Re: [bess] Éric Vyncke's Discuss on draft-ietf-bess-evpn-proxy-arp-nd-11: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
"Rabadan, Jorge (Nokia - US/Mountain View)" <jorge.rabadan@nokia.com> Wed, 06 October 2021 16:56 UTC
Return-Path: <jorge.rabadan@nokia.com>
X-Original-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 11A133A2029; Wed, 6 Oct 2021 09:56:14 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.352
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.352 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.452, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=nokia.onmicrosoft.com
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 CzvCzfaH20rD; Wed, 6 Oct 2021 09:56:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from NAM02-SN1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-sn1anam02on2116.outbound.protection.outlook.com [40.107.96.116]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C089F3A205C; Wed, 6 Oct 2021 09:55:53 -0700 (PDT)
ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=C3v41OjFb9d1PjQlm1xfGtk7KZBGJQ16tFYlURxMW1JnRn73qd+9mpX+4T2C/JcXLmtEu8p/IfgjRY6FMl8No6TFe6XSBvj09x9XyJtN569bNqNI7NPCU27bPsUMASRg+F/dsgJmhnLPPYxJ44Vdk9DUokres8To02nkUgAACT0Jxy+V3hV4rf/mGp5lOoiHCmUqgFMVkfsVQ6zqo8Y8lQEJ2ECEZJnMLklg4gUlzwbUAzqKMbo2jifAUO937yzEMOC8XLSFNfSm71Lv0i6uD0qHpTp8Ye0vBTK6B8fUiP39mOY6edbouC/q7wrzKqVdfemB6b3Erlxpoy5xNTt71w==
ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-ChunkCount:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-0:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-1; bh=lO5SuVNfcddAoJHO4zVMZwgHgLmDC/f3SkZfUyaqRg8=; b=cir34cXWqt5P3fBH40aApDPqfXNuoZfrmlUZfvZCC6IR25H8toGKVLgeRLmbEH2W7oQzO/I8E4T7tejgdxCqQtQgLWnoewD4i79aiCCIW59dEM99r5WhoTab/wxpMI97pQ6ROjxbvkG1RkCwSx2ZwKybHsVDGuaSc3NH5BZ6xVJSO3O5izguF60oH4rE7I673xl+eFI2qdIrCI3nRGAzUzoXadC1V6hqsv7PBqV2VF4YSUtlKsCFlo0dFUrHh/UZBQ8tBM+leDA9H5ivddZipnI3W0tnlaxxWuoRT3nsFCaGM+AC+Kew9RbSJ8A1DD0DUNDG0ggYLiRFLvkL52QG0w==
ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=nokia.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=nokia.com; dkim=pass header.d=nokia.com; arc=none
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=nokia.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector1-nokia-onmicrosoft-com; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=lO5SuVNfcddAoJHO4zVMZwgHgLmDC/f3SkZfUyaqRg8=; b=syYetUmwlnFFjNMzHp4oL6+cTX5JWHzN6fbyz59KowS2VsJ5KxkYVbSVlJv/PoRk+HFzBjLKvShkoQRXfSGUCMANSTBbZS/uo6lklDEWFCf6iPhYMOzmsUzYj0RfNnuex7QJwriipp2fEOhFnKpCuzfCtdBCkJj8H7/h+CjzeUM=
Received: from BY3PR08MB7060.namprd08.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:a03:36d::19) by BYAPR08MB4245.namprd08.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:a03::15) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.4587.18; Wed, 6 Oct 2021 16:55:49 +0000
Received: from BY3PR08MB7060.namprd08.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::c481:f856:9121:e]) by BY3PR08MB7060.namprd08.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::c481:f856:9121:e%6]) with mapi id 15.20.4566.022; Wed, 6 Oct 2021 16:55:49 +0000
From: "Rabadan, Jorge (Nokia - US/Mountain View)" <jorge.rabadan@nokia.com>
To: "Eric Vyncke (evyncke)" <evyncke@cisco.com>, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-bess-evpn-proxy-arp-nd@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-bess-evpn-proxy-arp-nd@ietf.org>, "bess-chairs@ietf.org" <bess-chairs@ietf.org>, "bess@ietf.org" <bess@ietf.org>, "Bocci, Matthew (Nokia - GB)" <matthew.bocci@nokia.com>, "jeanmichel.combes@orange.com" <jeanmichel.combes@orange.com>
Thread-Topic: Éric Vyncke's Discuss on draft-ietf-bess-evpn-proxy-arp-nd-11: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
Thread-Index: AQHW7/+kojHR0jJxH0WfhBI9FWDqyKqI7LLQgEmobYCAArauf4CBrhUAgE4VwYCADKdNOIAWFRuA///4QB4=
Date: Wed, 06 Oct 2021 16:55:49 +0000
Message-ID: <BY3PR08MB706091D1FF6B6CE6A3A435A9F7B09@BY3PR08MB7060.namprd08.prod.outlook.com>
References: <161123842361.25230.14225434357147230236@ietfa.amsl.com> <MWHPR08MB3520DEA4E1426AF839CBF079F76A9@MWHPR08MB3520.namprd08.prod.outlook.com> <980E5BB9-CA75-479A-8448-7C4AD76EC1CE@cisco.com> <BY3PR08MB70609B01671FCCC5837786DDF7599@BY3PR08MB7060.namprd08.prod.outlook.com> <1AA5592A-72B2-4522-B144-675237C2F0FC@cisco.com> <9B8C691A-8066-4B0C-873D-D1B9AA735210@cisco.com> <BY3PR08MB7060528BD440CEE407F9ACFAF7A29@BY3PR08MB7060.namprd08.prod.outlook.com> <9B5F4D27-54FC-4537-B59B-A13A50502583@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <9B5F4D27-54FC-4537-B59B-A13A50502583@cisco.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
