There are many ways in which > a buggy or malicious node can disrupt a Babel network, and an > implementation is not required to detect most of them. (The most common > in production is a node that announces a route but doesn't actually > forward packets, e.g. due to a mis-configured firewall.) > While it is true that the protocol data stores and state machines and other aspects of behavior at the ends of the wire are important, the IETF has always had a particularly sharp focus on the bits on the wire. It seems reasonable to have a specification that won't fall over even if it gets a "routing" packet that's junk. And it is a traditional desiderata in routing protocols in the IETF that in a network with mixed implementations, you can't originate a bad routing packet from a node and have a persistent loop or conceivably even scattered persistent loops form in your network. > What Donald is requesting here is that we add a requirement that every > implementation should detect one particular (and rather unlikely) instance > of incorrect behaviour, and work around it. I don't necessarily agree > with this requirement, but I am willing to put it in if the implementation > cost is low enough. I don't think I'm necessarily requesting that, at least not in all cases. For example, if you are parsing a TLV it would be reasonable to set a flag when you see a valid Source Prefix sub-TLV and just remember the prefix specified, overwriting any previous source prefix seen in that TLV. Such a parser can distinguish between no Source Prefix sub-TLVs and one or more such sub-TLVs and, if there are any, will remember the prefix in the last one. But it does not "detect" if there are more than one. In any case, as long as the same packet will be interpreted in the same way by different routers, I'm fine with whatever reasonable unambiguous interpretation method is easiest to implement. Thanks, Donald =============================== Donald E. Eastlake 3rd +1-508-333-2270 (cell) 1424 Pro Shop Court, Davenport, FL 33896 USA d3e3e3@gmail.com ... > > -- Juliusz > --0000000000005ba474058637bf22 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi,

<= div dir=3D"ltr" class=3D"gmail_attr">On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 5:57 PM Julius= z Chroboczek <jch@irif.fr> wrote:<= br>
...=C2=A0
Babel is a distributed algorithm, and its correctness relies on all nodes in a routing domain behaving correctly.=C2=A0 There are many ways in which<= br> a buggy or malicious node can disrupt a Babel network, and an
implementation is not required to detect most of them.=C2=A0 (The most comm= on
in production is a node that announces a route but doesn't actually
forward packets, e.g. due to a mis-configured firewall.)

While it is true that the protocol data stores and state = machines and other aspects of behavior at the ends of the wire are importan= t, the IETF has always had a particularly sharp focus on the bits on the wi= re. It seems reasonable to have a specification that won't fall over ev= en if it gets a "routing" packet that's junk. And it is a tra= ditional desiderata in routing protocols in the IETF that in a network with= mixed implementations, you can't originate a bad routing packet from a= node and have a persistent loop or conceivably even scattered persistent l= oops form in your network.
=C2=A0
What Donald is requesting here is that we add a requirement that every
implementation should detect one particular (and rather unlikely) instance<= br> of incorrect behaviour, and work around it.=C2=A0 I don't necessarily a= gree
with this requirement, but I am willing to put it in if the implementation<= br> cost is low enough.

I don't think I'= ;m necessarily requesting that, at least not in all cases. For example, if = you are parsing a TLV it would be reasonable to set a flag when you see a v= alid Source Prefix sub-TLV and just remember the prefix specified, overwrit= ing any previous source prefix seen in that TLV. Such a parser can distingu= ish between no Source Prefix sub-TLVs and one or more such sub-TLVs and, if= there are any, will remember the prefix in the last one. But it does not &= quot;detect" if there are more than one.

In a= ny case, as long as the same packet will be interpreted in the same way by = different routers, I'm fine with whatever reasonable unambiguous interp= retation method is easiest to implement.

Thanks,
Donald
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=C2=A0Do= nald E. Eastlake 3rd =C2=A0 +1-508-333-2270 (cell)
=C2=A01424 Pro Shop C= ourt, Davenport, FL 33896 USA
=C2=A0d3e3e3@gmail.com

...

-- Juliusz
--0000000000005ba474058637bf22-- From nobody Wed Apr 10 19:25:41 2019 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F6EB12049C; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 19:25:24 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.748 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.748 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1X6F7nc1WKGH; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 19:25:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-io1-xd2f.google.com (mail-io1-xd2f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::d2f]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1DDC412015E; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 19:25:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-io1-xd2f.google.com with SMTP id d201so4028192iof.7; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 19:25:23 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=OYtUgWRDnSLNC/RmIdIM44tRk0Ie4BEx75h+t1lO7EM=; b=SjTww4vDOOvCHdE7G4WHLUtVwrybSZ9cvEVbCFjWtdwhVFLjIb5DSlQA9KtZF/d0gr CdPyJKVXAXDfDOsdUzgjOWMbibTA8wOReVOIKkMSTuNXz7zs79xGYnuZAgatlcTBZAD/ MAE9DfPPLd6JxsiBYaHEII1ex0rJsyffOZXSfvYBoeafp0VkjpJpfQMp6es6RNKndv/S 8KdvaLIVX6uEGlEwiimfQewawYLJFMM0KcswtsrRvPr4g6thVpAqaCpQ9WhNMlAkB1po 8zv+TGb61H4mb+SJYd+iMV/+QzxJfZ67YqUqYcZcMhNlAIciZU9OeaPJ+YCvY+oInefu UtjA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=OYtUgWRDnSLNC/RmIdIM44tRk0Ie4BEx75h+t1lO7EM=; b=DM1GsqKchzY2b9PhqFDLpwlT2GYFwMgTazF4TCtZG7Fp6K6SXbiVF6fKtekC2mv9ta kbkbbZPd2K0NIsjJbqiKcTV/F//a5Nx+9MLGxGp9pDWc4C9RiUfoIAQJQ+gYUssR9cZW 6QZ49tSmOubindaLdWLobSrUTgZpGhGKz/ft/PHGyVywITDRqbCYQ9ROnz4fOqbwl+xd 2B3KC8SDDm00i3+oRIadyQXK1dzGBe06HYbSq4o9pvSnVHK0ml2oL5TkL+P2flu6V34E XLnDEodxE28JukXdJ86/dYFHPGxszhBxIX8SJmHF7lyV1CJDdhtq5nJTsElCHJBNT5tL T3vw== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAWNaIw9bBeSg8Gitbmg0B74CqC3sJ7JY+4QfVhR6x91eNDS1fEQ 0gcsC1MW3vejxVglqSq3xe/ZqXKATA9JjEgcRGIWKz54 X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwuZgn0YIUioDfjv9Iq6gV+XxEbRWJxI6Ih3LsvuzOd9Y8cWfSotXWemrIFdjHXEDCqUS2gd/to5k7uRqFiB8M= X-Received: by 2002:a6b:f809:: with SMTP id o9mr17795797ioh.232.1554949522291; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 19:25:22 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 From: Donald Eastlake Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2019 22:25:11 -0400 Message-ID: To: Babel at IETF Cc: babel-chairs Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000eb8263058637e51d" Archived-At: Subject: [babel] Draft Babel Minutes X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2019 02:25:28 -0000 --000000000000eb8263058637e51d Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Draft Babel Minutes for the Prague meeting are at: https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/104/materials/minutes-104-babel-00 Thanks, Donald =============================== Donald E. Eastlake 3rd +1-508-333-2270 (cell) 1424 Pro Shop Court, Davenport, FL 33896 USA d3e3e3@gmail.com --000000000000eb8263058637e51d Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Draft Babel Minutes for the Prague meeting are at:

