IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Anima-signaling] Unsolicited discovery [was GRASP issue 50: Rapid mode]

"Liubing (Leo)" <leo.liubing@huawei.com> Fri, 12 August 2016 07:22 UTC

Return-Path: <leo.liubing@huawei.com>
X-Original-To: anima-signaling@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: anima-signaling@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2328012D9B7 for <anima-signaling@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 12 Aug 2016 00:22:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.468
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.468 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.247, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 8dzSdgwo7UD5 for <anima-signaling@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 12 Aug 2016 00:22:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [194.213.3.17]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 939E712B075 for <anima-signaling@ietf.org>; Fri, 12 Aug 2016 00:12:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from 172.18.7.190 (EHLO lhreml701-cah.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.7.190]) by lhrrg01-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.3.7-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id CUE76267; Fri, 12 Aug 2016 07:12:15 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from NKGEML411-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.98.56.70) by lhreml701-cah.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.93) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.235.1; Fri, 12 Aug 2016 08:12:14 +0100
Received: from NKGEML514-MBX.china.huawei.com ([fe80::40a8:f0d:c0f3:2ca5]) by nkgeml411-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.98.56.70]) with mapi id 14.03.0235.001; Fri, 12 Aug 2016 15:11:38 +0800
From: "Liubing (Leo)" <leo.liubing@huawei.com>
To: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>, Toerless Eckert <eckert@cisco.com>
Thread-Topic: [Anima-signaling] Unsolicited discovery [was GRASP issue 50: Rapid mode]
Thread-Index: AQHR7J/MZ84TRMoOGE+mPf74mu0eXqA1nbQAgA9TjaA=
Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2016 07:11:38 +0000
Message-ID: <8AE0F17B87264D4CAC7DE0AA6C406F45C2DFC5CE@nkgeml514-mbx.china.huawei.com>
References: <e5624787-ae82-5cfd-42e5-3c794950bb71@gmail.com> <20160801091940.GU21039@cisco.com> <ee4dbe41-2acd-1b3c-6c31-04c7183a9766@gmail.com> <20160802092513.GX21039@cisco.com> <8dfde735-4f5b-cb72-cb9a-9df853fd0bfd@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <8dfde735-4f5b-cb72-cb9a-9df853fd0bfd@gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US, zh-CN
Content-Language: zh-CN
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.111.98.117]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
X-Mirapoint-Virus-RAPID-Raw: score=unknown(0), refid=str=0001.0A020201.57AD76CF.00C9, ss=1, re=0.000, recu=0.000, reip=0.000, cl=1, cld=1, fgs=0, ip=0.0.0.0, so=2013-06-18 04:22:30, dmn=2013-03-21 17:37:32
X-Mirapoint-Loop-Id: 703a8ab5d08d4514a48888a66b080517
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/anima-signaling/Iy3M3gw51EtBBiMnpL4v-JfdHT4>
Cc: Anima signaling DT <anima-signaling@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Anima-signaling] Unsolicited discovery [was GRASP issue 50: Rapid mode]
X-BeenThere: anima-signaling@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: Mailing list for the signaling design team of the ANIMA WG <anima-signaling.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/anima-signaling>, <mailto:anima-signaling-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/anima-signaling/>
List-Post: <mailto:anima-signaling@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:anima-signaling-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/anima-signaling>, <mailto:anima-signaling-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2016 07:22:07 -0000

I folded the GRASP DT mailing list into the Anima folder. So I missed the large amount of recent discussion. I'll catch up.

Regarding Rapid Mode, when Sheng and I originally designed it, it was mostly inspired by the DHCP 2-message VS. 4-message. 
Me too cannot blow the efficiency. But I think maybe the following scenarios make sense:
1. As Toerless commented on the mic: in IoT scenario, especially the on the lightweight and lossy links.
2. On some "heavy" nodes, which act as kind of central nodes, might reduce the number of maximum concurrent sessions.

Best regards,
Bing

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Anima-signaling [mailto:anima-signaling-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf
> Of Brian E Carpenter
> Sent: Wednesday, August 03, 2016 4:44 AM
> To: Toerless Eckert
> Cc: Anima signaling DT
> Subject: Re: [Anima-signaling] Unsolicited discovery [was GRASP issue 50:
> Rapid mode]
> 
> I'll be honest, I think Bing and I disagree about this. I see Rapid Mode as a
> complication for quite a small gain in efficiency - there's actually more to be
> gained by running GRASP over UDP instead of TCP, I think. So I probably
> agree with you. But I think Bing sees more value in Rapid Mode than we do.
> 
>     Brian
> 
> On 02/08/2016 21:25, Toerless Eckert wrote:
> > Thats fine too. Can we walk through an example set of elements in such
> > a message ?
> >
> > Also: If we use Flood Synchronization, it sounds as if we would not
> > need Rapid mode to make that work. In which case my other comment re.
> > Rapid Mode might apply: unless we find a good example use-case within
> > our existing or likely near term charter scope, maybe move Rapid mode
> down into an appendix ?
> >
> > Cheers
> >     Toerless
> >
> > On Tue, Aug 02, 2016 at 05:18:53PM +1200, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
> >> On 01/08/2016 21:19, Toerless Eckert wrote:
> >>
> >> ...
> >>>
> >>> - Aka: I could happily let go of rapid-mode for now in the general case
> >>>   (move into appendix as "candidate extension"), and just figure out
> how
> >>>   we can include unsolicited synchronization data into unsolicited
> discovery
> >>>   messages.
> >>
> >> We theoretically had unsolicited discovery responses in the design
> >> for a while but never worked out details. They vanished when we added
> >> Flood Synchronization which is an unsolicited announcement. It sends
> >> an objective tagged with its source address. It's pretty much the same
> thing you are asking for.
> >>
> >>     Brian
> >
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Anima-signaling mailing list
> Anima-signaling@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/anima-signaling

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email