Re: [bess] Section 8.5 of draft-ietf-bess-rfc7432bis

Gyan Mishra <hayabusagsm@gmail.com> Sat, 04 March 2023 16:11 UTC

Return-Path: <hayabusagsm@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 5AFC2C14CE53 for <bess@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 4 Mar 2023 08:11:54 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.093
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.093 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_FONT_LOW_CONTRAST=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=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 ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id sisO_oi5_YmU for <bess@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 4 Mar 2023 08:11:50 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-qk1-x72f.google.com (mail-qk1-x72f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::72f]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D8D1BC14CE40 for <bess@ietf.org>; Sat, 4 Mar 2023 08:11:49 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-qk1-x72f.google.com with SMTP id h17so1777898qka.11 for <bess@ietf.org>; Sat, 04 Mar 2023 08:11:49 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=W2+N2gMWsB/simotKpLg3pUgAjvpdFdh7dwxp9XyUt0=; b=dHOG7Vsf6BAEawMYtwtN9Lodv34YX7tziN+8kdrrngiWVDAOafq7ViPvHl/9O9CoVq SFIfhsJRyqJj3s6NCJ6U7y3jXTEDPLPoAEw1mMgl5kpfG4oYwaqdfSkNTSPjgi/gdKzh 4X1MgzLuBdt5WmW6YT1gRZRSFUK/SO0c02az9kdoaiXfC/eDXjtAmnWy+VVIula3u98q 0pOo7xHsO+fSyQYb2TVJ3J+rZLdsc8ldEaL+fjeaE0gGtOo6sBUcdMpgPoPvOiwGOG1W 17oiziEXRY897Cjzy/X/sNsAq6FekeeltLjXUNvb/Ti1dk2TKWLRRnKZpFZ40dXulJNN tS4w==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=W2+N2gMWsB/simotKpLg3pUgAjvpdFdh7dwxp9XyUt0=; b=N1mK+kU1ARQI1ZZyPF5PyAyxINuEqEk/WzKWoKJ585rhIiVIVXycO6eKrpNZMGz2Z9 QgjLYIbvX50hjEBruEAe4Wh19gY8Lj9RF8UaAha/HfCT0JTouaJkiMugdKX4+Pr2Yunt 4sNju2dRkCtZl4du9uEO6Q3RQTaCK/SLaYY7u/1eX/DYGxv0o7MzzWbNA6/WdyTYA3Aq wH3NyPyi3TMM/x3wURZGdoK0BMIGDMjvwDe+qcFEVaaTsaVJuUdbt7zb4psAkaSSZWLo +P7TI3goxBPPbFpkY6Zq49Gei5SuEFmVTXS0qIEDeBgkCGBQ7gDXEt6Wk2GivgaWiP4S i/UQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AO0yUKUZFChdXtFYXM9TFyRMlT9cOp/PDEInTfZhsVac0WUj2zj4ILhX IcbmQRLawkpgbMuiquA6xg2Ir+f9GC6cVHsRk/I=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AK7set+1eqPylZ6SVYjl7gTADsupIXnymldt0L76XchnppCamsAGLyYezpvQL9NeAZUwTWgFln4sCt7tx6i0AjKB0p8=
X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:13e9:b0:743:9ba:e4fa with SMTP id h9-20020a05620a13e900b0074309bae4famr1121439qkl.11.1677946308473; Sat, 04 Mar 2023 08:11:48 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <AM9PR08MB6004F38A0D02DBBAAA137A73D5DE9@AM9PR08MB6004.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com> <BY3PR08MB706038003E2AF751B97FAB8CF7DE9@BY3PR08MB7060.namprd08.prod.outlook.com> <CABNhwV3Ms2zEJ41=Ajh34kB5E+t43+79_rE9MyuvEyF_vAdbjg@mail.gmail.com> <BY3PR08MB7060B8D618DBC6387CA95EEAF7B09@BY3PR08MB7060.namprd08.prod.outlook.com>
In-Reply-To: <BY3PR08MB7060B8D618DBC6387CA95EEAF7B09@BY3PR08MB7060.namprd08.prod.outlook.com>
From: Gyan Mishra <hayabusagsm@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 04 Mar 2023 11:11:36 -0500
Message-ID: <CABNhwV1LWbbA-T=sSB6u9w_zSJTA9Un_riai_DeCT6_cvC_bfw@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Jorge Rabadan (Nokia)" <jorge.rabadan@nokia.com>
Cc: Menachem Dodge <mdodge@drivenets.com>, "bess@ietf.org" <bess@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/related; boundary="000000000000abb93705f6155134"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/bess/qhNiIV4-IVIZlfv1y1JxAQfmaus>
Subject: Re: [bess] Section 8.5 of draft-ietf-bess-rfc7432bis
X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
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: Sat, 04 Mar 2023 16:11:54 -0000

Thanks Jorge!

