draft-pillay-esnault-ospf-flooding-05.txt

[Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>]

ops-dir comment

>    3.1 WG Submissions
>       3.1.1 New Item
> ******     o OSPF Refresh and Flooding Reduction in Stable Topologies 
>              (Informational) 
>              <draft-pillay-esnault-ospf-flooding-05.txt>
>              Token: Fenner, Bill

whew.. when I first read this, I thought this was for PS..

==> from an operational point of view, this seems like a totally useless 
idea warranting editing or an IESG note, due to:

 * DC circuits spec is from 1995; they are practically dead/useless today, 
who cares about the feature?  They're junk in the spec.

 * Now, this spec creates a dependency on DC circuit spec; this is useless 
if DC circuit spec is not implemented in all OSPF routers

 * The bandwidth required for flooding a few LSA's every 30 minutes is 
minimal.  Why bother with something like this which could lead to a lot of 
issues?  OSPF is not BGP; it carries only minimal amount of information, 
not the full Internet routing table, and flooding it once in a while is a 
very good idea if it gains you even a piece or robustness.

1. Abstract

==> abstract is numbered

3. Changes in the existing implementation.

==> s/.//

6. Security Considerations

   This memo does not create any new security issues for the OSPF
   protocol. Security considerations for the base OSPF protocol are
   covered in [1].

==> uhh, no.  what if you flood LSA's with noage bit, they stick around
forever and are never purged?  I'd guess that changes the OSPF protocol
assumptions quite a bit.  I didn't bother to check how well they were 
documented in the OSPF DC circuits doc, but I wouldn't count on it.