Skip to main content

The OSPF Opaque LSA Option
RFC 5250

Revision differences

Document history

Date Rev. By Action
2018-12-20
05 (System)
Received changes through RFC Editor sync (changed abstract to 'This document defines enhancements to the OSPF protocol to support a new class of link state …
Received changes through RFC Editor sync (changed abstract to 'This document defines enhancements to the OSPF protocol to support a new class of link state advertisements (LSAs) called Opaque LSAs. Opaque LSAs provide a generalized mechanism to allow for the future extensibility of OSPF. Opaque LSAs consist of a standard LSA header followed by application-specific information. The information field may be used directly by OSPF or by other applications. Standard OSPF link-state database flooding mechanisms are used to distribute Opaque LSAs to all or some limited portion of the OSPF topology.

This document replaces RFC 2370 and adds to it a mechanism to enable an OSPF router to validate Autonomous System (AS)-scope Opaque LSAs originated outside of the router's OSPF area. [STANDARDS-TRACK]')
2017-05-16
05 (System) Changed document authors from "Alex Zinin, Igor Bryskin, Lou Berger" to "Alex Zinin, Igor Bryskin, Lou Berger, Rob Coltun"
2015-10-14
05 (System) Notify list changed from ospf-chairs@ietf.org, draft-ietf-ospf-rfc2370bis@ietf.org to (None)
2012-08-22
05 (System) post-migration administrative database adjustment to the No Objection position for Chris Newman
2012-08-22
05 (System) post-migration administrative database adjustment to the No Objection position for Pasi Eronen
2008-07-07
05 Cindy Morgan State Changes to RFC Published from RFC Ed Queue by Cindy Morgan
2008-07-07
05 Cindy Morgan [Note]: 'RFC 5250' added by Cindy Morgan
2008-07-03
05 (System) RFC published
2008-05-12
05 (System) IANA Action state changed to RFC-Ed-Ack from Waiting on RFC Editor
2008-05-12
05 (System) IANA Action state changed to Waiting on RFC Editor from In Progress
2008-05-12
05 (System) IANA Action state changed to In Progress from Waiting on Authors
2008-05-09
05 (System) IANA Action state changed to Waiting on Authors from In Progress
2008-05-09
05 Cindy Morgan State Changes to RFC Ed Queue from Approved-announcement sent by Cindy Morgan
2008-05-09
05 (System) IANA Action state changed to In Progress
2008-05-09
05 Amy Vezza IESG state changed to Approved-announcement sent
2008-05-09
05 Amy Vezza IESG has approved the document
2008-05-09
05 Amy Vezza Closed "Approve" ballot
2008-05-09
05 Amy Vezza State Changes to Approved-announcement to be sent from IESG Evaluation::AD Followup by Amy Vezza
2008-05-09
05 Pasi Eronen [Ballot Position Update] Position for Pasi Eronen has been changed to No Objection from Undefined by Pasi Eronen
2008-05-09
05 Pasi Eronen [Ballot Position Update] Position for Pasi Eronen has been changed to Undefined from Discuss by Pasi Eronen
2008-05-08
05 (System) New version available: draft-ietf-ospf-rfc2370bis-05.txt
2008-04-30
05 Chris Newman [Ballot Position Update] Position for Chris Newman has been changed to No Objection from Discuss by Chris Newman
2008-04-28
04 (System) New version available: draft-ietf-ospf-rfc2370bis-04.txt
2008-04-26
05 Samuel Weiler Request for Last Call review by SECDIR Completed. Reviewer: Blake Ramsdell.
2008-04-25
05 Chris Newman
[Ballot discuss]
The IANA considerations section refers to an IANA registry
without giving the precise name of the registry.  As a reader of
the document, …
[Ballot discuss]
The IANA considerations section refers to an IANA registry
without giving the precise name of the registry.  As a reader of
the document, this makes it difficult to identify/guess which of
the many OSPF registries is being discussed.

For example, if the text is referring to the "Opaque Link-State
Advertisements (LSA) Option Types" registry, then it should say so.

When discussing an existing registry, the name should exactly match one
of the names on this page: http://www.iana.org/protocols/
2008-04-25
05 Chris Newman [Ballot discuss]
The IANA considerations section refers to an IANA registry
without giving the precise name of the registry.  Please fix that.
2008-04-24
03 (System) New version available: draft-ietf-ospf-rfc2370bis-03.txt
2008-04-24
05 Cindy Morgan State Changes to IESG Evaluation::AD Followup from IESG Evaluation by Cindy Morgan
2008-04-24
05 Lisa Dusseault [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded by Lisa Dusseault
2008-04-24
05 Tim Polk [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded by Tim Polk
2008-04-24
05 Mark Townsley [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded by Mark Townsley
2008-04-24
05 Magnus Westerlund [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded by Magnus Westerlund
2008-04-24
05 Cullen Jennings [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded by Cullen Jennings
2008-04-24
05 Jari Arkko [Ballot Position Update] New position, Yes, has been recorded by Jari Arkko
2008-04-24
05 Russ Housley [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded by Russ Housley
2008-04-24
05 Jari Arkko
[Ballot comment]
Terms NSSA, ASBR used before definition.

