IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [bess] FW: WG Last Call (including implem status & shepherd) for draft-ietf-bess-evpn-vpws-03

Jeff Tantsura <jefftant.ietf@gmail.com> Mon, 30 May 2016 04:41 UTC

Return-Path: <jefftant.ietf@gmail.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 3D3AA12B03C for <bess@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 29 May 2016 21:41:12 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.698
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.698 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.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 d7YO3WlB7vci for <bess@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 29 May 2016 21:41:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-yw0-x22d.google.com (mail-yw0-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c05::22d]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7C37112B04D for <bess@ietf.org>; Sun, 29 May 2016 21:41:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-yw0-x22d.google.com with SMTP id x189so153720796ywe.3 for <bess@ietf.org>; Sun, 29 May 2016 21:41:09 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=12vGyFxFXd5/0OdSvWeg+NENRRbED9f/LVIRS5uSOHw=; b=zYd+d6o/K0oKGxlAF0BCs9HtffZaKkNYNH8yH6fJf1suatL31/zSY30h9XOvGfosoX alyb4iB1Innn/b+0LiJnrR5hIourAps6zfCUVCnpcpRZEX9zAxVHxwuY0xIbcUlL5ZYj 7LCivuExqaAEEKSJS22xUkNXebPCowsT+g+tuMJfnvOoQP0NPjpV0U5A6O1l1HWaJXsM oUQcpFcBEyE44f7ZlE9RZLaF8eMs34eoJuaVPdnOG6FXimXdpy+Fn29cD8ntOk/2KwVN PLEW69cMO86LmSyR3K+S69C9eYxEp7OBgZBgRPyhCZt7KNk4lgcV8nreKDUu31gFg4YV KwvA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=12vGyFxFXd5/0OdSvWeg+NENRRbED9f/LVIRS5uSOHw=; b=DXuCwWt4ix8vytHSZE0HuB519Vjry65mFRyDuzpgldRRy90ieJyuZZDmik3dpxQSVD Y+xyRPwmQ/oa+YhAaFXIIH9zTQwpMzTipGjFb3DShLgogJg6JhHTmPjfNZ0lGVdLPYte J1h9k2zPPk0sUWAUjSVoIQwAnsJm+wJCJENdFaZteipBe0pNhDnEKMlNYHkRLYPqkzJN jrHV3HybBrYMFYj10SVsO+1iazilgvIOC+xLvrlmgywnf2zey2itOhZpW4LQw9dbeWhp vpKEfcUE/19goi9i6oEBfYrSuw0HTL/KRb6/GDReqNU57+XcSqCjn+mLjhX+BVHn//pf 6M0A==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALyK8tL65uNU631rSikISeQkmkIvI65r1Vjh2uHwHz8IJZQL5WcxcZW8RV8o8sXAbyoxcQ==
X-Received: by 10.37.80.133 with SMTP id e127mr14567520ybb.162.1464583268699; Sun, 29 May 2016 21:41:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.0.115] (66-189-255-235.dhcp.reno.nv.charter.com. [66.189.255.235]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id g124sm12687033ywa.11.2016.05.29.21.41.07 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Sun, 29 May 2016 21:41:08 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail-D03ED64E-07B3-4E56-B975-F038EAE0FC7B"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
From: Jeff Tantsura <jefftant.ietf@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (13F69)
In-Reply-To: <AF21DB1B-E579-48FB-942E-E3C6BF6B8ADD@nokia.com>
Date: Sun, 29 May 2016 21:41:07 -0700
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <5EFAE93D-12BE-4BC7-80BE-A68497AC2FE0@gmail.com>
References: <572B2655.3020605@alcatel-lucent.com> <D3095B2F-072B-42CA-B160-DB4888DA02A7@alcatel-lucent.com> <57303CEE.8040104@orange.com> <7A432DD5-E28B-4670-B53E-2137A0A6E445@alcatel-lucent.com> <57309395.8090408@orange.com> <SN1PR0501MB1709149BA36C410EF7E46E52C7700@SN1PR0501MB1709.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> <SN1PR0501MB1709DD24B90B52F014AA58CFC7700@SN1PR0501MB1709.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> <BLUPR0501MB17151371F2D0A16368B63FFAD4720@BLUPR0501MB1715.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> <CAFKBPj58Q_cDi3GhAtgCQ0XfAaYtdNeCzzuWN3eJURc47y5sWg@mail.gmail.com> <0D4E38AC-C11C-4DB9-8D61-8778FA2852B4@vmware.com> <BLUPR0501MB1715DB345CF2E66870572148D4770@BLUPR0501MB1715.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> <67A01B47-48C4-4899-9D87-F64E379DA174@vmware.com> <BLUPR0501MB1715BE626403CF88E10F9488D4490@BLUPR0501MB1715.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> <600118F7-222D-4C0A-A573-C1FFE56F251B@vmware.com> <BLUPR0501MB171500F62DCF2AD58ABE9BAFD4420@BLUPR0501MB1715.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> <C94AE040-60CA-448F-B740-E8920E31AECB@vmware.com> <AF21DB1B-E579-48FB-942E-E3C6BF6B8ADD@nokia.com>
To: "Rabadan, Jorge (Nokia - US)" <jorge.rabadan@nokia.com>
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/bess/D1NJRQBpADtrx3L-ziL0QMbdL4U>
Cc: "Jeffrey (Zhaohui) Zhang" <zzhang@juniper.net>, John E Drake <jdrake@juniper.net>, Sami Boutros <sboutros@vmware.com>, "Ali Sajassi (sajassi)" <sajassi@cisco.com>, "bess@ietf.org" <bess@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [bess] FW: WG Last Call (including implem status & shepherd) for draft-ietf-bess-evpn-vpws-03
X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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: Mon, 30 May 2016 04:41:12 -0000