Gyan


On Sat, Mar 4, 2023 at 2:06 AM Jorge Rabadan (Nokia) <
jorge.rabadan@nokia.com> wrote:

> Hi Gyan,
>
>
>
> I agree with your two first statements, but I’m afraid I don’t agree with
> this one:
>
> “I would think HRW would be the new default algorithm used for DF election
> and would not be a knob as it fixes the major deficiencies with the modulus
> algorithm.”
>
>
>
> The modulo-based DF algorithm remains the default algorithm in case of
> inconsistency in the Ethernet Segment peers. It uses DF Alg 0, while HRW
> uses type 1 and Preference type 2. HRW is not obsoleting the modulo-based
> or anything like that. The three algorithms are widely used in networks,
> and while the default one has limitations, it is simple and works out in
> many networks.
>
>
>
> Thank you!
>
> Jorge
>
>
>
>
>
> *From: *Gyan Mishra <hayabusagsm@gmail.com>
> *Date: *Friday, March 3, 2023 at 11:50 PM
> *To: *Jorge Rabadan (Nokia) <jorge.rabadan@nokia.com>
> *Cc: *Menachem Dodge <mdodge@drivenets.com>, bess@ietf.org <bess@ietf.org>
> *Subject: *Re: [bess] Section 8.5 of draft-ietf-bess-rfc7432bis
>
>
>
> *CAUTION:* This is an external email. Please be very careful when
> clicking links or opening attachments. See http://nok.it/ext for
> additional information.
>
>
>
>
>
> Hi Jorge
>
>
>
> As defined in RFC 8584 AC-DF and HRW are independent of each other.
>
>
>
> RFC 8584 updates RFC 7432, however RFC 7432 bis does not update any aspect
> of RFC 8584 including HRW as you stated.
>
>
>
> I would think HRW would be the new default algorithm used for DF election
> and would not be a knob as it fixes the major deficiencies with the modulus
> algorithm.
>
>
>
> Thanks
>
>
>
> Gyan
>
> On Fri, Feb 10, 2023 at 2:01 PM Jorge Rabadan (Nokia) <
> jorge.rabadan@nokia.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Menachem,
>
>
>
> The way I see it, draft-ietf-bess-rfc7432bis will obsolete RFC7432, but it
> does not update or change RFC8584, so I don’t think
> draft-ietf-bess-rfc7432bis needs to repeat the aspects of RFC8584.
>
>
>
> In particular, the AC-DF, as the other capabilities defined in other
> documents, is a capability that can be turned on or off. While it is very
> useful in many cases, it actually needs to be disabled in some others,
> e.g., draft-ietf-bess-evpn-mh-pa-07
> <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-bess-evpn-mh-pa-07>
>
>
>
> So the answer to your second question could be that the AC-DF capability
> should be configurable in the implementation, and used on all cases where
> issues with individual Attachment Circuits may create blackholes. However,
> it has to be disabled in case of port-active multi-homing.
>
>
>
> My 2 cents..
>
>
>
> Thanks.
>
> Jorge
>
>
>
>
>
> *From: *BESS <bess-bounces@ietf.org> on behalf of Menachem Dodge <
> mdodge@drivenets.com>
> *Date: *Friday, February 10, 2023 at 8:10 AM
> *To: *bess@ietf.org <bess@ietf.org>
> *Subject: *[bess] Section 8.5 of draft-ietf-bess-rfc7432bis
>
> Some people who received this message don't often get email from
> mdodge@drivenets.com. Learn why this is important
> <https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification>
>
> Hello All,
>
>
>
> In section 8.5 of draft-ietf-bess-rfc7432bis there is a reference to the
> Finite State Machine in section 2.1 of RFC 8584.
>
>
>
> However, in section 4 of RFC 8584 the AC Influenced DF Election Capability
> is described and it states that this updates Step 3 of the procedure for
> service carving of RFC 7432.
>
>
>
> Shouldn’t this AC-DF update be mentioned in the procedures of section 8.5
> of draft-ietf-bess-rfc7432bis?
>
>
>
> Is AC Influenced DF Election the preferred DF election method ?
>
>
>
>
>
> According to RFC 8584 “ The procedure discussed in this section is
> applicable to the DF
>
>    election in EVPN services [RFC7432 <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc7432>] and EVPN VPWS [RFC8214 <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc8214>]. “
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Thank you kindly.
>
>
>
> Best Regards,
>
>
>
> *Menachem Dodge**​**​**​**​*
>
> System Architect
>
> [image: signature_3305758272]
>
> +972-526175734
>
> mdodge@drivenets.com
>
> follow us on Linkedin <https://www.linkedin.com/company/drivenets>
>
> www.drivenets.com
>
> [image: DriveNets Network Cloud]
> <https://get.drivenets.com/mwc-2023-schedule-a-meeting>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> BESS mailing list
> BESS@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess
>
> --
>
> <http://www.verizon.com/>
>
> *Gyan Mishra*
>
> *Network Solutions Architect *
>
> *Email gyan.s.mishra@verizon.com <gyan.s.mishra@verizon.com>*
>
> *M 301 502-1347*
>
>
>
-- 

<http://www.verizon.com/>

*Gyan Mishra*

*Network Solutions A**rchitect *

*Email gyan.s.mishra@verizon.com <gyan.s.mishra@verizon.com>*



*M 301 502-1347*