Thanks= ,
Donald
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=C2=A0Donald E. Eastlake 3rd =C2=A0 +1= -508-333-2270 (cell)
=C2=A01424 Pro Shop Court, Davenport, FL 33896 USA<= br>=C2=A0d3e3e3@gmail= .com
--000000000000eb8263058637e51d-- From nobody Thu Apr 11 03:38:26 2019 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CDCB012011D for ; Thu, 11 Apr 2019 03:38:24 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.901 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id j3brOR1U9YLi for ; Thu, 11 Apr 2019 03:38:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from korolev.univ-paris7.fr (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D0FC0120044 for ; Thu, 11 Apr 2019 03:38:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from potemkin.univ-paris7.fr (potemkin.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:1]) by korolev.univ-paris7.fr (8.14.4/8.14.4/relay1/82085) with ESMTP id x3BAcG2K032274 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 11 Apr 2019 12:38:16 +0200 Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [81.194.30.253]) by potemkin.univ-paris7.fr (8.14.4/8.14.4/relay2/82085) with ESMTP id x3BAcHFw029016; Thu, 11 Apr 2019 12:38:17 +0200 Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 41C987DDC0; Thu, 11 Apr 2019 12:38:20 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at math.univ-paris-diderot.fr Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr ([127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10023) with ESMTP id rxx-Kq-nfB2G; Thu, 11 Apr 2019 12:38:18 +0200 (CEST) Received: from lanthane.irif.fr (unknown [172.23.36.89]) (Authenticated sender: jch) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id DE1CE7DDBE; Thu, 11 Apr 2019 12:38:18 +0200 (CEST) Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2019 12:38:18 +0200 Message-ID: <87tvf4hlnp.wl-jch@irif.fr> From: Juliusz Chroboczek To: Mahesh Jethanandani CC: babel@ietf.org User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:2]); Thu, 11 Apr 2019 12:38:16 +0200 (CEST) X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (potemkin.univ-paris7.fr [194.254.61.141]); Thu, 11 Apr 2019 12:38:17 +0200 (CEST) X-Miltered: at korolev with ID 5CAF1918.002 by Joe's j-chkmail (http : // j-chkmail dot ensmp dot fr)! X-Miltered: at potemkin with ID 5CAF1919.002 by Joe's j-chkmail (http : // j-chkmail dot ensmp dot fr)! X-j-chkmail-Enveloppe: 5CAF1918.002 from potemkin.univ-paris7.fr/potemkin.univ-paris7.fr/null/potemkin.univ-paris7.fr/ X-j-chkmail-Enveloppe: 5CAF1919.002 from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/null/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/ X-j-chkmail-Score: MSGID : 5CAF1918.002 on korolev.univ-paris7.fr : j-chkmail score : . : R=. U=. O=. B=0.000 -> S=0.000 X-j-chkmail-Score: MSGID : 5CAF1919.002 on potemkin.univ-paris7.fr : j-chkmail score : . : R=. U=. O=. B=0.000 -> S=0.000 X-j-chkmail-Status: Ham X-j-chkmail-Status: Ham Archived-At: Subject: [babel] Monitoring interface -- example output X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2019 10:38:25 -0000 Dear Mahesh, At the Prague meeting, you asked for sample output from babeld's proprietary monitoring interface and example configuration files. Here's an actual interaction, explanation below. BABEL 1.0 version babeld-1.8.4-55-g39c5f0a host pi my-id e2:46:9a:ff:fe:4e:91:e3 ok dump add interface eth0 up true ipv6 fe80::e046:9aff:fe4e:91e2 ipv4 192.168.4.40 add interface wlan0 up true ipv6 fe80::e246:9aff:fe4e:91e2 ipv4 192.168.5.40 add interface wlan1 up true ipv6 fe80::e246:9aff:fe4e:91e4 ipv4 192.168.6.40 add neighbour 42bb90 address fe80::204:75ff:fe90:9ba9 if eth0 reach fc00 ureach 0000 rxcost 96 txcost 96 cost 96 add xroute fd84:eeaf:8cec::/48-2000::/3 prefix fd84:eeaf:8cec::/48 from 2000::/3 metric 0 add xroute fd84:eeaf:8cec::/64-2000::/3 prefix fd84:eeaf:8cec::/64 from 2000::/3 metric 0 add xroute 0.0.0.0/0-::ffff:0.0.0.0/0 prefix 0.0.0.0/0 from ::ffff:0.0.0.0/0 metric 0 add xroute 172.23.36.139/32-::/0 prefix 172.23.36.139/32 from ::/0 metric 0 add xroute 192.168.2.40/32-::/0 prefix 192.168.2.40/32 from ::/0 metric 0 add xroute 192.168.4.40/32-::/0 prefix 192.168.4.40/32 from ::/0 metric 0 add xroute 192.168.5.40/32-::/0 prefix 192.168.5.40/32 from ::/0 metric 0 add xroute 192.168.6.40/32-::/0 prefix 192.168.6.40/32 from ::/0 metric 0 add xroute 2001:660:3301:9208::40/128-::/0 prefix 2001:660:3301:9208::40/128 from ::/0 metric 0 add xroute 2001:660:3301:9208::40/128-2000::/3 prefix 2001:660:3301:9208::40/128 from 2000::/3 metric 0 add xroute fd84:eeaf:8cec::1/128-::/0 prefix fd84:eeaf:8cec::1/128 from ::/0 metric 0 add route 779cfeb0 prefix 172.23.36.89/32 from 0.0.0.0/0 installed yes id 02:04:75:ff:fe:90:9b:a9 metric 96 refmetric 0 via fe80::204:75ff:fe90:9ba9 if eth0 add route 73f1f0 prefix 192.168.5.100/32 from 0.0.0.0/0 installed yes id 02:04:75:ff:fe:90:9b:a9 metric 96 refmetric 0 via fe80::204:75ff:fe90:9ba9 if eth0 add route 73f070 prefix 2001:660:3301:9202::ac17:2459/128 from ::/0 installed yes id 02:04:75:ff:fe:90:9b:a9 metric 96 refmetric 0 via fe80::204:75ff:fe90:9ba9 if eth0 add route 73eff0 prefix fd84:eeaf:8cec::204:75ff:fe90:9ba9/128 from ::/0 installed yes id 02:04:75:ff:fe:90:9b:a9 metric 96 refmetric 0 via fe80::204:75ff:fe90:9ba9 if eth0 ok "BABEL 1.0" is the version of the monitoring interface. "version", "host" and "my-id" are the implementation version, the hostname and the router-id. I then request a dump of the data structures ("dump"), and babeld gives me. The general format is add *type* *identifier* *keyword* *value* *keyword* *value* ... - the set of active interfaces, with the parameters - interface name - up (boolean) - ipv6 (link-local address) - ipv4 (the IPv4 address used for advertising next hops, optional). - the set of neighbours, with parameters - a unique identifier for the neighbour; - the (remote) link-local address; - the interface over which we see the neighbour (if); - a 16-bit hello history; - a 16-bit unicast hello history; - the rxcost, txcost and computed cost. - the set of routes originated by this node (called xroutes in babeld): - a unique identifier for the xroute; - the prefix being advertised (IPv6 or IPv4); - the source prefix (draft-ietf-babel-source-specific); - the metric of the route (only one metric for xroutes). - the set of routes readvertised by this node (called routes): - a unique identifier for the route; - the prefix being advertised; - the source prefix; - whether the route is installed (boolean); - the router-id of the router originating the route (id); - the computed metric (metric) and the metric advertised by the neighbour (refmetric, for reference metric); - the next hop (via); - the interface (if). -- Juliusz From nobody Thu Apr 11 08:01:55 2019 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6358E120006 for ; Thu, 11 Apr 2019 08:01:53 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.901 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5HeZ1O6VEchF for ; Thu, 11 Apr 2019 08:01:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from korolev.univ-paris7.fr (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 78029120383 for ; Thu, 11 Apr 2019 08:01:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [81.194.30.253]) by korolev.univ-paris7.fr (8.14.4/8.14.4/relay1/82085) with ESMTP id x3BF1ikI019477; Thu, 11 Apr 2019 17:01:44 +0200 Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5B7E979BFF; Thu, 11 Apr 2019 17:01:48 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at math.univ-paris-diderot.fr Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr ([127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10023) with ESMTP id tNnElncyreDc; Thu, 11 Apr 2019 17:01:47 +0200 (CEST) Received: from lanthane.irif.fr (unknown [172.23.36.89]) (Authenticated sender: jch) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id EC22979BFD; Thu, 11 Apr 2019 17:01:46 +0200 (CEST) Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2019 17:01:46 +0200 Message-ID: <87imvkh9gl.wl-jch@irif.fr> From: Juliusz Chroboczek To: Donald Eastlake Cc: Toke =?ISO-8859-1?Q?H=F8iland-J=F8rgensen?= , Babel at IETF In-Reply-To: References: <874l76xhto.wl-jch@irif.fr> <874l76w21k.fsf@toke.dk> <871s2axfei.wl-jch@irif.fr> <87y34iulxd.fsf@toke.dk> <87r2a9x3dd.wl-jch@irif.fr> <87wok1tvfx.fsf@toke.dk> <87ftqpwmkm.wl-jch@irif.fr> User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [194.254.61.138]); Thu, 11 Apr 2019 17:01:44 +0200 (CEST) X-Miltered: at korolev with ID 5CAF56D8.003 by Joe's j-chkmail (http : // j-chkmail dot ensmp dot fr)! X-j-chkmail-Enveloppe: 5CAF56D8.003 from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/null/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/ X-j-chkmail-Score: MSGID : 5CAF56D8.003 on korolev.univ-paris7.fr : j-chkmail score : . : R=. U=. O=. B=0.000 -> S=0.000 X-j-chkmail-Status: Ham Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] Shepherd Review of draft-ietf-babel-source-specific-04 X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2019 15:01:54 -0000 > Babel is a distributed algorithm, and its correctness relies on all nodes > in a routing domain behaving correctly. There are many ways in which > a buggy or malicious node can disrupt a Babel network, and an > implementation is not required to detect most of them. (The most common > in production is a node that announces a route but doesn't actually > forward packets, e.g. due to a mis-configured firewall.) [...] > And it is a traditional desiderata in routing protocols in the > IETF that in a network with mixed implementations, you can't originate a bad > routing packet from a node and have a persistent loop or conceivably even > scattered persistent loops form in your network. I don't think that ideal is achievable. For example, in OSPF or IS-IS, if a router corrupts its LSDB, or fails to synchronise it in a timely manner, then you will get persistent loops. A similar thing will happen if a BGP speaker erroneously or maliciously discards part of the AS-path (the opposite of prepending, in a sense). I agree with you, though, that even though we cannot handle all cases, we should identify the cases that are easy to handle and either require or recommend that a robust implementation avoid burning down the universe when it receives an erroneous packet that is easy to detect. My question to Toke was whether this is one of the easy cases from the point of view of his implementation. > For example, if you are parsing a TLV it would be reasonable to set > a flag when you see a valid Source Prefix sub-TLV and just remember the > prefix specified, overwriting any previous source prefix seen in that > TLV. I agree, this appears to be a case that's easy to handle. So -- MUST or SHOULD? (I prefer SHOULD, both Toke and Donald appear to prefer MUST, so I'll give myself some more time to think it over.) -- Juliusz From nobody Thu Apr 11 08:12:05 2019 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 03642120396 for ; Thu, 11 Apr 2019 08:12:03 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.901 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Ri1ycn_J1FND for ; Thu, 11 Apr 2019 08:12:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from korolev.univ-paris7.fr (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 71AFC120392 for ; Thu, 11 Apr 2019 08:12:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [81.194.30.253]) by korolev.univ-paris7.fr (8.14.4/8.14.4/relay1/82085) with ESMTP id x3BFBtbh029991; Thu, 11 Apr 2019 17:11:55 +0200 Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 758A179E71; Thu, 11 Apr 2019 17:11:59 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at math.univ-paris-diderot.fr Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr ([127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10023) with ESMTP id fUiqTdiqsBZB; Thu, 11 Apr 2019 17:11:58 +0200 (CEST) Received: from lanthane.irif.fr (unknown [172.23.36.89]) (Authenticated sender: jch) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 27D8F79E6F; Thu, 11 Apr 2019 17:11:58 +0200 (CEST) Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2019 17:11:58 +0200 Message-ID: <87ftqoh8zl.wl-jch@irif.fr> From: Juliusz Chroboczek To: Donald Eastlake Cc: Toke =?ISO-8859-1?Q?H=F8iland-J=F8rgensen?