Using a Link State Advertisement (LSA) Options Bit to Prevent Looping in BGP/MPLS IP Virtual Private Networks (VPNs)
draft-ietf-ospf-2547-dnbit-04
Yes
(Alex Zinin)
No Objection
(Bert Wijnen)
(Bill Fenner)
(David Kessens)
(Jon Peterson)
(Margaret Cullen)
(Russ Housley)
(Steven Bellovin)
(Ted Hardie)
(Thomas Narten)
Abstain
(Allison Mankin)
Note: This ballot was opened for revision 04 and is now closed.
Alex Zinin Former IESG member
Yes
Yes
()
Unknown
Bert Wijnen Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown
Bill Fenner Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown
David Kessens Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown
Harald Alvestrand Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(2004-02-05)
Unknown
I have been reasured by the Routing ADs that there can never be a case where one OSPF network is connected to two 2547 VPNs that both inject routes into the OSPF network, and where it's expected to have routes related to one VPN injected into the other VPN. If that ever happened, one bit is not enough - but apparently, OSPF isn't used that way. If the document is revised for other reasons, a sentence or two saying so would be nice.
Jon Peterson Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown
Margaret Cullen Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown
Ned Freed Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(2004-01-30)
Unknown
Russ Housley Former IESG member
(was Discuss)
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown
Scott Hollenbeck Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(2004-03-15)
Unknown
I believe there should be a normative reference to RFC 2119 added (it's mentioned in the text, but not cited), but that's something the RFC Editor can address.
Steven Bellovin Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown
Ted Hardie Former IESG member
(was Discuss)
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown
Thomas Narten Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown
Allison Mankin Former IESG member
Abstain
Abstain
()
Unknown