authentication-results: cisco.com; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;cisco.com; dmarc=none action=none header.from=nokia.com;
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: b7b80407-ee5f-47cd-2d7d-08d988ea263d
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: BYAPR08MB4245:
x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <BYAPR08MB4245F82C59A304BE3A7198B7F7B09@BYAPR08MB4245.namprd08.prod.outlook.com>
x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:10000;
x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1
x-ms-exchange-antispam-relay: 0
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0;
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: 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
x-forefront-antispam-report: CIP:255.255.255.255; CTRY:; LANG:en; SCL:1; SRV:; IPV:NLI; SFV:NSPM; H:BY3PR08MB7060.namprd08.prod.outlook.com; PTR:; CAT:NONE; SFS:(4636009)(366004)(316002)(9326002)(122000001)(83380400001)(26005)(8936002)(5660300002)(2906002)(71200400001)(38070700005)(6506007)(66446008)(66556008)(110136005)(33656002)(66946007)(76116006)(64756008)(66476007)(224303003)(186003)(38100700002)(7696005)(86362001)(55016002)(52536014)(53546011)(508600001)(91956017)(9686003); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102;
x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata-chunkcount: 1
x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata-0: 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
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_BY3PR08MB706091D1FF6B6CE6A3A435A9F7B09BY3PR08MB7060namp_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: nokia.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthAs: Internal
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthSource: BY3PR08MB7060.namprd08.prod.outlook.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: b7b80407-ee5f-47cd-2d7d-08d988ea263d
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 06 Oct 2021 16:55:49.3092 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 5d471751-9675-428d-917b-70f44f9630b0
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: yeXrXhKAO2xBSFVbTG31ghNoK7RkjOb9TWjbPKuTZMLaZCRvoqWN1VOD0KWrNL+zJYthPlAT/Rl384I9JjhlIA==
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BYAPR08MB4245
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/bess/AW9cEO3D8pcxagilMb5KD0AfUA8>
Subject: Re: [bess] Éric Vyncke's Discuss on draft-ietf-bess-evpn-proxy-arp-nd-11: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list <bess.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/bess>, <mailto:bess-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/bess/>
List-Post: <mailto:bess@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bess-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess>, <mailto:bess-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 06 Oct 2021 16:56:23 -0000
Hi Eric, Thanks for getting back. About your comment: - The 'reply' option implies that the PE ignores the unknown options and replies with NA messages, assuming a successful lookup on the Proxy-ND table. EV4> what is the behavior when the ‘reply’ option is selected and there is no successful lookup ? I guess it is ‘forward’ but this is worth specifying in the text. That’s another good point. I’ll add the following and if you are okay with it we’ll publish revision 16 with this change: OLD: - The 'reply' option implies that the PE ignores the unknown options and replies with NA messages, assuming a successful lookup on the Proxy-ND table. NEW: - The 'reply' option implies that the PE ignores the unknown options and replies with NA messages, assuming a successful lookup on the Proxy-ND table. An unsuccessful lookup will result on a ‘forward’ behavior (i.e., flood the NS message based on the MAC DA. Please let me know if you are ok with it. Thank you! Jorge From: Eric Vyncke (evyncke) <evyncke@cisco.com> Date: Wednesday, October 6, 2021 at 5:17 PM To: Rabadan, Jorge (Nokia - US/Mountain View) <jorge.rabadan@nokia.com>, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-bess-evpn-proxy-arp-nd@ietf.org <draft-ietf-bess-evpn-proxy-arp-nd@ietf.org>, bess-chairs@ietf.org <bess-chairs@ietf.org>, bess@ietf.org <bess@ietf.org>, Bocci, Matthew (Nokia - GB) <matthew.bocci@nokia.com>, jeanmichel.combes@orange.com <jeanmichel.combes@orange.com> Subject: Re: Éric Vyncke's Discuss on draft-ietf-bess-evpn-proxy-arp-nd-11: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT) Hello Jorge As I am back from vacations, it is time to write a reply. We are now very close to a revision which would allow me to clear my blocking DISCUSS. Look below for EV4> (which is trivial to fix) Big thank you for also addressing/replying to my non-blocking COMMENT points ;-) (I have elided the text about them) Regards, -éric From: "Rabadan, Jorge (Nokia - US/Mountain View)" <jorge.rabadan@nokia.com> Date: Thursday, 23 September 2021 at 09:35 To: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-bess-evpn-proxy-arp-nd@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-bess-evpn-proxy-arp-nd@ietf.org>, "bess-chairs@ietf.org" <bess-chairs@ietf.org>, "bess@ietf.org" <bess@ietf.org>, "Bocci, Matthew (Nokia - GB)" <matthew.bocci@nokia.com>, "jeanmichel.combes@orange.com" <jeanmichel.combes@orange.com>, Eric Vyncke <evyncke@cisco.com> Subject: Re: Éric Vyncke's Discuss on draft-ietf-bess-evpn-proxy-arp-nd-11: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT) Hi Eric, Thank you very much once again for your thorough review, it helped a lot. Please see my comments and resolutions below with [jorge3]. Revision 15 incorporates all the changes. Assuming this can clear your DISCUSS and COMMENTs (please let us know otherwise), I think the document also addresses Erik Kline’s comments, and it is now ready to go. Thanks. Jorge From: Eric Vyncke (evyncke) <evyncke@cisco.com> Date: Tuesday, September 14, 2021 at 2:50 PM To: Rabadan, Jorge (Nokia - US/Mountain View) <jorge.rabadan@nokia.com>, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-bess-evpn-proxy-arp-nd@ietf.org <draft-ietf-bess-evpn-proxy-arp-nd@ietf.org>, bess-chairs@ietf.org <bess-chairs@ietf.org>, bess@ietf.org <bess@ietf.org>, Bocci, Matthew (Nokia - GB) <matthew.bocci@nokia.com>, jeanmichel.combes@orange.com <jeanmichel.combes@orange.com> Subject: Re: Éric Vyncke's Discuss on draft-ietf-bess-evpn-proxy-arp-nd-11: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT) Hello Jorge, Sorry for belated reply… IETF week and some holidays were on the path... The -14 revision has vastly improved the document and has addressed the majority of my points. There are anyway still one open blocking DISCUSS point and three COMMENT points (but feel free to ignore them). See in the elided text for EV3> Regards, -éric ---------------------------------------------------------------------- DISCUSS: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- == DISCUSS == -- Section 3.2 -- Why not flooding to all other PEs the ARP/NS with unknown options ? It would be safer. [jorge] yes, the new text is as follows, let me know please: f. A PE MUST only reply to ARP-Request and NS messages with the format specified in [RFC0826] and [RFC4861] respectively. Received ARP-Requests and NS messages with unknown options SHOULD be either forwarded (as unicast packets) to the owner of the requested IP (assuming the MAC is known in the Proxy-ARP/ND table and BD) or discarded. An option to flood ARP-Requests/NS messages with unknown options MAY be used. The operator should assess if flooding those unknown options may be a security risk for the EVPN BD. An administrative option to control this behavior ('unicast-forward', 'discard' or 'forward') SHOULD be supported. The 'unicast-forward' option is described in Section 3.4. EV> please note that the ‘forward’ behavior does not seem to be listed as a sub-function [jorge2] Not listed as a specific sub-function but ‘forward’ is the flooding behavior when the ARP-Request/NS is received and the lookup in the proxy-ARP/ND table is unsuccessful, as described in section 3. I changed the bullet f) a bit for clarity: f. For Proxy-ARP, a PE MUST only reply to ARP-Request with the format specified in [RFC0826]. For Proxy-ND, a PE MUST reply to NS messages with the format and options specified in [RFC4861], and MAY reply to NS messages containing other options. Received NS messages with unknown options MAY be forwarded (as unicast packets) to the owner of the requested IP (assuming the MAC is known in the Proxy-ARP/ND table and BD). An administrative choice