= , Babel at IETF In-Reply-To: <87imvkh9gl.wl-jch@irif.fr> References: <874l76xhto.wl-jch@irif.fr> <874l76w21k.fsf@toke.dk> <871s2axfei.wl-jch@irif.fr> <87y34iulxd.fsf@toke.dk> <87r2a9x3dd.wl-jch@irif.fr> <87wok1tvfx.fsf@toke.dk> <87ftqpwmkm.wl-jch@irif.fr> <87imvkh9gl.wl-jch@irif.fr> User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [194.254.61.138]); Thu, 11 Apr 2019 17:11:55 +0200 (CEST) X-Miltered: at korolev with ID 5CAF593B.002 by Joe's j-chkmail (http : // j-chkmail dot ensmp dot fr)! X-j-chkmail-Enveloppe: 5CAF593B.002 from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/null/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/ X-j-chkmail-Score: MSGID : 5CAF593B.002 on korolev.univ-paris7.fr : j-chkmail score : . : R=. U=. O=. B=0.000 -> S=0.000 X-j-chkmail-Status: Ham Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] Shepherd Review of draft-ietf-babel-source-specific-04 X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2019 15:12:03 -0000 > I agree, this appears to be a case that's easy to handle. > So -- MUST or SHOULD? (I prefer SHOULD, both Toke and Donald appear to > prefer MUST, so I'll give myself some more time to think it over.) Now that I've implemented it, I think it's simple enough to be a MUST. Sorry for boring everyone. -- Juliusz From nobody Thu Apr 11 08:27:48 2019 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietf.org Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 60FB91202E7; Thu, 11 Apr 2019 08:27:46 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: Cc: babel@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.95.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Reply-To: babel@ietf.org Message-ID: <155499646631.26218.6338634608662679783@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2019 08:27:46 -0700 Archived-At: Subject: [babel] I-D Action: draft-ietf-babel-source-specific-05.txt X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2019 15:27:47 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Babel routing protocol WG of the IETF. Title : Source-Specific Routing in Babel Authors : Matthieu Boutier Juliusz Chroboczek Filename : draft-ietf-babel-source-specific-05.txt Pages : 11 Date : 2019-04-11 Abstract: Source-specific routing (also known as Source-Address Dependent Routing, SADR) is an extension to traditional next-hop routing where packets are forwarded according to both their destination and their source address. This document describes an extension for source- specific routing to the Babel routing protocol. The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-babel-source-specific/ There are also htmlized versions available at: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-babel-source-specific-05 https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-babel-source-specific-05 A diff from the previous version is available at: https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-babel-source-specific-05 Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ From nobody Thu Apr 11 08:30:16 2019 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 512811200F5; Thu, 11 Apr 2019 08:30:14 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.901 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id be4XtIV6oZ-2; Thu, 11 Apr 2019 08:30:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from korolev.univ-paris7.fr (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 681B5120098; Thu, 11 Apr 2019 08:30:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from potemkin.univ-paris7.fr (potemkin.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:1]) by korolev.univ-paris7.fr (8.14.4/8.14.4/relay1/82085) with ESMTP id x3BFU6WM013816 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 11 Apr 2019 17:30:06 +0200 Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [81.194.30.253]) by potemkin.univ-paris7.fr (8.14.4/8.14.4/relay2/82085) with ESMTP id x3BFU7re026887; Thu, 11 Apr 2019 17:30:07 +0200 Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A76A7A378; Thu, 11 Apr 2019 17:30:10 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at math.univ-paris-diderot.fr Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr ([127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10023) with ESMTP id or3Sy3d4iYuy; Thu, 11 Apr 2019 17:30:09 +0200 (CEST) Received: from lanthane.irif.fr (unknown [172.23.36.89]) (Authenticated sender: jch) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1E7757A373; Thu, 11 Apr 2019 17:30:09 +0200 (CEST) Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2019 17:30:09 +0200 Message-ID: <87ef68h85a.wl-jch@irif.fr> From: Juliusz Chroboczek To: Donald Eastlake Cc: Babel at IETF , babel-chairs In-Reply-To: References: User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:2]); Thu, 11 Apr 2019 17:30:06 +0200 (CEST) X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (potemkin.univ-paris7.fr [194.254.61.141]); Thu, 11 Apr 2019 17:30:07 +0200 (CEST) X-Miltered: at korolev with ID 5CAF5D7E.001 by Joe's j-chkmail (http : // j-chkmail dot ensmp dot fr)! X-Miltered: at potemkin with ID 5CAF5D7F.001 by Joe's j-chkmail (http : // j-chkmail dot ensmp dot fr)! X-j-chkmail-Enveloppe: 5CAF5D7E.001 from potemkin.univ-paris7.fr/potemkin.univ-paris7.fr/null/potemkin.univ-paris7.fr/ X-j-chkmail-Enveloppe: 5CAF5D7F.001 from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/null/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/ X-j-chkmail-Score: MSGID : 5CAF5D7E.001 on korolev.univ-paris7.fr : j-chkmail score : . : R=. U=. O=. B=0.000 -> S=0.000 X-j-chkmail-Score: MSGID : 5CAF5D7F.001 on potemkin.univ-paris7.fr : j-chkmail score : . : R=. U=. O=. B=0.000 -> S=0.000 X-j-chkmail-Status: Ham X-j-chkmail-Status: Ham Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] Shepherd Review of draft-ietf-babel-source-specific-04 X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2019 15:30:15 -0000 > Section 6, page 7, first parenthetical: > I think instead of "and all of its extensions" it should say something a bit > more limited. How about "and all previously standardized extensions"? Done. > Section 7, page 8, 2nd paragraph: > Generally, cases where different routers can interpret routing protocol > messages differently make me very nervous. It is almost always possible to > construct a situation where this causes persistent looping. It seems to me that > you need to unambiguously specify what is done if there is a malformed TLV with > multiple Source Prefix sub-TLVs. Such TLVs could always be ignored or the first > or the last Source Prefix sut-TLV could be the effective sub-TLV with other > Source Prefix sub-TLVs ignored. But whatever is specified, it needs to be > mandatory unambiguous behavior. Done. > Section 7.1, Page 9: > What do you do when you get a malformed Source Prefix sub-TLV with a zero > Source Plen? Done. This leads to some repetition (the case of wildcard requests and retractions was already specified in Section 5.2), but what the hell. > Typos: Done. > Minor textural comments: > =================== > These are just minor cases where I think the draft would read slightly > better with a wording change. Done. Thanks for your help, -- Juliusz From nobody Thu Apr 11 15:50:48 2019 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 45B6D120733; Thu, 11 Apr 2019 15:50:45 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.95 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.95 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_BOUND_DIGITS_15=0.798, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id uNTBIn4-bqRV; Thu, 11 Apr 2019 15:50:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-io1-xd35.google.com (mail-io1-xd35.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::d35]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B2CFE1206F6; Thu, 11 Apr 2019 15:50:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-io1-xd35.google.com with SMTP id b6so6880629iog.0; Thu, 11 Apr 2019 15:50:43 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=4jxj6RUBywA/U7fy0pvDnRiISzPCP2yvvsXnktiGQ+8=; b=j6iU7L+VYtI2KUb/JJt/VUrLmU6SVJdAt3SEwm6lmYNJ/ra+I87pkjmSpky6dWeL8R 8MB+YFVTKKHafM1evIuLXFJZPYNoh1HvkfLcwOHc2wqHPVFDMaguAkrF56dMgVV/5Hdr MUU09Y5EvFX8Y4PR0in2YfK+qNGkaKtjtkVnEj4d0UzDBgYmqZ3MU98ST21nY3ZQVzVm MOpqpeUcjs6LHAr5C0cX14CxLfAZFTKBWMegxB7bllGAy9kOw3texm0KbonjNEEZJG1M eU+BoVSKC7dA+j6adN++EmO4vjj5if8ylJMqlDA4LQcMhYttmo4FiZCnTzMubOF/kvzi Hwpg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=4jxj6RUBywA/U7fy0pvDnRiISzPCP2yvvsXnktiGQ+8=; b=Yi92XO3TV5SE025dGqFSBnjlkFcgKrp9yFqOtqXqwJisFRZ7DBZPcn7187yYTFsIKx p5FIc3XJujxdBM8ebEmd1PKPZYnsGWy9fZmt6NjvLHy8ULBfDhIX7k4fWFbAwtMms0S1 byvsMYGVatdquQkZFoYh2JMXGdcNl8Gm9fp2JaRs1evFH9dti8W3EOFCwhLSZZryqfOO 8FTbyc1jepgGuOchwVy2IvEX6fPhbKCbCyRtwGYOb9+MEdLJ7YhSci2VOv6Y403vFG/H mS00nbBSr+vQ8Wo+4i+hpLprKoW72YN7qmfPsyNZQr/K+1D/oYIuFjxUIil77KvsPxa9 dRUA== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAXdpsj1+A1f94VP+TKate/cqL/2VHrlypQoSwbMwp9JLm+PsGkS IPKSDGIFOwXZ5fjr8IXMq9FIYLCOFR9zoCB5xZdNeO/L X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxUPa52vxDqwvkXtJX/bMlZzcbc/EIL0HTX33kieAKyHmJbx43a8OLPvhQfe219S5UwufmfSFuohRbzSk2M1BQ= X-Received: by 2002:a6b:e317:: with SMTP id u23mr2322736ioc.206.1555023042608; Thu, 11 Apr 2019 15:50:42 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Donald Eastlake Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2019 18:50:31 -0400 Message-ID: To: Babel at IETF Cc: babel-chairs Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000001284270586490420" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] Draft Babel Minutes X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2019 22:50:46 -0000 --0000000000001284270586490420 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Some small updates have been made to the minutes: https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/104/materials/minutes-104-babel-01 Thanks, Donald =============================== Donald E. Eastlake 3rd +1-508-333-2270 (cell) 1424 Pro Shop Court, Davenport, FL 33896 USA d3e3e3@gmail.com On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 10:25 PM Donald Eastlake wrote: > Draft Babel Minutes for the Prague meeting are at: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/104/materials/minutes-104-babel-00 > > Thanks, > Donald > =============================== > Donald E. Eastlake 3rd +1-508-333-2270 (cell) > 1424 Pro Shop Court, Davenport, FL 33896 USA > d3e3e3@gmail.com > --0000000000001284270586490420 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Some small updates have been made to the minutes:

Thanks,
Donald
=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D
=C2=A0Donald E. Eastlake 3rd =C2=A0 +1-508-333-2270 (cell)
=C2= =A01424 Pro Shop Court, Davenport, FL 33896 USA
=C2=A0d3e3e3@gmail.com


On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 10:25 PM Donald Eastlake <d3e3e3@gmail.com> wrote:
Draft Babel Minutes for t= he Prague meeting are at:
Thanks,
Donald
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D
=C2=A0Donald E. Eastlake 3rd =C2=A0 +1-508-333-2270 (cell)
=C2=A0= 1424 Pro Shop Court, Davenport, FL 33896 USA
=C2=A0d3e3e3@gmail.com
--0000000000001284270586490420-- From nobody Thu Apr 11 16:13:33 2019 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C4C821200B7 for ; Thu, 11 Apr 2019 16:13:31 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=toke.dk Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id qHWln4qF7mnt for ; Thu, 11 Apr 2019 16:13:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.toke.dk (mail.toke.dk [52.28.52.200]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6799712002F for ; Thu, 11 Apr 2019 16:13:29 -0700 (PDT) From: Toke =?utf-8?Q?H=C3=B8iland-J=C3=B8rgensen?= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=toke.dk; s=20161023; t=1555024406; bh=CSlycui9Rcn44Bc5UtIm/V5rByrptf4jLmtO8Y1sq20=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=mTOCFjWim95mhm2ngiCBS+cA9wfgOzSXw0Ngx6Tli8AzhS3HuKVDeQkPNfU580enx 6YHgUTBKjOOqVgZkgB7WAUzlufrjKo12JFrGJeeyVtupT3fSusSaLHh8YVVbHzQ+6h VwzcVEDCl6hH0KXn9Ot2f3fyuTWK8RS1OcMDAcQIdRo6lho7FCKvpR/XHVrWs/TP7i zIoLTCir8zcyNL8GZ5973H2bkpzjUiESxsighPZvglvAkoz+sSWlZnNlr++t7Yv7FN VF8womBarQTViflL9Pqnv7Lc9qw2q4ofk8OR064Kjmd37IlHFIg5W7X5oqdpTf2am0 LFn0zPQyaoR7g== To: Juliusz Chroboczek , Donald Eastlake Cc: Babel at IETF In-Reply-To: <87ftqoh8zl.wl-jch@irif.fr> References: <874l76xhto.wl-jch@irif.fr> <874l76w21k.fsf@toke.dk> <871s2axfei.wl-jch@irif.fr> <87y34iulxd.fsf@toke.dk> <87r2a9x3dd.wl-jch@irif.fr> <87wok1tvfx.fsf@toke.dk> <87ftqpwmkm.wl-jch@irif.fr> <87imvkh9gl.wl-jch@irif.fr> <87ftqoh8zl.wl-jch@irif.fr> Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2019 01:13:26 +0200 X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett Message-ID: <87k1g0rv8p.fsf@toke.dk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] Shepherd Review of draft-ietf-babel-source-specific-04 X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2019 23:13:32 -0000 Juliusz Chroboczek writes: >> I agree, this appears to be a case that's easy to handle. > >> So -- MUST or SHOULD? (I prefer SHOULD, both Toke and Donald appear to >> prefer MUST, so I'll give myself some more time to think it over.) > > Now that I've implemented it, I think it's simple enough to be a MUST. > Sorry for boring everyone. Great :) -Toke From nobody Sat Apr 13 17:11:45 2019 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 965A4120425; Sat, 13 Apr 2019 17:11:43 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.749 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.749 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id WkvXxph_fl1z; Sat, 13 Apr 2019 17:11:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-io1-xd34.google.com (mail-io1-xd34.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::d34]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 67E9A1201C0; Sat, 13 Apr 2019 17:11:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-io1-xd34.google.com with SMTP id x3so11651531iol.10; Sat, 13 Apr 2019 17:11:42 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=Xvy+1Bs8beTzpWlh8avgEyobG3zlKFKEFbHZc+b66JQ=; b=SdMO15MGd09f8R4aN4wPmmGLuYGrEar1LDe3HauxsrSiz4MT6qxZA41Fo7KK7CsEDg tDuN7mI5yB+wBFH+uUoNUbkJhyhxj5zywU9vYNIwKPOh0BANRJBi5CQSaj48+/2Ffg2V I7eREbLQ7AA+L2yhZw5CcyerYaOwl4i55GGMcshKZOFle4+X2CjzZGZtQNkaZZ9N5tda m1YvOttDSLI7He497lACWQOksET8OwztriW3MhSDk/TyduZ7NKOumDX6wk2TP5/vK7fR X66ZLzLtMjT+s5tvBLyP721q4SSG9ohN7mW2RRO1F+0UKcF3rAyY6xYrRdTTF0ZC8aV6 1N5A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=Xvy+1Bs8beTzpWlh8avgEyobG3zlKFKEFbHZc+b66JQ=; b=Iq1h2DS1PfALrnSDEfVtSOkWt1Ee83K50iyiWeDFTZUdRdC9bgRfGeRcqc47rw8CI6 Tl9Kqg3+c2RmlHC3FcYbUb820RzMI1c4Y2ptjRXbCgTHpDYnMJGLw1jnkwKd0VZCgrtb 4D/uwTqfroXqBzcY6EV6uzLNovF9hDFsv8ZpFESwJPA/XLesK4pP7G2PI0dffI+M3SoK DQL0y+NM9eZOF41ld5Y10msZGYew8R+iJBDK3/Wb0u+lHMNfOP70pq4Lejfpd6Rk7qFf TO1Jyu/pTgjt2cr6Hye2OQoaGCj/nvjvYToZuO1+7p5rCFQovP4iX4UkJg+Q1iWE/zZu 83iA== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAWYoYR6VXM3ejWj7Qri5x3x3vVGF2Xyk2QWZYLvAH4ljQFHmroZ EzP1CFdXL5PBRCaZf+S1EPQ4V6wbPdtx7Oc0Y6UyFswE X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqyTLOx+Cfaqqyq8KAD3ATxpD2vyQFlha9oEo/GDcDRM6B8IGxzGbbpkZj5YIGybOe+iLEYg0ldJuOXHs6+hGHw= X-Received: by 2002:a6b:f809:: with SMTP id o9mr29803201ioh.232.1555200701408; Sat, 13 Apr 2019 17:11:41 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 From: Donald Eastlake Date: Sat, 13 Apr 2019 20:11:30 -0400 Message-ID: To: Babel at IETF Cc: babel-chairs Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000005cac8f0586726126" Archived-At: Subject: [babel] WG Adoption of draft-jonglez-babel-rtt-extension X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2019 00:11:44 -0000 --0000000000005cac8f0586726126 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Based on the ample support on the mailing list and lack of objection at the meeting in Prague, there is a clear consensus to adopt draft-jonglez-babel-rtt-extension-02 as a WG draft. The authors should post a draft-ietf-babel-rtt-extension-00 version. Thanks, Donald and Russ =============================== --0000000000005cac8f0586726126 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Based on the ample support on the mailing= list and lack of objection at the meeting in Prague, there is a clear cons= ensus to adopt=C2=A0draft-jonglez-babel-rtt-extension-02 as a WG draft. The= authors should post a draft-ietf-babel-rtt-extension-00 version.

