Re: [rbridge] [Pppext] TRILL, IS-IS, and System ID
"Les Ginsberg (ginsberg)" <[email protected]> Wed, 1 Jun 2011 09:32:33 -0700
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.isis,gmane.ietf.pppext |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <AE36820147909644AD2A7CA014B1FB520E6E7FE1@xmb-sjc-222.amer.cisco.com> |
(Please include isis-wg on this thread.) James - > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On > Behalf Of James Carlson > Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2011 8:51 AM > To: Stewart Bryant (stbryant) > Cc: PPP Extensions; Donald Eastlake; [email protected]; William Allen > Simpson > Subject: Re: [rbridge] [Pppext] TRILL, IS-IS, and System ID > > Stewart Bryant wrote: > > > >> All that said, I don't really care. This is a tempest in a teapot. > I > >> can mash together both texts if the Routing ADs are willing to > accept a > >> passing reference here to a draft that, in their words, hasn't even > been > >> considered by the IS-IS community. > > James, > > > > I believe that any departure from the text in ISO10589 needs > > to be discussed in the ISIS WG. > > "Any" departure? No matter how subservient? That seems as inflexible > as the other end of this spectrum. > > If I suggested text like this, would it require ISIS WG discussion, > and, > if so, what's the chance that this discussion would terminate in a > positive way? > > 3. An implementation that has only PPP links might have no > Organizationally Unique Identifier (OUI) that can form an IS-IS > System ID. Resolving that issue is outside the scope of this > document, however it is strongly RECOMMENDED that all TRILL > implementations have at least one zero-configuration mechanism to > obtain a valid System ID. Refer to ISO/IEC 10589 regarding > System > ID uniqueness requirements. Alternative solutions to this issue > may also be defined in the future; see [8] for an example. I have a BIG PROBLEM with references to [8] W. Simpson, "Generation of Unique IS-IS System Identifiers," (draft-simpson-isis-ppp-unique), work in progress, March 2011 This has been publicly reviewed and noted (and I think quite correctly so) as being seriously flawed. So even a passing suggestion that this might be a reasonable alternative for someone seems at best very premature. Les > > -- > James Carlson 42.703N 71.076W > <[email protected]> > _______________________________________________ > rbridge mailing list > [email protected] > http://mailman.postel.org/mailman/listinfo/rbridge