Internet-Draft | OSPF Terminology | March 2022 |
Fox, et al. | Expires 4 September 2022 | [Page] |
- Workgroup:
- Link State Routing
- Internet-Draft:
- draft-fox-lsr-ospf-terminology-00
- Updates:
- 2328 5340 (if approved)
- Published:
- Intended Status:
- Standards Track
- Expires:
Update to OSPF Terminology
Abstract
This document updates some OSPF terminology to be in line with inclusive language used in the industry.¶
This document updates RFC2328 and RFC5340.¶
Status of This Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.¶
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.¶
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."¶
This Internet-Draft will expire on 4 September 2022.¶
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2022 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors. All rights reserved.¶
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document. Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must include Revised BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as described in the Revised BSD License.¶
1. Introduction
This document updates some OSPF terminology to be in line with inclusive language used in the industry.¶
2. Update to RFC2328
The base OSPFv2 specification [RFC2328] defines the synchronization of databases as two routers froming a "master/slave relationship". All instances of these terms are replaced by leader/follower, respectively.¶
The Master (MS) bit in the database description packet is renamed the Leader (L) bit.¶
The operation of OSPFv2 is not modified. The Leader/Follower terminology and Leader (L) Bit definition changes impact the following sections: 7.2 "The Synchronization of Databases", 10 "The Neighbor Data Structures", 10.1 "Neighbor states", 10.2 "Events causing neighbor state changes", 10.6 "Receiving Database Description Packets", 10.8 "Sending Database Description Packets", 10.10 "An Example", and A.3.3 "The Database Description packet".¶
3. Update to RFC5340
The base OSPFv3 specification [RFC5340] defines the database description process between two routers as one being "designated to be the master and the other is the slave". All instances of these terms are replaced by leader/follower, respectively.¶
The Master/Slave (MS) bit in the database description packet is renamed the Leader (L) bit.¶
The operation of OSPFv3 is not modified. The Leader/Follower terminology and Leader (L) Bit definition changes impact section A.3.3 "The Database Description packet".¶
4. Other RFCs With References
The following OSPF RFCs also have references to the legacy terminology.¶
- RFC 4222 - Prioritized Treatment of Specific OSPF Version 2 Packets and Congestion Avoidance (BCP) [RFC4222]¶
- RFC 5243 - OSPF Database Exchange Summary List Optimization (Informational) [RFC5243]¶
- RFC 4811 - OSPF Out-of-Band Link State Database (LSDB) Resynchronization (Experimental) [RFC4811]¶
- RFC 5243 - OSPF Database Exchange Summary List Optimization (Informational) [RFC5243]¶
- RFC 5614 - Mobile Ad Hoc Network (MANET) Extension of OSPF Using Connected Dominating Set (CDS) Flooding (Experimental) [RFC5614]¶
- RFC 5838 - Support of Address Families in OSPFv3 (Standards Track) [RFC5838]¶
Some of these will be updated by this document. The final set is TBD.¶
5. Acknowledgements
TDB¶
6. IANA Considerations
IANA is requested to rename bit 0x01 in the "Database Description (DD) Packet Flags" registry to "Leader (L-bit)" and to add a reference to this document.¶
7. Security Considerations
This document updates the terminology used in OSPFv2 [RFC2328] and OSPFv3 [RFC5340] without any modification to the specification of the protocol. As such, the security characteristics of OSPF do not change.¶
8. References
8.1. Normative References
- [RFC2328]
- Moy, J., "OSPF Version 2", STD 54, RFC 2328, DOI 10.17487/RFC2328, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2328>.
- [RFC5340]
- Coltun, R., Ferguson, D., Moy, J., and A. Lindem, "OSPF for IPv6", RFC 5340, DOI 10.17487/RFC5340, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5340>.
8.2. Informative References
- [RFC4222]
- Choudhury, G., Ed., "Prioritized Treatment of Specific OSPF Version 2 Packets and Congestion Avoidance", BCP 112, RFC 4222, DOI 10.17487/RFC4222, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4222>.
- [RFC4811]
- Nguyen, L., Roy, A., and A. Zinin, "OSPF Out-of-Band Link State Database (LSDB) Resynchronization", RFC 4811, DOI 10.17487/RFC4811, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4811>.
- [RFC5243]
- Ogier, R., "OSPF Database Exchange Summary List Optimization", RFC 5243, DOI 10.17487/RFC5243, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5243>.
- [RFC5614]
- Ogier, R. and P. Spagnolo, "Mobile Ad Hoc Network (MANET) Extension of OSPF Using Connected Dominating Set (CDS) Flooding", RFC 5614, DOI 10.17487/RFC5614, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5614>.
- [RFC5838]
- Lindem, A., Ed., Mirtorabi, S., Roy, A., Barnes, M., and R. Aggarwal, "Support of Address Families in OSPFv3", RFC 5838, DOI 10.17487/RFC5838, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5838>.