to control the behavior for received NS messages with unknown options ('unicast-forward', 'discard' or 'forward') MAY be supported. The 'forward' option implies flooding the NS message based on the MAC DA. The 'unicast-forward' option is described in Section 3.4. If 'discard' is available, the operator should assess if flooding NS unknown options may be a security risk for the EVPN BD (and is so, enable 'discard'), or if, on the contrary, not forwarding NS unknown options may disrupt connectivity. EV2> the text should also state that NS messages MAY be ‘discarded’ to be consistent with the administrative choice. EV2> in the ‘MAY be forward’, the text is only about unicast while the administrative choice includes the ‘forward’ / flooding EV2> the administrative choice should also include ‘reply’ (even if I really dislike this choice as it can break badly things) EV2> strongly suggest to add a ‘SHOULD forward’ or ‘This document RECOMMEND to ‘forward’’ EV3> an answer or a new text for the above is all that remains from my previous DISCUSS points. [jorge3] I rewrote the text in revision 15 to clarify all those points. I split the bullet and made it clearer for IPv6. Hope it helps remove your concern: e. For Proxy-ARP, a PE MUST only reply to ARP-Request with the format specified in [RFC0826]. f. For Proxy-ND, a PE MUST reply to NS messages with known options with the format and options specified in [RFC4861], and MAY reply, discard, forward or unicast-forward NS messages containing other options. An administrative choice to control the behavior for received NS messages with unknown options ('reply', 'discard', 'unicast-forward' or 'forward') MAY be supported. - The 'reply' option implies that the PE ignores the unknown options and replies with NA messages, assuming a successful lookup on the Proxy-ND table. EV4> what is the behavior when the ‘reply’ option is selected and there is no successful lookup ? I guess it is ‘forward’ but this is worth specifying in the text. - If 'discard' is available, the operator should assess if flooding NS unknown options may be a security risk for the EVPN BD (and if so, enable 'discard'), or if, on the contrary, not forwarding/flooding NS unknown options may disrupt connectivity. This option discards NS messages with unknown options, irrespective of the result of the lookup on the Proxy-ND table. - The 'unicast-forward' option is described in Section 3.4. - The 'forward' option implies flooding the NS message based on the MAC DA. This option forwards NS messages with unknown options, irrespective of the result of the lookup on the Proxy-ND table. The 'forward' option is RECOMMENDED by this document.
- [bess] Éric Vyncke's Discuss on draft-ietf-bess-e… Éric Vyncke via Datatracker
- Re: [bess] Éric Vyncke's Discuss on draft-ietf-be… Rabadan, Jorge (Nokia - US/Mountain View)
- Re: [bess] Éric Vyncke's Discuss on draft-ietf-be… Eric Vyncke (evyncke)
- Re: [bess] Éric Vyncke's Discuss on draft-ietf-be… Rabadan, Jorge (Nokia - US/Mountain View)
- Re: [bess] Éric Vyncke's Discuss on draft-ietf-be… Eric Vyncke (evyncke)
- Re: [bess] Éric Vyncke's Discuss on draft-ietf-be… Rabadan, Jorge (Nokia - US/Mountain View)
- Re: [bess] Éric Vyncke's Discuss on draft-ietf-be… Eric Vyncke (evyncke)
- Re: [bess] Éric Vyncke's Discuss on draft-ietf-be… Eric Vyncke (evyncke)
- Re: [bess] Éric Vyncke's Discuss on draft-ietf-be… Rabadan, Jorge (Nokia - US/Mountain View)
- Re: [bess] Éric Vyncke's Discuss on draft-ietf-be… Joshi, Vinayak
- Re: [bess] Éric Vyncke's Discuss on draft-ietf-be… Rabadan, Jorge (Nokia - US/Mountain View)
- Re: [bess] Éric Vyncke's Discuss on draft-ietf-be… Joshi, Vinayak
- Re: [bess] Éric Vyncke's Discuss on draft-ietf-be… Rabadan, Jorge (Nokia - US/Mountain View)
- Re: [bess] Éric Vyncke's Discuss on draft-ietf-be… Joshi, Vinayak
- Re: [bess] Éric Vyncke's Discuss on draft-ietf-be… Pascal Thubert (pthubert)
- Re: [bess] Éric Vyncke's Discuss on draft-ietf-be… Joshi, Vinayak
- Re: [bess] Éric Vyncke's Discuss on draft-ietf-be… Pascal Thubert (pthubert)
- Re: [bess] Éric Vyncke's Discuss on draft-ietf-be… Eric Vyncke (evyncke)
- Re: [bess] Éric Vyncke's Discuss on draft-ietf-be… Rabadan, Jorge (Nokia - US/Mountain View)
- Re: [bess] Éric Vyncke's Discuss on draft-ietf-be… Eric Vyncke (evyncke)
- Re: [bess] Éric Vyncke's Discuss on draft-ietf-be… Rabadan, Jorge (Nokia - US/Mountain View)