Re: [Bier] Call for adoption: draft-wijnandsxu-bier-non-mpls-bift-encoding-01

I am uncertain how useful the outcome of this work is as long as
its "informational", "local decision..."

I found Ice's explanation about the goals to Eric very useful.

If we would scope the work to include the following 3 points i
would give it a very enthusiastic approve as WG item:

(1)Goal (described in doc): BIFT-ID Encoding to minimixe provisioning complexity:
   Make non-MPLS option as easy (or easier) than MPLS encap: Avoid 
   to configure BIFT-ID <-> {SD,SI} mappings for every BIFT on every node
   (or introduce new IGP signaling to auto-negotiate it).

(2) Target: IMHO should be same standards track as 8296. Probably update
    RFC8296.

(3) Draft should become normative reference to draft-ietf-bier-bier-yang.
   To support this draft, YANG model just needs to introduce
   encap option "bier-encap-bsl-sd-si" (some name). Nothing more needed!

I may be persuaded that there is enough value of not standardizing it (2),
not documenting how to use it (1) or not making it supported via the YANG
model (3). I would just like to understand why we would like to cripple
the work so much. Without it, the non-MPLS encap will not catch up with
MPLS. Is that the goal of the WG ?

Technically, two points:

a) However this work proceeds, we would need to add parameters to the
   YANG draft to support the "arbitrary" BIFT-ID assignment. I think
   this would mean some "flat-bift-id" encapsulation type and a
   list of per (SD,SI) BIFT-ID parameters in the appropriate place
   of the YANG data model. Make this mandatory to support.

   The mandatory need to support those flat BIFT-ID encoding parameters 
   is my best idea how to ensure Erics concern does not happen: platforms
   that will not allow you do use any BIFT-ID.

b) I think it would be great if we had inband recognition of misconfigured
   BIFT-IDs without the need to depend on the control plane.

   Given how the BSL aready has a header field, it seems we would not
   need it in the BIFT-ID, but could use (some of) those bits to identify the 
   encoding, and make this mechanism be one encoding value.

Cheers
    Toerless

On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 10:07:05AM -0800, Greg Shepherd wrote:
> In Singapore we had solid support to
> adopt draft-wijnandsxu-bier-non-mpls-bift-encoding as a WG draft.
> 
> This is a call to the list for adoption. Please read and reply with/without
> support to this thread:
> 
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-wijnandsxu-bier-non-mpls-bift-encoding/
> 
> Thanks,
> Greg

> _______________________________________________
> BIER mailing list
> BIER@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bier