Re: [bess] Questions to draft-dawra-bess-srv6-services-02

Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net> Thu, 03 October 2019 15:02 UTC

Return-Path: <robert@raszuk.net>
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 CCFFC120809 for <bess@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 3 Oct 2019 08:02:13 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, HTTPS_HTTP_MISMATCH=0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=raszuk.net
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 vifb81c1wi73 for <bess@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 3 Oct 2019 08:02:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qk1-x736.google.com (mail-qk1-x736.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::736]) (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 18AEF120048 for <bess@ietf.org>; Thu, 3 Oct 2019 08:02:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qk1-x736.google.com with SMTP id f16so2649083qkl.9 for <bess@ietf.org>; Thu, 03 Oct 2019 08:02:09 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=raszuk.net; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=I8G/YNTEqUm0J1ng8HzBxZrVx/VDGAV1CG9gxTNJRPc=; b=N31PBlOkTwYTzJYRzowgt0/3neA8gCERHLk9n2vuRlwN96K3YPHb/TdlE8at0En4t5 jdM3EDTclu7kdjMh7II3H0yBhWThYdkarTW327V9iLS1/WHpYhmryEBblzFom670vsPb Hor9uM7USg5zEd6txjj7JRXK2CzHdESDjNXo81ed5+YG5z7bRX8k9J5uZJ/xuJOAocuW kC+w4IFWGIeQOTbN34dl7JQ3Lw9DqL9f3fBkM5JeRAeiUoQHVyEYHdXgI2lAttiz01qt 3sP0+Wuj5+iVDepBoeuJzYgBfaEp9Pe145S0ZlFwnocLo58iLmDh3UUw/5JOa484O6yh 7CnQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=I8G/YNTEqUm0J1ng8HzBxZrVx/VDGAV1CG9gxTNJRPc=; b=YKBnahMVjFncOKkbl+2VgjtW3lFBWXNDT7/vUM45KGkeYqbugUpukN28vm1z2i+SpR Xdryqg6VZ6kpuvWrscK+AEeuWYvQ68KjwqyZGaEMbWdlKJthuModZ/TywSkAYHI1Eadc oNV/34p4WKcGf5nTrXP+f2ZteBsufNqg59JfATUhFzgUPRoYKZWMVx44KNhebvzrVNOM jY7hf0pJijPoVLkN9IKZ1ScIHRg9y7Wybo1uPxo2PKQAyYOJFnJEIwbpTlNqoezNJ9DT LgDKnftTmanpv1X4KpiE5UeRftex6D6i5sFblxdIj+uD0vJ3hJ5EhDeEI3SWm0+UIdWB /aVQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAXbVYeqJgKvWbfsXmgDhX1uG4/oYhbOjDtYxHrkbZR0xe+HUZES HJ2FWukglPpMbb17ctkPZvPXWkXtSr2ffEQt9hYfvdt0
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwxmVDMcFKyV/KM5tc5hOtFCNjhO9ZHDNWsljgh/UDhF3m0CIJd4rLXp3CkjoZ+pUA6Qv/Ila15zK/+SW5g5FE=
X-Received: by 2002:a37:274e:: with SMTP id n75mr4756850qkn.134.1570114927999; Thu, 03 Oct 2019 08:02:07 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CH2PR13MB3574E3933B00BA7CD0867495859F0@CH2PR13MB3574.namprd13.prod.outlook.com>
In-Reply-To: <CH2PR13MB3574E3933B00BA7CD0867495859F0@CH2PR13MB3574.namprd13.prod.outlook.com>
From: Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net>
Date: Thu, 03 Oct 2019 17:01:53 +0200
Message-ID: <CAOj+MMFDEYP8BHpJ-jhX4dgbvLa-OaROFo4SUMmKm6cp-tq2tw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Linda Dunbar <linda.dunbar@futurewei.com>
Cc: "draft-dawra-bess-srv6-services@ietf.org" <draft-dawra-bess-srv6-services@ietf.org>, "bess@ietf.org" <bess@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000008a4ff9059402de85"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/bess/ax6vyaqC0RpVCXC_kBUF4N7Ms38>
Subject: Re: [bess] Questions to draft-dawra-bess-srv6-services-02
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: Thu, 03 Oct 2019 15:02:14 -0000

Hi Linda,

Nope. Nodes except egress have any reason to look at VPN label. That label
has only local significance on egress.

Thx,
R.

