Aijuan,

On Wed, Sep 24, 2025 at 12:08 PM Aijun Wang <[email protected]>
wrote:

> Hi, all experts:
>
> I noticed that during the Ketan and Med’s review of this document, they
> all recommended that the “operation consideration” part should be added but
> the authors refused.
>
> Here I want to remind the operators that focus on the UPA feature, that
> the protocol extension defined in this document is implementable, but NOT
> practical to be deployed in the network.
>
> Any operator try to adopt this feature in their network should be aware
> that the following issues:
>
> 1) The UPA propagation between the areas is conflict with the base OSPF
> standard(RFC 2328).
>
> That is to say, according to the description in RFC 2328, UPA can’t be
> propagated further to the remote area(only to the neighbor area).
>
> For details explanation, please review the discussions at
> https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lsr/ev2A1DBxSl0DkbwSiAQ2UP1yf3Y/ (Until
> now, only Ketan faces the question directly, but failed to give the
> reasonable explanation)
>

The quotes link gives an answer Ketan has given many times:


www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-lsr-igp-ureach-prefix-announce-09.html#section-4.2
- this document extends the base OSPF protocol behavior specifically for
UPAs alone to allow their propagation. Therefore, this is not in conflict
with RFC2328.

The link states:

4.2.
<https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-lsr-igp-ureach-prefix-announce-09.html#section-4.2>Propagation
of UPA in OSPF
<https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-lsr-igp-ureach-prefix-announce-09.html#name-propagation-of-upa-in-ospf>

OSPF ABRs or ASBRs, which would be responsible for propagating UPA
advertisements into other areas MUST recognize such advertisements.
Advertising prefix reachability between OSPF areas assumes prefix
reachability in a source area. Such requirement of reachability MUST NOT be
applied for UPAs, as they are propagating unreachability.

At best I could see giving Operational Considerations guidance of deploying
this in a mixed environment where some, but not all devices
suport this feature. If you really believe that is a concern, please write
a sentence of two on how operators should handle this. This could
be as simple as "dont enable this feature until all your devices support
it". If you cannot give such a short operational advise sentence for
consideration, I will assume the issue need no further addressing.

2) The exploitation of LSInfinity feature is one disaster to the operator’s
> network.
>
> One can easily imagine the confusion scenario: One prefix with metric set
> to slightly lower than LSInfinity will become “unreachable” after several
> hops because the accumulated cost will exceed the LSInfinity.
>

Same as above - instead of simply saying "disaster", try to give
constructive operational consideration sentences.


> I noticed until now, among the IESG reviewers, only Med is from the
> operator, but ignored also the above issues( I appreciate that Med insisted
> that UP flag was unnecessary, despite of the authors’ unsound resistance to
> change——Until now, there is no vendor implement the U flag, not to mention
> UP flag).
>
> The above issues are so obvious, I am wondering why it can pass the final
> IESG review.
>

It can pass review because you have not convinced anyone beyond yourself
that there is a problem.

Is it necessary to appeal to the IAB after the IESG’s review to pass this
> document?
>
> Can IAB amend the so called consensus procedure to eliminate such
> standards that have flaws, or challenging to be deployed in the operator’s
> network?
>

The consensus being questioned by a single individual is hardly convincing.
Where are the other operators?
Until now, we have never seen a single individual predicting the demise of
the internet, and being correct.

I am wondering.
> Can anyone give some suggestions, or explain the solutions to above issues?
>

See above. Write constructive text that you think would give proper warning
on how/when to use these features or not.

Paul
_______________________________________________
Lsr mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to