We have been talking about removing it since we started...

Regards,
Jeff

> On May 29, 2016, at 8:44 PM, Rabadan, Jorge (Nokia - US) <jorge.rabadan@nokia.com> wrote:
> 
> Sami,
>  
> I'm ok to remove it too.
> Thanks.
> Jorge
>  
> On 5/29/16, 6:35 PM, "Sami Boutros" <sboutros@vmware.com> wrote:
>  
> Hi Jeff,
>  
> I am ok to remove the BW section, adding other authors for their I/p.
>  
> Thanks,
>  
> Sami
> From: "Jeffrey (Zhaohui) Zhang" <zzhang@juniper.net>
> Date: Friday, May 27, 2016 at 2:41 PM
> To: Sami Boutros <sboutros@vmware.com>
> Cc: "bess@ietf.org" <bess@ietf.org>
> Subject: RE: [bess] FW: WG Last Call (including implem status & shepherd) for draft-ietf-bess-evpn-vpws-03
>  
> Hi Sami,
>  
> I thought about this BW topic further, and have the following question:
>  
> - Even for the originally stated purpose, i.e. for PE1 to request PE2 to request BW reservation in the network, why does it have to be signaled from PE1? Why can’t you provision PE2 to request that BW reservation? You need to provision service identifier on both PE1 and PE2 anyway, so you might as well add BW provisioning on PE2.
>  
> I understand that draft-boutros-bess-evpn-vpws-service-edge-gateway-02 does specify that the service node could skip the service identifier configuration and automatically signals the one that it receives from the access node. In that case, signaling qos/bw parameters from the access node makes sense (in that there is no need for configuration on the service node side).
>  
> So, perhaps the entire BW or shaping signaling stuff could be moved from the base EVPN-VPWS draft to draft-boutros-bess-evpn-vpws-service-edge-gateway?
>  
> Jeffrey
>  
> Sami: The issue here is that we are using the BW idr draft, and there is no shaping defined there, and we don’t plan to define a new attribute for this, perhaps we can add that to a new draft?
>  Zzh2> Good point that BW is not equal to shaping parameters; however, existing PW specifications do not seem to have BW related stuff and one actual customer use case I am aware of with EVPN VPWS actually does involve shaping; so maybe it’s better to take care of this in the base spec? It’s just a new attribute anyway.
>  
> _______________________________________________
> BESS mailing list
> BESS@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email