Appendix A, or at least Section 12.2 in there must be normative, right? In
fact, I would …
[Ballot comment]
Terms NSSA, ASBR used before definition.

Appendix A, or at least Section 12.2 in there must be normative, right? In
fact, I would have expected to the see the format definitions in the body
of the document.
2008-04-24
05 Chris Newman
[Ballot discuss]
The IANA considerations section requires review of standards track OSPF
extensions by a designated expert once the OSPF WG has disbanded.  I
would …
[Ballot discuss]
The IANA considerations section requires review of standards track OSPF
extensions by a designated expert once the OSPF WG has disbanded.  I
would like to understand how this procedure will work and how we can be
sure the requirement is not lost between now and when the OSPF WG is
disbanded.

In addition, the IANA considerations section refers to IANA registries
without giving the precise name of the registry.  Please fix that.
2008-04-24
05 Chris Newman [Ballot Position Update] New position, Discuss, has been recorded by Chris Newman
2008-04-24
05 Jari Arkko [Ballot comment]
Terms NSSA, ASBR used before definition.
2008-04-24
05 Jari Arkko [Ballot comment]
Term NSSA used before definition.
2008-04-23
05 Ron Bonica [Ballot Position Update] New position, Yes, has been recorded by Ron Bonica
2008-04-23
05 Pasi Eronen
[Ballot discuss]
RFC 2370 said "the O-bit is not set in packets other than Database
Description packets"; this sentence has been changed to "the O-bit …
[Ballot discuss]
RFC 2370 said "the O-bit is not set in packets other than Database
Description packets"; this sentence has been changed to "the O-bit
SHOULD NOT be set and SHOULD be ignored when received in packets other
than Database Description packets." SHOULD implies that there may
exist "valid reasons in particular circumstances" to ignore this; the
document should briefly explain what that reason could be, if the
situation has indeed changed from RFC 2370 times.
2008-04-23
05 Pasi Eronen [Ballot Position Update] New position, Discuss, has been recorded by Pasi Eronen
2008-04-21
05 David Ward [Ballot Position Update] New position, Yes, has been recorded by David Ward
2008-04-21
05 Ross Callon [Ballot Position Update] New position, Yes, has been recorded for Ross Callon
2008-04-21
05 Ross Callon Ballot has been issued by Ross Callon
2008-04-21
05 Ross Callon Created "Approve" ballot
2008-04-21
05 Ross Callon
PROTO writeup by Acee Lindem:

  1. Have the chairs personally reviewed this version of the Internet
    Draft (ID), and in particular, do …
PROTO writeup by Acee Lindem:

  1. Have the chairs personally reviewed this version of the Internet
    Draft (ID), and in particular, do they believe this ID is ready
    to forward to the IESG for publication?

Yes

  2. Has the document had adequate review from both key WG members and
    key non-WG members?

Yes - I've reviewed it myself several times.

    Do you have any concerns about the depth or
    breadth of the reviews that have been performed?
   
No

  3. Do you have concerns that the document needs more review from a
    particular (broader) perspective (e.g., security, operational
    complexity, someone familiar with AAA, etc.)?

No

  4. Do you have any specific concerns/issues with this document that
    you believe the ADs and/or IESG should be aware of? For example,
    perhaps you are uncomfortable with certain parts of the document,
    or have concerns whether there really is a need for it. In any
    event, if your issues have been discussed in the WG and the WG has
    indicated it that it still wishes to advance the document, detail
    those concerns in the write-up.

No

  5. How solid is the WG consensus behind this document? Does it
    represent the strong concurrence of a few individuals, with
    others being silent, or does the WG as a whole understand and
    agree with it?

This is a update to an existing RFC, it contains mostly
clarifications and improvements to the existing text. The one
change (requiring reachability for AS-scoped opaque LSA) was
discussed in an IETF meeting and everyone present was in favor
of updating the existing RFC as opposed to accepting a new WG
document.

  6. Has anyone threatened an appeal or otherwise indicated extreme
    discontent? If so, please summarise the areas of conflict
    in separate email to the Responsible Area Director.

No

  7. Have the chairs verified that the document adheres to all
    of the ID Checklist items?
idnits 2.04.12

tmp/draft-ietf-ospf-rfc2370bis-01.txt:
- Failure fetching the file, proceeding without it.)
- Failure fetching the file, proceeding without it.)

