Subject: [OSPF] Benoit Claise's Discuss on draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-autoconfig-13: (with DISCUSS)

From: "Benoit Claise" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 05 Feb 2015 05:31:59 -0800

Benoit Claise has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-autoconfig-13: Discuss

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)

Please refer to http://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-autoconfig/

----------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCUSS:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

   4.  OSPFv3 interfaces MAY use an arbitrary HelloInterval and
       RouterDeadInterval as specified in Section 3.  

Hopefully, an easy DISCUSS.
>From a management point of view, we must be able to determine if a router
or interfaces within a router are OSPF-autoconfigured.
If I'm not mistaken, you miss, in the management considerations section,
something like this: The OSPFv3 routers MUST flag the interfaces
supporting this specification. 

Background: I recall one particular tool in the past that would check the
different router configs and flag the HelloInterval and
RouterDeadInterval
 mismatched values for adjacent routers. This would be equivalent to the
following debug:
OSPF: Rcv hello from 192.168.0.2 area 0 from FastEthernet0/0 192.168.0.2
OSPF: Mismatched hello parameters from 192.168.0.2
OSPF: Dead R 40 C 60, Hello R 10 C 15  Mask R 255.255.255.252 C
255.255.255.252

In case of OSPF auto-config, this check doesn't make any sense.