[Anima] VLANs and draft-ietf-anima-autonomic-control-plane-08.txt
Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Wed, 02 August 2017 06:57 UTC
Return-Path: <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
X-Original-To: anima@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: anima@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 26CC9131C4F for <anima@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 1 Aug 2017 23:57:46 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham 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 B4SrKZPT-KNh for <anima@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 1 Aug 2017 23:57:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (tuna.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:3:216:3eff:fe7c:d1f3]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BF8A3124C27 for <anima@ietf.org>; Tue, 1 Aug 2017 23:57:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sandelman.ca (obiwan.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:2::247]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 98CBD2009E for <anima@ietf.org>; Wed, 2 Aug 2017 02:59:34 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from obiwan.sandelman.ca (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 16E408076D for <anima@ietf.org>; Wed, 2 Aug 2017 02:57:44 -0400 (EDT)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
To: anima@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <f5e84812-c2fa-cc16-4105-20f7791110f4@gmail.com>
References: <150044138257.25233.12391471568614147773@ietfa.amsl.com> <f5e84812-c2fa-cc16-4105-20f7791110f4@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6; nmh 1.6+dev; GNU Emacs 24.5.1
X-Face: $\n1pF)h^`}$H>Hk{L"x@)JS7<%Az}5RyS@k9X%29-lHB$Ti.V>2bi.~ehC0; <'$9xN5Ub# z!G,p`nR&p7Fz@^UXIn156S8.~^@MJ*mMsD7=QFeq%AL4m<nPbLgmtKK-5dC@#:k
X-Attribution: mcr
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg="pgp-sha256"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2017 02:57:44 -0400
Message-ID: <31582.1501657064@obiwan.sandelman.ca>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/anima/_G_grj7_QwJzjsQpkNHb-l4smLg>
Subject: [Anima] VLANs and draft-ietf-anima-autonomic-control-plane-08.txt
X-BeenThere: anima@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: Autonomic Networking Integrated Model and Approach <anima.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/anima>, <mailto:anima-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/anima/>
List-Post: <mailto:anima@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:anima-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/anima>, <mailto:anima-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2017 06:57:46 -0000
Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> wrote: > Although I think it would be simpler to do this: > 48 2 1 13 63 1 > +----------------+----+---+---------+-----------------------------+---+ > | ULA prefix |Type| Z | Zone-ID | Device-ID | V | > | | 00 | | | Registrar-ID | Device-Number| | > +----------------+----+---+---------+--------------+--------------+---+ > 48 15 I like this much better. > A general remark: when a wider audience looks at this, there will > be complaints that we are re-creating classful addressing. I suggest > adding some text about this. (Along the lines of: it's true, and > here is why it doesn't matter.) Agreed. But they are assignment classes, not routing classes. > Clarify that ACP (and GRASP) capable devices do > not need to depend on MLD snooping, since they > catch LL multicasts directly per port. But non-ACP > switches MUST either support MLDv2 snooping or > operate as pure L2 bridges for all multicast > packets. > Also, is there anything to say here about VLANs? There are some chicken and egg problems here. On the one hand (other hand in next email), there may be a variety of L2 technologies ("LAN EXTENSION") which may be provided by other providers which the ACP should "bridge" across as if it was just a wire. A configuration which is not-uncommon (but seemed to surprise more than multiple sales engineers from more than three major companies) is for an (incumbent) telco to offer a service that connects one location (the datacenter, DC) to many locations. The central location has a VLAN tag that leads to each other locations, and at that other location (customer premises, CP), the VLAN tag does not appear. Now, hook things up and do not tell the devices at either end about this scenario ("remote hands" have just unpacked the drop-shipped equipment). This is a *PRIME* use for autonomic networking. (I actually tried to do this all with DHCP/TFTP for unconfigured devices, btw, with some success, but then the manufacturer of the high-quality $300 CPE device screwed up their platform OS making it a low-quality $300 device) On the CP side it's all good, because the freshly unpacked equipment would see the GRASP M_FLOODs (whether proxy announcements for an unimprinted device, or AN_ACP announcements for an imprinted device) without a VLAN tag. But, the DC device has a problem. All it knows about is a fiber of 1GbE or 10GbE Ethernet here. Any untagged packets it sent will be dropped. If the CP device would send some kind of traffic, then the DC device would see it, with the VLAN tag, and could autonomically configure a VLAN interface for it, and begin to talk to it. That would be great. If the CP device is imprinted, the AN_ACPs would just go out, and it would be all well. But, in the bootstrapping case, we've said that the pledge should remain quiet... so maybe we want to revise that? On the other hand, the pledge actually won't be completely quiet. It will send out DADs for any LL addresses it might have configured. (Today, we wrote that Pledges should configure fresh RFC4941 temporary addresses for use in enrollment. And that they should try new addresses whenever all of their prospects fail, in case some of the problems are related in some way to their choices of address) So, perhaps we should write is that, on an unconfigured interface, if one sees VLAN encapsulated traffic on an interface on which, and one *would* send out the AN_ACP/AN_Proxy messages, that one should start sending some M_FLOODs for awhile on that VLAN interface. -- Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>, Sandelman Software Works -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-
- Re: [Anima] Some questions to the WG: [I-D Action… Michael Richardson
- [Anima] Some questions to the WG: [I-D Action: dr… Brian E Carpenter
- [Anima] I-D Action: draft-ietf-anima-autonomic-co… internet-drafts
- Re: [Anima] I-D Action: draft-ietf-anima-autonomi… Brian E Carpenter
- [Anima] ANIMA ACP -08 -- estimating depth of DODA… Michael Richardson
- [Anima] VLANs and draft-ietf-anima-autonomic-cont… Michael Richardson
- Re: [Anima] VLANs and draft-ietf-anima-autonomic-… Michael Richardson
- Re: [Anima] I-D Action: draft-ietf-anima-autonomi… Toerless Eckert
- [Anima] ACP -10 [was Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-a… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [Anima] ACP -10 [was Re: I-D Action: draft-ie… Toerless Eckert
- Re: [Anima] ACP -10 [was Re: I-D Action: draft-ie… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [Anima] ACP -10 [was Re: I-D Action: draft-ie… Brian E Carpenter
- [Anima] GRASP objective details for registrar (wa… Toerless Eckert
- Re: [Anima] GRASP objective details for registrar Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [Anima] GRASP objective details for registrar Toerless Eckert
- Re: [Anima] I-D Action: draft-ietf-anima-autonomi… Michael Richardson
- Re: [Anima] ACP -10 [was Re: I-D Action: draft-ie… Michael Richardson
- Re: [Anima] GRASP objective details for registrar Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [Anima] I-D Action: draft-ietf-anima-autonomi… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [Anima] ACP -10 [was Re: I-D Action: draft-ie… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [Anima] I-D Action: draft-ietf-anima-autonomi… Michael Richardson
- Re: [Anima] ACP -10 [was Re: I-D Action: draft-ie… Michael Richardson
- Re: [Anima] GRASP objective details for registrar… Michael Richardson
- Re: [Anima] GRASP objective details for registrar Toerless Eckert
- [Anima] GRASP objectives used in multiple documen… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [Anima] I-D Action: draft-ietf-anima-autonomi… Toerless Eckert
- Re: [Anima] GRASP objective details for registrar Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [Anima] I-D Action: draft-ietf-anima-autonomi… Michael Richardson
- Re: [Anima] GRASP objectives used in multiple doc… Michael Richardson
- Re: [Anima] GRASP objectives used in multiple doc… Brian E Carpenter