draft-ietf-lsr-ospf-terminology.xml

<?xml version='1.0' encoding='utf-8'?>
<!-- This template is for creating an Internet Draft using xml2rfc,
    which is available here: http://xml.resource.org. -->
<!-- For a complete list and description of processing instructions (PIs),
    please see http://xml.resource.org/authoring/README.html. -->
<rfc
      xmlns:xi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XInclude"
      category="std"
      docName="draft-ietf-lsr-ospf-terminology-10"
      ipr="trust200902"
      obsoletes=""
      updates="2328 5340 4222 4811 5243 5614 5838"
      submissionType="IETF"
      xml:lang="en"
      tocInclude="true"
      tocDepth="4"
      symRefs="true"
      sortRefs="true"
      consensus="true"
      version="3">
  <!-- xml2rfc v2v3 conversion 2.38.1 -->
  <!-- category values: std, bcp, info, exp, and historic
    ipr values: trust200902, noModificationTrust200902, noDerivativesTrust200902,
       or pre5378Trust200902
    you can add the attributes updates="NNNN" and obsoletes="NNNN"
    they will automatically be output with "(if approved)" -->

 <!-- ***** FRONT MATTER ***** -->

 <front>
    <!-- The abbreviated title is used in the page header - it is only necessary if the
        full title is longer than 39 characters -->

   <title abbrev="OSPF Terminology">Update to OSPF Terminology</title>
    <seriesInfo name="Internet-Draft" value="draft-ietf-lsr-ospf-terminology-10"/>
    <!-- add 'role="editor"' below for the editors if appropriate -->

   <!-- Another author who claims to be an editor -->

   <author initials="M" surname="Fox" fullname="Mike Fox">
     <organization>IBM</organization>
     <address>
       <postal>
         <street>3039 E Cornwallis Rd</street>
         <city>Research Triangle Park</city>
         <region>NC</region>
         <code>27709</code>
         <country>USA</country>
       </postal>
      <email>mjfox@us.ibm.com</email>
     </address>
   </author>

   <author initials="A" surname="Lindem" fullname="Acee Lindem">
     <organization>LabN Consulting LLC</organization>
     <address>
       <postal>
         <street>301 Midenhall Way</street>
         <city>Cary</city>
         <region>NC</region>
         <code>27513</code>
         <country>USA</country>
       </postal>
      <email>acee.ietf@gmail.com</email>
     </address>
   </author>

   <author initials="A" surname="Retana" fullname="Alvaro Retana">
     <organization>Futurewei Technologies, Inc.</organization>
     <address>
       <postal>
         <street>2330 Central Expressway</street>
         <city>Santa Clara</city>
         <region>CA</region>
         <code>95050</code>
         <country>USA</country>
       </postal>
      <email>aretana@futurewei.com</email>
     </address>
   </author>

    <date year="2023"/>
    <!-- If the month and year are both specified and are the current ones, xml2rfc will fill
        in the current day for you. If only the current year is specified, xml2rfc will fill
	 in the current day and month for you. If the year is not the current one, it is
	 necessary to specify at least a month (xml2rfc assumes day="1" if not specified for the
	 purpose of calculating the expiry date).  With drafts it is normally sufficient to
	 specify just the year. -->

   <!-- Meta-data Declarations -->

   <area>Routing</area>
    <workgroup>Link State Routing</workgroup>
    <!-- WG name at the upperleft corner of the doc,
        IETF is fine for individual submissions.
	 If this element is not present, the default is "Network Working Group",
        which is used by the RFC Editor as a nod to the history of the IETF. -->

   <keyword>OSPF terminology</keyword>
    <!-- Keywords will be incorporated into HTML output
        files in a meta tag but they have no effect on text or nroff
        output. If you submit your draft to the RFC Editor, the
        keywords will be used for the search engine. -->

   <abstract>
      <t>
        This document updates some OSPF terminology to be in line with inclusive language used in the industry.
        The IETF has designated US National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) "Guidance for NIST Staff on Using
        Inclusive Language in Documentary Standards" for its inclusive language guidelines. It is intended that all
        future OSPF documents use this revised terminology even when they reference the RFCs updated by this
        document.
      </t>
      <t>
        This document updates RFC2328, RFC5340, RFC4222, RFC4811, RFC5243, RFC5614, and RFC5838.
      </t>
    </abstract>
  </front>
  <middle>
    <section numbered="true" toc="default">
     <name>Introduction</name>
      <t>
        This document updates some OSPF terminology to be in line with inclusive language used in the industry.
        The IETF has designated US National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) "Guidance for NIST Staff on Using
        Inclusive Language in Documentary Standards" <xref target="NISTIR8366"/> for its inclusive language guidelines.
        It is intended that all future OSPF documents use this revised terminology even when they reference the RFCs
        updated by this document.
      </t>
      <t>
        This document updates <xref target="RFC2328"/>, <xref target="RFC5340"/>, <xref target="RFC4222"/>,
        <xref target="RFC4811"/>, <xref target="RFC5243"/>, <xref target="RFC5614"/>,
        and <xref target="RFC5838"/>.
      </t>