Thanks,
Donald and Russ
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=C2=A0
--0000000000005cac8f0586726126-- From nobody Sat Apr 13 18:18:37 2019 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EE63F12038B; Sat, 13 Apr 2019 18:18:35 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.749 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.749 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 3TkvRbIsrsPW; Sat, 13 Apr 2019 18:18:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-io1-xd32.google.com (mail-io1-xd32.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::d32]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 13FFC120343; Sat, 13 Apr 2019 18:18:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-io1-xd32.google.com with SMTP id p23so11711028iol.13; Sat, 13 Apr 2019 18:18:35 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=u2JQ3e1zd/U+VE0zYLdibR4W7aHqMXgvH3x3beS12/A=; b=e3lV7MJRrDbny1a3qF0IfSKbN6dJ1Ybk5oCg2XgzJ4F56nH6gXOoZLEEaSBvd4uotO Dn1jX+MrskgR19RjBCxgD6Jnc4Hs0JlrQWbq8JqK/KLtgwZCBDi8etNffHTK5v4RQCGH qCRBSPmG/iCRBO6iExQgd59WOXRoFPsbLw9z+eT4eFYIBLBjifzUMNMpkxk39Lh5bWLw QUVWA5cTG/E50x7Q3H2wgeIdyldGUpUZj3Tbqcit1VD2uJmMdHV59VkR3HLA8Bdu1Z8/ /9vPNDuDeRQSU6S9CbijsUTQCeI9Aisj7K9Lo4kAmTkkl2Y287YspH5Y9xT7+GbquEpz +V9Q== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=u2JQ3e1zd/U+VE0zYLdibR4W7aHqMXgvH3x3beS12/A=; b=W7iXFwK2/GbLwzrISUEvdN0W8Oza4zvGbatv17ImcC6FjVoIUqqOz1IX1W7LfIv1YW BnPD40xPSiHmbJ1Paux3/lSMUG6m99qaj5NoMK33PZYQeI9kL2xUM41JexWfynMxlKmK SVpZS15y04Y06RbOSPmbVS4zFJ3eRaiGVfq9Zmy3x8wVznqQd1QtsDTBcmMos+cPzoiQ dINY7w0jQlPVMiiJtHzWGb7t1rxk4eUZcaSal06Wf+p+Px6/5s8hoJJDjGBo7zcnhJet 2dkilRvnjPGFBFjTx1ewVPBZg0aHcHokgBF8RVZrfWhgMgUHSeLnqwT9WwUJXBH7Kpjb 1ccw== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAWlNhsDp3Gg1/SfCWqc7lGMnxlbLw21A8hPgEmWjl1MV12i4BL7 WG9XsDDNunfNj1n5/4DDZcXXlg3Bjngq4m4JaXf33y63 X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqyx7DxgcVm5JZokTUCbhBZldx5hzEYYw/rNjQUVnwvXIlKSZx/kOa5EI6aepxWbhts0ah6JL+PXKwjKaOFo7+w= X-Received: by 2002:a6b:c981:: with SMTP id z123mr39054702iof.123.1555204714137; Sat, 13 Apr 2019 18:18:34 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 From: Donald Eastlake Date: Sat, 13 Apr 2019 21:18:22 -0400 Message-ID: To: Babel at IETF Cc: babel-chairs Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000008a0fe8058673502e" Archived-At: Subject: [babel] WG consensus for draft-ietf-babel-source-specific-05.txt X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2019 01:18:36 -0000 --0000000000008a0fe8058673502e Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" We have determined that there is WG consensus for draft-ietf-babel-source-specific. RFC publication will be requested. Thanks, Donald and Russ =============================== --0000000000008a0fe8058673502e Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
We have determined that there is WG conse= nsus for draft-ietf-babel-source-specific. RFC publication will be requeste= d.