On Thu, Oct 3, 2019 at 4:45 PM Linda Dunbar <linda.dunbar@futurewei.com>
wrote:

> Robert,
>
>
>
> Thank you very much for the explanation.
>
> With the L3VPN case,  there are nodes between Egress and Ingress PEs that
> do look into the VPN label carried by the packets for VRF & IP lookup,
> correct?
>
> I was just confused of the statement about “all nodes between Egress &
> Ingress PE are SR unaware plain IP forwarding nodes”.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
>
> Linda
>
>
>
> *From:* Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net>
> *Sent:* Thursday, October 03, 2019 3:50 AM
> *To:* Linda Dunbar <linda.dunbar@futurewei.com>
> *Cc:* draft-dawra-bess-srv6-services@ietf.org; bess@ietf.org
> *Subject:* Re: [bess] WG adoption and IPR poll for
> draft-dawra-bess-srv6-services-02
>
>
>
> Linda,
>
>
>
> SRv6 services is just a general term used here. Imagine one of such
> service is L3VPN. VPN label (or pointer to it) is needed to be carried
> somewhere in the packet as address space may be overlapping between VPN
> customers and simple IP lookup will not be sufficient to determine VRF or
> exit interface.
>
>
>
> One option which has been done and deployed is to encode it natively in
> the packet and on ingress simply apply prodecures of IPv4 or IPv6
> encapsulation - RFC4797 and RFC7510
>
>
>
> The other new option is to take the VPN label or VPN demux value and
> encode it in SRH or in DO.
>
>
>
> Now which option to choose is left for the operator to decide likely
> depending on a lot of other factors involved.
>
>
>
> Thx,
>
> R.
>
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 3, 2019 at 5:52 AM Linda Dunbar <linda.dunbar@futurewei.com>
> wrote:
>
> I support WG adoption of the draft, with the following questions. Hope
> authors can help to explain:
>
>
>
> Section 1 Introduction states that the underlay between the Ingress and
> Egress only needs to support plain IPv6
>
> Forwarding. Those plain IPv6 routers don't need to understand the SR
> policies encoded in the payload, correct?
>
> Why need Ingress PE to encapsulate the policy sent by egress PE if all the
> nodes between them are plain IPv6 routers?
>
>
>
> Which PE is to enforce the SR policy?
>
> If the policies are for the egress to enforce, why can't the egress PE
> simply enforce the policy instead of asking ingress node to encapsulate the
> policy in the packet header? Which has the drawback of extra header bits in
> packets.
>
>
>
> Linda Dunbar
>
>
>
>
>
> *From: *"Bocci, Matthew (Nokia - GB)" <matthew.bocci@nokia.com>
> *Date: *Friday, September 27, 2019 at 4:00 AM
> *To: *"draft-dawra-bess-srv6-services@ietf.org" <
> draft-dawra-bess-srv6-services@ietf.org>, "bess@ietf.org" <bess@ietf.org>
> *Subject: *WG adoption and IPR poll for draft-dawra-bess-srv6-services-02
> *Resent-From: *<alias-bounces@ietf.org>
> *Resent-To: *<gdawra.ietf@gmail.com>, <cfilsfil@cisco.com>, <
> pbrisset@cisco.com>, Swadesh Agrawal <swaagraw@cisco.com>, <
> daniel.voyer@bell.ca>, <daniel.bernier@bell.ca>, <dws@steinberg.net>, <
> robert@raszuk.net>, <bruno.decraene@orange.com>, <
> satoru.matsushima@g.softbank.co.jp>, <zhuangshunwan@huawei.com>, <
> jorge.rabadan@nokia.com>
> *Resent-Date: *Friday, September 27, 2019 at 4:00 AM
>
>
>
> Hello,
>
>
>
> This email begins a two-weeks WG adoption poll for
> draft-dawra-bess-srv6-services-02 [1] .
>
>
>
> Please review the draft and post any comments to the BESS working group
> list.
>
>
>
> We are also polling for knowledge of any undisclosed IPR that applies to
> this Document, to ensure that IPR has been disclosed in compliance with
> IETF IPR rules (see RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669 and 5378 for more details).
>
>
>
> If you are listed as an author or a contributor of this document, please
> respond to this email and indicate whether or not you are aware of any
> relevant undisclosed IPR, copying the BESS mailing list. The document won't
> progress without answers from all the authors and contributors.
>
> Currently, there are no IPR disclosures against this document.
>
>
>
> If you are not listed as an author or a contributor, then please
> explicitly respond only if you are aware of any IPR that has not yet been
> disclosed in conformance with IETF rules.
>
>
>
> This poll for adoption closes on Friday 11th October 2019.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Matthew and Stephane
>
>
>
> [1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-dawra-bess-srv6-services/
> <https://nam03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdatatracker.ietf.org%2Fdoc%2Fdraft-dawra-bess-srv6-services%2F&data=02%7C01%7Clinda.dunbar%40futurewei.com%7Ccda46858450b47cddd2908d747deab0f%7C0fee8ff2a3b240189c753a1d5591fedc%7C1%7C0%7C637056893990134792&sdata=KplKMUlBMxL1hSt2ZMbYHpChddEsDhTRrUOLH7e7gaQ%3D&reserved=0>
>
>
>
>
>
>