Subject: [Isis-wg] Fwd: [rbridge] I-D Action:draft-ietf-trill-rbridge-af-01.txt

From: Donald Eastlake <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2011 23:20:54 -0400

This draft has been updated based primarily on Mike Shand's comments.

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From:  <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 10:45 PM
Subject: [rbridge] I-D Action:draft-ietf-trill-rbridge-af-01.txt
To: [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked]

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
This draft is a work item of the Transparent Interconnection of Lots
of Links Working Group of the IETF.

       Title           : RBridges: Appointed Forwarders
       Author(s)       : R. Perlman, et al.
       Filename        : draft-ietf-trill-rbridge-af-01.txt
       Pages           : 18
       Date            : 2011-04-11

The IETF TRILL protocol provides optimal pair-wise data forwarding
without configuration, safe forwarding even during periods of
temporary loops, and support for multipathing of both unicast and
multicast traffic. TRILL accomplishes this by using IS-IS link state
routing and by encapsulating traffic using a header that includes a
hop count. Devices that implement TRILL are called RBridges.

TRILL supports multi-access LAN links that can have multiple end
stations and RBridges attached. Where multiple RBridges are attached
to a link, native traffic to and from end stations on that link is
handled by a subset of those RBridges called Appointed Forwarders,
with the intent that native traffic in each VLAN be handled by at
most one RBridge.  The purpose of this document is to improve the
documentation of the Appointed Forwarder mechanism.

A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-trill-rbridge-af-01.txt

Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/

---

From: Donald Eastlake <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 08:27:50 -0400

Hi,

I believe this draft needs some minor changes to make clear that
appointing an RBridge as a forwarder has no effect on any ports that
are configured as trunk ports.

Speaking as one of the authors, I think that with that change it would
be ready for Working Group Last Call...

Thanks,
Donald
=============================
 Donald E. Eastlake 3rd   +1-508-333-2270 (cell)
 155 Beaver Street
 Milford, MA 01757 USA
 [email-masked]

On Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 10:45 PM,  <[email-masked]> wrote:
> This draft is a work item of the Transparent Interconnection of Lots of Links Working Group of the IETF.
>
>

---

From: Radia Perlman <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 07:01:03 -0700

No objection to adding that, though I think the definition of trunk
port in the base spec makes it clear that no data packets would be
encapsulated/decapsulated on that port.   But, if you want to add a
comment repeating that, into the af spec, no harm done.

Radia

On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 5:27 AM, Donald Eastlake <[email-masked]> wrote:
> _______________________________________________
> Isis-wg mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/isis-wg
>