Thanks,
Donald and Russ
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D

<= /div>
--0000000000008a0fe8058673502e-- From nobody Thu Apr 18 12:01:00 2019 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3D82D120469 for ; Thu, 18 Apr 2019 12:00:51 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.238 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.238 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, KHOP_DYNAMIC=1.363, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id jyRavffBdL_f for ; Thu, 18 Apr 2019 12:00:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx0a-00191d01.pphosted.com (mx0a-00191d01.pphosted.com [67.231.149.140]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EAE1312040E for ; Thu, 18 Apr 2019 12:00:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pps.filterd (m0053301.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-00191d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id x3IIlCBs040854 for ; Thu, 18 Apr 2019 15:00:49 -0400 Received: from alpi154.enaf.aldc.att.com (sbcsmtp6.sbc.com [144.160.229.23]) by mx0a-00191d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2rxxpw8m65-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Thu, 18 Apr 2019 15:00:48 -0400 Received: from enaf.aldc.att.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by alpi154.enaf.aldc.att.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id x3IJ0l0P007328 for ; Thu, 18 Apr 2019 15:00:47 -0400 Received: from zlp30488.vci.att.com (zlp30488.vci.att.com [135.47.91.93]) by alpi154.enaf.aldc.att.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id x3IJ0iau007228 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Thu, 18 Apr 2019 15:00:44 -0400 Received: from zlp30488.vci.att.com (zlp30488.vci.att.com [127.0.0.1]) by zlp30488.vci.att.com (Service) with ESMTP id F059C400A0A2 for ; Thu, 18 Apr 2019 19:00:43 +0000 (GMT) Received: from GAALPA1MSGHUBAE.ITServices.sbc.com (unknown [130.8.218.154]) by zlp30488.vci.att.com (Service) with ESMTPS id DE8E4400A0AA for ; Thu, 18 Apr 2019 19:00:43 +0000 (GMT) Received: from GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com ([169.254.5.160]) by GAALPA1MSGHUBAE.ITServices.sbc.com ([130.8.218.154]) with mapi id 14.03.0439.000; Thu, 18 Apr 2019 15:00:43 -0400 From: "STARK, BARBARA H" To: "'Babel at IETF'" Thread-Topic: info-model: link properties Thread-Index: AdT2F3VDc9TEBNBNR0O9GsdDvc4z+A== Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2019 19:00:42 +0000 Message-ID: <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E6114E150E05@GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [135.70.206.27] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:, , definitions=2019-04-18_09:, , signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_policy_notspam policy=outbound_policy score=0 suspectscore=0 malwarescore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 mlxscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxlogscore=979 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1810050000 definitions=main-1904180116 Archived-At: Subject: [babel] info-model: link properties X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2019 19:01:00 -0000 Hi Babel, I'm working through the issues discussed in Prague. I'll be sending separat= e emails for separate issues. This email is about the Link Properties regis= try (formerly Link Types) and associated parameters. The conclusions I recorded from Prague were that "Link Types" was not an ac= curate name, because the registry items are really more a collection of lin= k properties. We should change the name, use names for the registry items t= hat better evoke a collection of properties, and change the descriptions to= talk some about the link properties that the registry item is for.=20 Here's what I propose, and the questions I still have: Change to Link Properties registry, and the parameters are babel-supported-= link-properties (read-only list of supported registry items) and babel-link= -properties (the link properties currently associated with an interface). Change registry items to other: no link property information available tunnel: a tunneled interface over unknown physical link wired:=20 wireless: Questions:=20 Are wired and wireless the right names to use? How should these 2 be described? That is, what are the properties we care a= bout, that make a link considered to be wired or wireless (or whatever name= we give these property collections)? Barbara From nobody Thu Apr 18 13:34:14 2019 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA36612015D for ; Thu, 18 Apr 2019 13:34:12 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.238 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.238 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, KHOP_DYNAMIC=1.363, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id xE2RA4f4r69u for ; Thu, 18 Apr 2019 13:34:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx0a-00191d01.pphosted.com (mx0b-00191d01.pphosted.com [67.231.157.136]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 13F32120156 for ; Thu, 18 Apr 2019 13:34:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pps.filterd (m0049462.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by m0049462.ppops.net-00191d01. (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id x3IKSaAn027654 for ; Thu, 18 Apr 2019 16:34:10 -0400 Received: from alpi154.enaf.aldc.att.com (sbcsmtp6.sbc.com [144.160.229.23]) by m0049462.ppops.net-00191d01. with ESMTP id 2rxym3skdr-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Thu, 18 Apr 2019 16:34:10 -0400 Received: from enaf.aldc.att.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by alpi154.enaf.aldc.att.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id x3IKYAKL032005 for ; Thu, 18 Apr 2019 16:34:10 -0400 Received: from zlp30488.vci.att.com (zlp30488.vci.att.com [135.47.91.93]) by alpi154.enaf.aldc.att.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id x3IKY3DP031893 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Thu, 18 Apr 2019 16:34:04 -0400 Received: from zlp30488.vci.att.com (zlp30488.vci.att.com [127.0.0.1]) by zlp30488.vci.att.com (Service) with ESMTP id D554E400A0A7 for ; Thu, 18 Apr 2019 20:34:03 +0000 (GMT) Received: from GAALPA1MSGHUBAC.ITServices.sbc.com (unknown [130.8.218.152]) by zlp30488.vci.att.com (Service) with ESMTPS id C45F2400A0A2 for ; Thu, 18 Apr 2019 20:34:03 +0000 (GMT) Received: from GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com ([169.254.5.160]) by GAALPA1MSGHUBAC.ITServices.sbc.com ([130.8.218.152]) with mapi id 14.03.0439.000; Thu, 18 Apr 2019 16:34:00 -0400 From: "STARK, BARBARA H" To: "'Babel at IETF'" Thread-Topic: info-model: calculated and received metrics Thread-Index: AdT2IrfeBlDu4vVISWCthPLc0HSMMg== Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2019 20:33:59 +0000 Message-ID: <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E6114E151182@GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [135.70.206.27] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:, , definitions=2019-04-18_10:, , signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_policy_notspam policy=outbound_policy score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1015 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 impostorscore=0 mlxlogscore=719 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1810050000 definitions=main-1904180123 Archived-At: Subject: [babel] info-model: calculated and received metrics X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2019 20:34:13 -0000 This was discussed in Prague, but I think it still didn't come to the right= conclusion (in my head) as I look at it again. >From reading rfc6126bis, it appears that=20 - all routes advertised by neighbors will have a received metric - all routes advertised by this router will have a calculated metric - routes originated by this router will not have a received metric - routes with infinite received metrics don't need a calculated metric For a route to exist in the info model babel-routes object, either the rece= ived or calculated metric MUST be non-zero (rfc6126bis only mentions the re= ceived metric as being in its route table). Both parameters will be non-zero if the route is received and selected. Both parameters are important and need to be implemented. Are these accurate statements? Barbara From nobody Thu Apr 18 19:17:41 2019 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E7E3F1203CE for ; Thu, 18 Apr 2019 19:17:39 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.237 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.237 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, KHOP_DYNAMIC=1.363, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id cgTw3-Kz38nz for ; Thu, 18 Apr 2019 19:17:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx0a-00191d01.pphosted.com (mx0b-00191d01.pphosted.com [67.231.157.136]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 54C8312027E for ; Thu, 18 Apr 2019 19:17:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pps.filterd (m0049463.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by m0049463.ppops.net-00191d01. (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id x3J2FWb1037823 for ; Thu, 18 Apr 2019 22:17:36 -0400 Received: from alpi154.enaf.aldc.att.com (sbcsmtp6.sbc.com [144.160.229.23]) by m0049463.ppops.net-00191d01. with ESMTP id 2ry2x538n8-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Thu, 18 Apr 2019 22:17:35 -0400 Received: from enaf.aldc.att.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by alpi154.enaf.aldc.att.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id x3J2HZ4k029302 for ; Thu, 18 Apr 2019 22:17:35 -0400 Received: from zlp30485.vci.att.com (zlp30485.vci.att.com [135.47.91.178]) by alpi154.enaf.aldc.att.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id x3J2HTM8029234 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Thu, 18 Apr 2019 22:17:31 -0400 Received: from zlp30485.vci.att.com (zlp30485.vci.att.com [127.0.0.1]) by zlp30485.vci.att.com (Service) with ESMTP id 468104009E70 for ; Fri, 19 Apr 2019 02:17:29 +0000 (GMT) Received: from GAALPA1MSGHUBAD.ITServices.sbc.com (unknown [130.8.218.153]) by zlp30485.vci.att.com (Service) with ESMTPS id 32A6E4009E67 for ; Fri, 19 Apr 2019 02:17:29 +0000 (GMT) Received: from GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com ([169.254.5.160]) by GAALPA1MSGHUBAD.ITServices.sbc.com ([130.8.218.153]) with mapi id 14.03.0439.000; Thu, 18 Apr 2019 22:17:28 -0400 From: "STARK, BARBARA H" To: "'Babel at IETF'" Thread-Topic: info-model: HMAC/DTLS/interface references Thread-Index: AdT2U+MdStZfZEgjQySeQ3Ar9PMXyg== Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2019 02:17:28 +0000 Message-ID: <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E6114E151AF4@GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [135.70.206.27] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:, , definitions=2019-04-19_01:, , signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_policy_notspam policy=outbound_policy score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1015 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 impostorscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1810050000 definitions=main-1904190015 Archived-At: Subject: [babel] info-model: HMAC/DTLS/interface references X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2019 02:17:40 -0000 I've posted a draft draft version of info-model at=20 https://bhstark2.github.io/babel-information-model/draft-ietf-babel-informa= tion-model.html=20 It has (I hope) resolution of all issues except the question I had around d= escribing the IANA Babel Link Properties wired and wireless items. Barbara =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D In Prague we discussed that the direction of reference (from HMAC and DTLS = object to interface object) should be reversed (from interface to DTLS and = HMAC), and parameters moved out of the HMAC and DTLS objects into the inter= face object. Here is what the new draft has... under interface (see the draft for the entire description of parameters -- = what I have here is abbreviated): | +-- babel-interfaces-hmac-keys: List of references to the babel-hmac = entries that apply to this interface. When an interface instance is created= , all babel-hmac instances with babel-hmac-default-apply "true" will be inc= luded in this list. | +-- babel-hmac-algorithm: The name of the HMAC algorithm used on this= interface. | +-- babel-hmac-verify: A Boolean flag indicating whether HMAC hashes = in incoming Babel packets are required to be present and are verified. | +-- babel-interfaces-dtls-certs: List of references to the babel-dtls= entries that apply to this interface. When an interface instance is create= d, all babel-dtls instances with babel-dtls-default-apply "true" will be in= cluded in this list. | +-- babel-dtls-cached-info: Indicates whether the cached_info extensi= on is included in ClientHello and ServerHello packets. | +-- babel-dtls-cert-prefer: List of supported certificate types, in o= rder of preference. under hmac and dtls: +-- babel-hmac | +-- babel-hmac-default-apply: A Boolean flag indicating whether this = babel-dtls instance is applied to all interfaces, by default. If "true", th= is instance is applied to new babel-interfaces instances at the time they a= re created, by including it in the babel-interface-dtls-certs list. If "fal= se", this instance is not applied to new babel-interfaces instances when th= ey are created. | | +-- babel-hmac-key-name | | +-- babel-hmac-key-use-sign | | +-- babel-hmac-key-use-verify | | +-- babel-hmac-key-value +-- babel-dtls | +-- babel-dtls-default-apply: A Boolean flag indicating whether this = babel-dtls instance is applied to all interfaces, by default. If "true", th= is instance is applied to new babel-interfaces instances at the time they a= re created, by including it in the babel-interface-dtls-certs list. If "fal= se", this instance is not applied to new babel-interfaces instances when th= ey are created. | | +-- babel-cert-name: A unique name for this DTLS certificate that = can be used to identify the certificate in this object instance, since the = value is too long to be useful for identification. This value can only be p= rovided when this instance is created, and is not subsequently writable. (t= his is a new parameter, as agreed to in Prague) | | +-- babel-cert-value | | +-- babel-cert-type | | +-- babel-cert-private-key | | +-- babel-cert-test From nobody Wed Apr 24 12:10:44 2019 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietf.org Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0117C12010E; Wed, 24 Apr 2019 12:10:42 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: IETF Meeting Session Request Tool To: Cc: babel-chairs@ietf.org, d3e3e3@gmail.com, martin.vigoureux@nokia.com, babel@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.95.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <155613304194.32055.9758854035952483392.