    </section>

    <section anchor="update" numbered="true" toc="default">
      <name>Update to RFC2328</name>
      <t>
        The base OSPFv2 specification <xref target="RFC2328"/> defines the synchronization of
        databases as two routers forming a "master/slave relationship".  All instances of these terms
        are replaced by Leader/Follower, respectively.
      </t>
      <t>
	The Master (MS) bit in the database description packet is renamed the Leader (L) bit.
      </t>
      <t>
        The operation of OSPFv2 is not modified. The Leader/Follower terminology and Leader (L) Bit definition
        changes impact the following sections:  7.2 "The Synchronization of Databases", 10 "The Neighbor Data Structures",
        10.1 "Neighbor states", 10.2 "Events causing neighbor state changes", 10.3 "The Neighbor state machine",
        10.6 "Receiving Database Description Packets",
        10.8 "Sending Database Description Packets", 10.10 "An Example", and A.3.3 "The Database Description packet".
      </t>
      </section>

    <section anchor="updatev6" numbered="true" toc="default">
      <name>Update to RFC5340</name>
      <t>
        The base OSPFv3 specification <xref target="RFC5340"/> defines the database description process
        between two routers as one being "designated to be the master and the other is the slave".  All instances of these
        terms are replaced by Leader/Follower, respectively.
      </t>
      <t>
	The Master/Slave (MS) bit in the database description packet is renamed the Leader (L) bit.
      </t>
      <t>
        The operation of OSPFv3 is not modified. The Leader/Follower terminology and Leader (L) Bit definition
        changes impact section A.3.3 "The Database Description packet".
      </t>
    </section>

    <section anchor="update4222" numbered="true" toc="default">
      <name>Update to RFC4222</name>
      <t>
        This Best Current Practice (BCP) document describes "Prioritized Treatment of Specific OSPF Version 2 Packets and
        Congestion Avoidance" <xref target="RFC4222"/>. There is an example OSFPv2 packet sequence in Appendix C, (2),
        that refers to the "slave" in a database exchange. This reference will be renamed to "Follower".
      </t>
    </section>

    <section anchor="update4811" numbered="true" toc="default">
      <name>Update to RFC4811</name>
      <t>
        This Experimental document specifies "OSPF Out-of-Band Link State Database (LSDB) Resynchronization"
        <xref target="RFC4811"/>.
        Section 2.4 includes a Database Description packet (Figure 2) and a description of the attendant encoding
        changes for Out-of-Band Resynchronization. In the figure and the description, all instances of MS when
        referring to the Database Description packet bit are renamed to "L". There is also a reference to "Master" in
        this section that is renamed to "Leader".
      </t>
    </section>

    <section anchor="update5243" numbered="true" toc="default">
      <name>Update to RFC5243</name>
      <t>
        This Informational document describes an "OSPF Database Exchange Summary List Optimization" <xref target="RFC5243"/>.
        The Introduction, Section 1, references "Master or Slave". This will be replaced by "Leader or Follower".
        Section 3.0 includes an example of the optimized database exchange. In this example, all instances of
        "Master" will be renamed to "Leader" and all instances of "Slave" will be renamed to "Follower".
      </t>
    </section>

    <section anchor="update5614" numbered="true" toc="default">
      <name>Update to RFC5614</name>
      <t>
        This Experimental document specifies the "Mobile Ad Hoc Network (MANET) Extension of OSPF
        Using Connected Dominating Set (CDS) Flooding" <xref target="RFC5614"/>.
        "Changes to the Neighbor State Machine", Section 7.2 contains modifications to the neighbor
        state machine updated from <xref target="RFC2328"/>. In this transition to "2-way" state, all
        instances of "Master" are renamed to "Leader" and all instances of "Slave" are renamed to
        "Follower". Additionally, instances of "MS" in reference to the Database Description packet
        bit are renamed to "L". Additionally, in "Receiving Database Description Packets, Section 7.5,
        the parenthentical "master or slave" is replaced by "Leader or Follower".
      </t>
    </section>

