IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [bess] some questions about draft-ietf-bess-evpn-igmp-mld-proxy-02 for IGMPv3

"Mankamana Mishra (mankamis)" <mankamis@cisco.com> Fri, 13 July 2018 02:14 UTC

Return-Path: <mankamis@cisco.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 47A28130EAC; Thu, 12 Jul 2018 19:14:32 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.509
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.509 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_RATIO_08=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.01, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.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 6TRm7NVlhQE1; Thu, 12 Jul 2018 19:14:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from alln-iport-1.cisco.com (alln-iport-1.cisco.com [173.37.142.88]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F3AA6130DC7; Thu, 12 Jul 2018 19:14:28 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=106924; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1531448069; x=1532657669; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:mime-version; bh=kRLyCT7Cjd6Llia4H7ZqbYMa3X5KjAP4rFcPn/E4HIU=; b=D4nJcMmTJ//DXWn/0ZtP/WTCWjmv2KGVtLuwby2rXRxCL07GR++h7BQf MmYrDe50ZMXsO0thbX/9DTdOGgce6VauyitdQfZzGb8Veleicyv3pArpq U/R9UsQkwXQ2tWdpqr7wySUI/wAZSYA3krBQHHGkF6/c1JiARZaDdC/1B U=;
X-Files: image001.jpg, image002.jpg : 26792, 32361
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0DUAAC5Ckhb/5pdJa1cGQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQcBAQEBAYJTD2djfygKg3GIBIw4gguVNYF6CAECG4RRGYIyITQYAQIBAQIBAQJtHAyFNgEBAQEDBR4CCAFLEgEIEQIBAQIGAQEBCg4KAgQFEA0CDB0KBAENBAEOgxIBgX+paYEuijAPiH6BVz+BDwEngmqFGwYYgkMxgiQClg8DHYMqCQKFNAF0iHwOgTWEHogAhjaBR4lwAhEUgR0HHTiBUnAVZQGCPgmCHBcRhgqHfG+KbYEaAQE
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.51,346,1526342400"; d="jpg'145?scan'145,208,217,145";a="142447241"
Received: from rcdn-core-3.cisco.com ([173.37.93.154]) by alln-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 13 Jul 2018 02:14:28 +0000
Received: from XCH-ALN-009.cisco.com (xch-aln-009.cisco.com [173.36.7.19]) by rcdn-core-3.cisco.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id w6D2ERXb011223 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Fri, 13 Jul 2018 02:14:27 GMT
Received: from xch-rcd-008.cisco.com (173.37.102.18) by XCH-ALN-009.cisco.com (173.36.7.19) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1320.4; Thu, 12 Jul 2018 21:14:27 -0500
Received: from xch-rcd-008.cisco.com ([173.37.102.18]) by XCH-RCD-008.cisco.com ([173.37.102.18]) with mapi id 15.00.1320.000; Thu, 12 Jul 2018 21:14:27 -0500
From: "Mankamana Mishra (mankamis)" <mankamis@cisco.com>
To: Liuyisong <liuyisong@huawei.com>, "draft-ietf-bess-evpn-igmp-mld-proxy@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-bess-evpn-igmp-mld-proxy@ietf.org>, "bess@ietf.org" <bess@ietf.org>
CC: Zhuangshunwan <zhuangshunwan@huawei.com>, "Yangang (Routing Design)" <yangang@huawei.com>
Thread-Topic: [bess] some questions about draft-ietf-bess-evpn-igmp-mld-proxy-02 for IGMPv3
Thread-Index: AQHUGk85tZG99zkCb0KJPrAqWqpnaQ==
Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2018 02:14:27 +0000
Message-ID: <E2B681B9-C649-4CB2-AFE1-4F9349DD66AE@cisco.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach: yes
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [10.24.103.143]
Content-Type: multipart/related; boundary="_005_E2B681B9C6494CB2AFE14F9349DD66AEciscocom_"; type="multipart/alternative"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/bess/vUK5O_UlYbbujqFQdRzTXhNwsdo>
Subject: Re: [bess] some questions about draft-ietf-bess-evpn-igmp-mld-proxy-02 for IGMPv3
X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27
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: Fri, 13 Jul 2018 02:14:33 -0000

Hi Yisong

Would you be present in IETF, we could discuss in person and then update the thread?

Thanks
Mankamana


From: BESS <bess-bounces@ietf.org> on behalf of Liuyisong <liuyisong@huawei.com>
Date: Thursday, July 12, 2018 at 4:38 AM
To: "draft-ietf-bess-evpn-igmp-mld-proxy@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-bess-evpn-igmp-mld-proxy@ietf.org>, "bess@ietf.org" <bess@ietf.org>
Cc: Zhuangshunwan <zhuangshunwan@huawei.com>, "Yangang (Routing Design)" <yangang@huawei.com>
Subject: [bess] some questions about draft-ietf-bess-evpn-igmp-mld-proxy-02 for IGMPv3

Hi folks,

I have some questions about the draft-ietf-bess-evpn-igmp-mld-proxy-02 for IGMPv3 synchronization

In section 7.2 & 7.3, there are IGMP Join and Leave Synch Route definition as following:
[cid:image003.jpg@01D419FE.B52B2C00][cid:image006.jpg@01D419FE.B52B2C00]

IGMPv3 is very complicated, and it is not very clear to how to construct the IGMP Join/Leave Synch Route in the draft.
Firstly I think only incremental membership information in the IGMP synch route, because the route NLRI can only contain one (S,G) or (*,G)
1.for a simple example:
INCLUDE (A)    BLOCK (B)    INCLUDE (A)             Send Q(G,A*B)
We can use include mode, source A*B, group G in IGMP Leave Synch Routes one by one to notify the other multi-homed PEs.

2.for a more complicated example:
EXCLUDE (X,Y)  TO_EX (A)    EXCLUDE (A-Y,Y*A)       (A-X-Y)=Group Timer
                                                        Delete (X-A)
                                                        Delete (Y-A)
                                                        Send Q(G,A-Y)
                                                        Group Timer=GMI
It is more difficult than example 1.There are 5 actions, and should we use both Join and Leave Synch routes to notify the other multi-homed PEs?
I think we should use:

1） include mode, source A-X-Y, group G in IGMP Join Synch Routes one by one

2） include mode, source X-A, group G in IGMP Join Synch Routes withdraw one by one

3） exclude mode, source Y-A, group G in IGMP Join Synch Routes withdraw one by one

4） include mode, source A-Y, group G in IGMP Leave Synch Routes one by one
Is it appropriate for IGMPv3 Synch route construction in the draft?

3.In IGMPv3, only BLOCK, TO_IN, TO_EX can lead to generate last member query.
Is that mean when the PE only receive BLOCK, TO_IN , TO_EX , it should advertise the leave synch routes to the other multi-homed PEs?


Thanks
Yisong

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email