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2019 12:10:41 -0700 Archived-At: Subject: [babel] babel - New Meeting Session Request for IETF 105 X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2019 19:10:42 -0000 A new meeting session request has just been submitted by Donald E. Eastlake 3rd, a Chair of the babel working group. --------------------------------------------------------- Working Group Name: Babel routing protocol Area Name: Routing Area Session Requester: Donald Eastlake Number of Sessions: 1 Length of Session(s): 1 Hour Number of Attendees: 24 Conflicts to Avoid: First Priority: rtgwg idr bess sfc Second Priority: dnsop saag lsr rtgarea Third Priority: mptcp cfrg homenet secdispatch People who must be present: Donald E. Eastlake 3rd Russ White Martin Vigoureux Resources Requested: Special Requests: Meeting toward the end of the day Thursday or in the last slot Thursday has worked well for BABEL. --------------------------------------------------------- From nobody Fri Apr 26 03:07:46 2019 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A9A812019F for ; Fri, 26 Apr 2019 03:07:45 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.901 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id lKgyzASweQlc for ; Fri, 26 Apr 2019 03:07:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from korolev.univ-paris7.fr (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 72F98120075 for ; Fri, 26 Apr 2019 03:07:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [81.194.30.253]) by korolev.univ-paris7.fr (8.14.4/8.14.4/relay1/82085) with ESMTP id x3QA7att014117 for ; Fri, 26 Apr 2019 12:07:36 +0200 Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3BC165B305 for ; Fri, 26 Apr 2019 12:07:40 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at math.univ-paris-diderot.fr Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr ([127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10023) with ESMTP id Ya01WoK7xzeF for ; Fri, 26 Apr 2019 12:07:39 +0200 (CEST) Received: from lanthane.irif.fr (unknown [172.23.36.89]) (Authenticated sender: jch) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0422D5B2FF for ; Fri, 26 Apr 2019 12:07:37 +0200 (CEST) Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2019 12:07:37 +0200 Message-ID: <87mukd9j12.wl-jch@irif.fr> From: Juliusz Chroboczek To: babel@ietf.org User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [194.254.61.138]); Fri, 26 Apr 2019 12:07:36 +0200 (CEST) X-Miltered: at korolev with ID 5CC2D868.002 by Joe's j-chkmail (http : // j-chkmail dot ensmp dot fr)! X-j-chkmail-Enveloppe: 5CC2D868.002 from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/null/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/ X-j-chkmail-Score: MSGID : 5CC2D868.002 on korolev.univ-paris7.fr : j-chkmail score : . : R=. U=. O=. B=0.000 -> S=0.000 X-j-chkmail-Status: Ham Archived-At: Subject: [babel] Last-minute tightening in rfc6126bis X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2019 10:07:45 -0000 Dear all, Joao Sobrinho has sent me his observations about convergence of a certain class of routing protocols in the presence of metrics that are not left-distributive. In short, it turns out that protocols such as DSDV can cause persistent blackholes in some topologies if the metric being used is not left-distributive. Happily enough, Babel does not belong to the class of protocols that are problematic. However, the current text describes the relevant property in non-normative language. Thanks to Sobrinho's explanation, I've decided to make the relevant property into a MUST. I believe that all existent implementations already have the right property. I've just committed the relevant changes to the github repository: https://github.com/jech/babel-drafts/commit/5b038542a765b550cec487878f9f0acc2c2f82b0 I'll let them simmer for a few days, then push a new revision to the datatracker. -- Juliusz From nobody Fri Apr 26 03:15:38 2019 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietf.org Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 67FC312038F; Fri, 26 Apr 2019 03:15:36 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: Cc: babel@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.95.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Reply-To: babel@ietf.org Message-ID: <155627373636.6905.7292213022050686636@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2019 03:15:36 -0700 Archived-At: Subject: [babel] I-D Action: draft-ietf-babel-rtt-extension-00.txt X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2019 10:15:37 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Babel routing protocol WG of the IETF. Title : Delay-based Metric Extension for the Babel Routing Protocol Authors : Baptiste Jonglez Juliusz Chroboczek Filename : draft-ietf-babel-rtt-extension-00.txt Pages : 9 Date : 2019-04-26 Abstract: This document defines an extension to the Babel routing protocol that uses symmetric delay in metric computation and therefore makes it possible to prefer lower latency links to higher latency ones. The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-babel-rtt-extension/ There are also htmlized versions available at: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-babel-rtt-extension-00 https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-babel-rtt-extension-00 Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ From nobody Fri Apr 26 03:21:09 2019 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D68E9120393 for ; Fri, 26 Apr 2019 03:21:07 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.901 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Kh6ypQiG1D-o for ; Fri, 26 Apr 2019 03:21:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from korolev.univ-paris7.fr (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 63CA912038F for ; Fri, 26 Apr 2019 03:21:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [81.194.30.253]) by korolev.univ-paris7.fr (8.14.4/8.14.4/relay1/82085) with ESMTP id x3QAKwfi022297; Fri, 26 Apr 2019 12:20:58 +0200 Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id A6FB55B598; Fri, 26 Apr 2019 12:21:01 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at math.univ-paris-diderot.fr Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr ([127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10023) with ESMTP id Kx5_-yXC21zf; Fri, 26 Apr 2019 12:21:00 +0200 (CEST) Received: from lanthane.irif.fr (unknown [172.23.36.89]) (Authenticated sender: jch) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8CA515B596; Fri, 26 Apr 2019 12:21:00 +0200 (CEST) Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2019 12:21:00 +0200 Message-ID: <87imv19ier.wl-jch@irif.fr> From: Juliusz Chroboczek To: "STARK, BARBARA H" Cc: "'Babel at IETF'" In-Reply-To: <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E6114E150E05@GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com> References: <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E6114E150E05@GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com> User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [194.254.61.138]); Fri, 26 Apr 2019 12:20:58 +0200 (CEST) X-Miltered: at korolev with ID 5CC2DB8A.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http : // j-chkmail dot ensmp dot fr)! X-j-chkmail-Enveloppe: 5CC2DB8A.000 from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/null/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/ X-j-chkmail-Score: MSGID : 5CC2DB8A.000 on korolev.univ-paris7.fr : j-chkmail score : . : R=. U=. O=. B=0.000 -> S=0.000 X-j-chkmail-Status: Ham Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] info-model: link properties X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2019 10:21:08 -0000 > Change registry items to > other: no link property information available > tunnel: a tunneled interface over unknown physical link > wired: > wireless: That is not my understanding of what we agreed to. I was under the impression that we had decided that the classification of link types in wired/wireless/tunnel is an internal implementation detail of babeld, and that what we wanted to export were the underlying properties, which are: - link cost estimator (ETX or 2-out-of-3); - use split-horizon (boolean); - use RTT (boolean). wired means 2-out-of-3, split-horizon, no RTT. wireless means ETX, no split-horizon, no RTT. tunnel means 2-out-of-3, split-horizon, RTT. It is clear to me that the interface type abstration is useful for the user, who doesn't want to deal with technical details such as whether the split-horizon optimisation is allowable on a given link type, but it's difficult to export from the management interface. -- Juliusz From nobody Fri Apr 26 03:22:59 2019 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 62E35120393 for ; Fri, 26 Apr 2019 03:22:57 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.901 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 8N-ubZJwgCl6 for ; Fri, 26 Apr 2019 03:22:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from korolev.univ-paris7.fr (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B81D712038F for ; Fri, 26 Apr 2019 03:22:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [81.194.30.253]) by korolev.univ-paris7.fr (8.14.4/8.14.4/relay1/82085) with ESMTP id x3QAMmqf023256; Fri, 26 Apr 2019 12:22:48 +0200 Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 031855B5FC; Fri, 26 Apr 2019 12:22:52 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at math.univ-paris-diderot.fr Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr ([127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10023) with ESMTP id ygm5HcFXfS1H; Fri, 26 Apr 2019 12:22:50 +0200 (CEST) Received: from lanthane.irif.fr (unknown [172.23.36.89]) (Authenticated sender: jch) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E6F4C5B5FA; Fri, 26 Apr 2019 12:22:50 +0200 (CEST) Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2019 12:22:50 +0200 Message-ID: <87h8al9ibp.wl-jch@irif.fr> From: Juliusz Chroboczek To: "STARK, BARBARA H" Cc: "'Babel at IETF'" In-Reply-To: <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E6114E151182@GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com> References: <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E6114E151182@GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com> User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [194.254.61.138]); Fri, 26 Apr 2019 12:22:48 +0200 (CEST) X-Miltered: at korolev with ID 5CC2DBF8.001 by Joe's j-chkmail (http : // j-chkmail dot ensmp dot fr)! X-j-chkmail-Enveloppe: 5CC2DBF8.001 from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/null/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/ X-j-chkmail-Score: MSGID : 5CC2DBF8.001 on korolev.univ-paris7.fr : j-chkmail score : . : R=. U=. O=. B=0.000 -> S=0.000 X-j-chkmail-Status: Ham Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] info-model: calculated and received metrics X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2019 10:22:57 -0000 > This was discussed in Prague, but I think it still didn't come to the right conclusion (in my head) as I look at it again. >> From reading rfc6126bis, it appears that > - all routes advertised by neighbors will have a received metric > - all routes advertised by this router will have a calculated metric > - routes originated by this router will not have a received metric > - routes with infinite received metrics don't need a calculated metric In the last case -- the calculated metric will necessarily be infinite. > For a route to exist in the info model babel-routes object, either the > received or calculated metric MUST be non-zero (rfc6126bis only mentions > the received metric as being in its route table). Zero is a perfectly fine value for a metric (actually, the very best). Perhaps you meant defined instead of non-zero? -- Juliusz From nobody Fri Apr 26 03:49:11 2019 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietf.org Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A468A1200A4; Fri, 26 Apr 2019 03:49:01 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: Cc: babel@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.95.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Reply-To: babel@ietf.org Message-ID: <155627574164.6925.7132237305542709982@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2019 03:49:01 -0700 Archived-At: Subject: [babel] I-D Action: draft-ietf-babel-applicability-06.txt X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2019 10:49:02 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Babel routing protocol WG of the IETF. Title : Applicability of the Babel routing protocol Author : Juliusz Chroboczek Filename : draft-ietf-babel-applicability-06.txt Pages : 10 Date : 2019-04-26 Abstract: Babel is a routing protocol based on the distance-vector algorithm augmented with mechanisms for loop avoidance and starvation avoidance. In this document, we argue that there exist niches where Babel is useful and that are not adequately served by more mature protocols. The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-babel-applicability/ There are also htmlized versions available at: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-babel-applicability-06 https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-babel-applicability-06 A diff from the previous version is available at: https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-babel-applicability-06 Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ From nobody Sun Apr 28 17:21:12 2019 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 89BAE12004C for ; Sun, 28 Apr 2019 17:21:10 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 7-tzQprJCD0Y for ; Sun, 28 Apr 2019 17:21:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-lj1-x22d.google.com (mail-lj1-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::22d]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 77482120044 for ; Sun, 28 Apr 2019 17:21:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-lj1-x22d.google.com with SMTP id z26so7765186ljj.2 for ; Sun, 28 Apr 2019 17:21:08 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=PUSMKgzl+3BKjMlaq8l96jowrahGdbwCylkJmCNk7js=; b=qzshkPkxYxCBzoBDoqhcuw8FkOi8wKKv9gz80OkBFRUjXku88cWHr89n4ByiFOCK7L gLRhD9m6pCBRh4osil3UNTmInDhlQ8iJQfLXWALbSQPcnaxkCdxjhteDC5mTAQgez1XM 2EH1lDXrQBQnozjK+Cnzuq3bRUX53+rZbpr79VenHc+PL1h5H1iaFuSRw9tM53L1rDI1 +2n7zl/PMD3Bnljk27hN0jlZKAMDRMB+gqfrF33ZIcGuZAlTRlhD6nusmVww3wfL8NyY /u6qYs0frB0DsEmOPV9w52PoKwti3fJqvYXXrAXp5Z7i8d8vJ5vTdymXmMgfr9uFxt7X wyrA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=PUSMKgzl+3BKjMlaq8l96jowrahGdbwCylkJmCNk7js=; b=jpKdTt6HchmS4edvYgzsMNMBkcxnrfP/F75Tpm7KxGvCNSS8yL4cgQHmyrpx1YYq1R peRXBjGdylo6WyieGeTwgtGdNKn/8vLhIUPckPWnrncFp9Q5olT1To5/53jJz6KzonVo rb9h4z3r84cGHapff3+7lxJnX4qLTsA9AJAXvmX+ACl3xaMXzzxA0Q54c8+WIWwIlKtm /TU0OXabbtzW6W3BqIwum0v0JQ/4SPPHFACfgJdIsnDzTxn+DEc3PQ9XbMYtr4T221ID Qao1v3ruEm7e751E5dkN/f1jGxjFmD5yH7a7Z3NZrVRdMAVdmL46UFZ1dnUGRObrAy1b 9NWQ== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAX2VYCIFKdG+m5hUFTUj5VBTaP487pSBi0QaNrVn4xHuGYRdDGl ys5K6BlXu2EQrDKOv8xHjTr+0QQckyWtkfCBCPA= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwFaRPf0YiIowRr9vjwT7MNekKgLvrpqo274qzBjf0RfAiy93vTMR4tswgSkPhuZwhXJ2XseHAGnE/HaAptuYQ= X-Received: by 2002:a2e:9f53:: with SMTP id v19mr9034256ljk.0.1556497266717; Sun, 28 Apr 2019 17:21:06 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <87mukd9j12.wl-jch@irif.fr> In-Reply-To: <87mukd9j12.wl-jch@irif.fr> From: David Schinazi Date: Sun, 28 Apr 2019 17:20:55 -0700 Message-ID: To: Juliusz Chroboczek Cc: Babel at IETF Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000ad39ac0587a04225" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] Last-minute tightening in rfc6126bis X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2019 00:21:11 -0000 --000000000000ad39ac0587a04225 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Hi Juliusz, I can confirm that my former implementation did not use seqnos for route selection. I support this change to the document. David On Fri, Apr 26, 2019 at 3:07 AM Juliusz Chroboczek wrote: > Dear all, > > Joao Sobrinho has sent me his observations about convergence of a certain > class of routing protocols in the presence of metrics that are not > left-distributive. In short, it turns out that protocols such as DSDV can > cause persistent blackholes in some topologies if the metric being used is > not left-distributive. > > Happily enough, Babel does not belong to the class of protocols that are > problematic. However, the current text describes the relevant property in > non-normative language. Thanks to Sobrinho's explanation, I've decided to > make the relevant property into a MUST. I believe that all existent > implementations already have the right property. > > I've just committed the relevant changes to the github repository: > > > https://github.com/jech/babel-drafts/commit/5b038542a765b550cec487878f9f0acc2c2f82b0 > > I'll let them simmer for a few days, then push a new revision to the > datatracker. > > -- Juliusz > > _______________________________________________ > babel mailing list > babel@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/babel > --000000000000ad39ac0587a04225 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi Juliusz,