  Checking boilerplate required by RFC 3978 and 3979, updated by RFC 4748:
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------

    No issues found here.

  Checking nits according to http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-guidelines.txt:
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------

    No issues found here.

  Checking nits according to http://www.ietf.org/ID-Checklist.html:
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------

    No issues found here.

  Miscellaneous warnings:
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------

    No issues found here.

  Checking references for intended status: Proposed Standard
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (See RFC 3967 for information about using normative references to
    lower-maturity documents in RFCs)
  -- Possible downref: Non-RFC (?) normative reference: ref. 'IANA'

  -- No information found for draft-ietf-ospf-mt- - is the name correct?

  -- No information found for draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-update- - is the name
    correct?


    Summary: 0 errors (**), 0 warnings (==), 3 comments (--).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


  8. Is the document split into normative and informative references?

Yes

    Are there normative references to IDs, where the IDs are not
    also ready for advancement or are otherwise in an unclear state?
    (note here that the RFC editor will not publish an RFC with
    normative references to IDs, it will delay publication until all
    such IDs are also ready for publication as RFCs.)

No - only information references to IDs.

  9. What is the intended status of the document? (e.g., Proposed
    Standard, Informational?)

Proposed Standard

10. For Standards Track and BCP documents, the IESG approval
    announcement includes a write-up section with the following
    sections:

    * Technical Summary
    * Working Group Summary
    * Protocol Quality

2008-04-18
05 Ross Callon Telechat date was changed to 2008-04-24 from 2008-03-27 by Ross Callon
2008-04-18
05 Ross Callon State Changes to IESG Evaluation from Waiting for AD Go-Ahead by Ross Callon
2008-04-18
05 Ross Callon Placed on agenda for telechat - 2008-04-24 by Ross Callon
2008-03-26
05 (System) State has been changed to Waiting for AD Go-Ahead from In Last Call by system
2008-03-21
05 Amanda Baber
IANA Last Call comments:

ACTION 1:

Upon approval of this document, IANA will replace references to
[RFC2370] with references to [RFC-ietf-ospf-rfc2370bis-02.txt]
for the …
IANA Last Call comments:

ACTION 1:

Upon approval of this document, IANA will replace references to
[RFC2370] with references to [RFC-ietf-ospf-rfc2370bis-02.txt]
for the following assignmemts:

Registry Name: OSPFv2 Options Registry (8 bits)
http://www.iana.org/assignments/ospfv2-parameters

Value  Description      Reference
------  ----------------  ---------
0x40    O-bit            [RFC2370]


Registry Name: OSPFv2 Link State (LS) Type
http://www.iana.org/assignments/ospfv2-parameters

Value    Description                    Reference
-------  ------------------------------  ---------
9        Link-scoped Opaque LSA          [RFC2370]
10      Area-scoped Opaque LSA          [RFC2370]
11      AS-scoped Opaque LSA            [RFC2370]


ACTION 2:

Upon approval of this document, IANA will replace the reference to
[RFC2370] with a reference to [RFC-ietf-ospf-rfc2370bis-02.txt] for
the following registry:

Registry Name:  Opaque Link-State Advertisements (LSA) Option Types
Reference: [RFC2370]
http://www.iana.org/assignments/ospf-opaque-types


We understand the above to be the only IANA Actions for this
document.
2008-03-13
05 Samuel Weiler Request for Last Call review by SECDIR is assigned to Blake Ramsdell
2008-03-13
05 Samuel Weiler Request for Last Call review by SECDIR is assigned to Blake Ramsdell
2008-03-12
05 Amy Vezza Last call sent
2008-03-12
05 Amy Vezza State Changes to In Last Call from Last Call Requested by Amy Vezza
2008-03-12
05 Amy Vezza Intended Status has been changed to Proposed Standard from None
2008-03-11
05 David Ward Last Call was requested by David Ward
2008-03-11
05 David Ward Removed from agenda for telechat - 2008-03-27 by David Ward
2008-03-11
05 David Ward State Changes to Last Call Requested from IESG Evaluation by David Ward
2008-03-11
05 (System) Ballot writeup text was added
2008-03-11
05 (System) Last call text was added
2008-03-11
05 (System) Ballot approval text was added
2008-03-11
05 David Ward Draft Added by David Ward in state IESG Evaluation
2008-03-10
02 (System) New version available: draft-ietf-ospf-rfc2370bis-02.txt
2007-12-06
05 (System) Document has expired
2007-06-04
01 (System) New version available: draft-ietf-ospf-rfc2370bis-01.txt
2006-12-08
00 (System) New version available: draft-ietf-ospf-rfc2370bis-00.txt