    <section anchor="update5838" numbered="true" toc="default">
      <name>Update to RFC5838</name>
      <t>
        This Standards Track document specifies the "Support of Address Families in OSPFv3"
        <xref target="RFC5838"/>. "Database Description Maximum Transmission Unit (MTU)
        Specification for Non-IPv6 AFs", Section 2.7 contains a Database Description
        packet change figure which include the "MS" bit. In this figure, the "MS" field will
        be renamed to "L" field.
      </t>
            <t>
        Additionally, in Section 2.4., first paragraph, "Changes to the Hello Packet Processing",
        the text is updated to remove the non-inclusive terms pertaining to
        unreachability handling as follows:
      </t>

 <artwork>
   When an OSPFv3 router does not support this specification and an
   interface is configured with the Instance ID corresponding to a
   IPv4 AF, packets could be routed toward this interface and
   dropped. This could happen due to misconfiguration or a router
   software downgrade. Packet reception and dropping on an interface
   not configured with the packet AF. For example, an IPv4 packet
   could be received on an interface not supporting IPv4 since
   a router that doesn't support this specification can still
   include the interface in an SPF-calculated path as long as it
   establishes adjacencies using the Instance ID corresponding
   to the IPv4 AF. Note that OSPFv3 Router-LSAs and Network-LSAs are
   AF-agnostic.
 </artwork>

    </section>

    <section anchor="Acknowledgements" numbered="true" toc="default">
      <name>Acknowledgements</name>
      <t>Thanks to Dhruv Dhody, Adrian Farrel, Barry Leiba, and Erik Kline for review and comments.</t>
    </section>
    <!-- Possibly a 'Contributors' section ... -->

   <section anchor="IANA" numbered="true" toc="default">
      <name>IANA Considerations</name>
      <t>IANA is requested to rename bit 0x01 in the "Database Description (DD) Packet Flags"
      registry to "Leader (L-bit)" and to add a reference to this document.</t>
    </section>

    <section anchor="Security" numbered="true" toc="default">
      <name>Security Considerations</name>
      <t>
        This document updates the terminology used in OSPF RFCs without any modification to the specifications of the protocol.
        As such, the security characteristics of OSPF do not change.
      </t>
    </section>
  </middle>
  <!--  *****BACK MATTER ***** -->

 <back>
    <!-- References split into informative and normative -->

   <!-- There are 2 ways to insert reference entries from the citation libraries:
    1. define an ENTITY at the top, and use "ampersand character"RFC2629; here (as shown)
    2. simply use a PI "less than character"?rfc include="reference.RFC.2119.xml"?> here
       (for I-Ds: include="reference.I-D.narten-iana-considerations-rfc2434bis.xml")

    Both are cited textually in the same manner: by using xref elements.
    If you use the PI option, xml2rfc will, by default, try to find included files in the same
    directory as the including file. You can also define the XML_LIBRARY environment variable
    with a value containing a set of directories to search.  These can be either in the local
    filing system or remote ones accessed by http (http://domain/dir/... ).-->

   <references>
      <name>References</name>
      <references>
        <name>Normative References</name>
        <!--?rfc include="http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.2119.xml"?-->
        <xi:include href="https://www.rfc-editor.org/refs/bibxml/reference.RFC.2328.xml"/>
        <xi:include href="https://www.rfc-editor.org/refs/bibxml/reference.RFC.5340.xml"/>
        <xi:include href="https://www.rfc-editor.org/refs/bibxml/reference.RFC.4222.xml"/>
        <xi:include href="https://www.rfc-editor.org/refs/bibxml/reference.RFC.4811.xml"/>
        <xi:include href="https://www.rfc-editor.org/refs/bibxml/reference.RFC.5243.xml"/>
        <xi:include href="https://www.rfc-editor.org/refs/bibxml/reference.RFC.5614.xml"/>
        <xi:include href="https://www.rfc-editor.org/refs/bibxml/reference.RFC.5838.xml"/>
      </references>
      <references>
        <name>Informative References</name>
        <reference anchor="NISTIR8366" target="https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.IR.8366">
          <front>
            <title>Guidance for NIST Staff on Using Inclusive Language in Documentary Standards,
            National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Interagency or Internal Report 8366</title>
            <author surname="NIST"/>
            <date year="2021" month="April"/>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="NISTIR" value="8366"/>
        </reference>
      </references>

    </references>

 </back>
</rfc>