I can confirm that my forme= r implementation did not use seqnos for route selection.

I support this change to the document.

Davi= d

On Fri, Apr 26, 2019 at 3:07 AM Juliusz Chroboczek <jch@irif.fr> wrote:
Dear all,

Joao Sobrinho has sent me his observations about convergence of a certain class of routing protocols in the presence of metrics that are not
left-distributive.=C2=A0 In short, it turns out that protocols such as DSDV= can
cause persistent blackholes in some topologies if the metric being used is<= br> not left-distributive.

Happily enough, Babel does not belong to the class of protocols that are problematic.=C2=A0 However, the current text describes the relevant propert= y in
non-normative language.=C2=A0 Thanks to Sobrinho's explanation, I'v= e decided to
make the relevant property into a MUST.=C2=A0 I believe that all existent implementations already have the right property.

I've just committed the relevant changes to the github repository:

=C2=A0 =C2=A0 ht= tps://github.com/jech/babel-drafts/commit/5b038542a765b550cec487878f9f0acc2= c2f82b0

I'll let them simmer for a few days, then push a new revision to the datatracker.

-- Juliusz

_______________________________________________
babel mailing list
babel@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/babel
--000000000000ad39ac0587a04225-- From nobody Sun Apr 28 20:02:21 2019 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietf.org Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 546B91202B9; Sun, 28 Apr 2019 20:02:06 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Donald Eastlake via Datatracker To: X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.95.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Cc: babel-chairs@ietf.org, d3e3e3@gmail.com, iesg-secretary@ietf.org, Donald Eastlake , babel@ietf.org Message-ID: <155650692633.21000.7589768152379913246.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Sun, 28 Apr 2019 20:02:06 -0700 Archived-At: Subject: [babel] Publication has been requested for draft-ietf-babel-source-specific-05 X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2019 03:02:20 -0000 Donald Eastlake has requested publication of draft-ietf-babel-source-specific-05 as Proposed Standard on behalf of the BABEL working group. Please verify the document's state at https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-babel-source-specific/