Re: [Bier] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-dhanaraj-bier-lsr-ethernet-extensions-00.txt

Nope, it's not. Add a sub-TLV to signal the capacity rather than giving
special meanings to values in flat addressing space ...

--- tony

On Sun, Apr 28, 2019 at 10:41 AM Jeffrey (Zhaohui) Zhang <zzhang=
40juniper.net@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:

> Hi Senthil,
>
>
>
> Looks like that I did not reply to this email.
>
>
>
> Since there is no real difference between an mpls label and an opaque
> 20-bit BIFT-ID (other than one uses mpls forwarding infrastructure and the
> other does not), I agree that reserve space [0-15] is a good idea to keep
> the two in sync.
>
>
>
> Jeffrey
>
>
>
>
>
> Juniper Internal
>
> *From:* Senthil Dhanaraj <senthil.dhanaraj.ietf@gmail.com>
> *Sent:* Thursday, January 31, 2019 4:39 AM
> *To:* Jeffrey (Zhaohui) Zhang <zzhang@juniper.net>
> *Cc:* Xiejingrong <xiejingrong@huawei.com>; BIER WG <bier@ietf.org>
> *Subject:* Re: [Bier] Fwd: New Version Notification for
> draft-dhanaraj-bier-lsr-ethernet-extensions-00.txt
>
>
>
> Hi Jeffrey,
>
>
>
> I meant that "reserved special purpose BIFT-id" could also be used for
> cases like PHP.
>
> This way, we may avoid having to add new sub-TLV's like "PHP sub-sub-TLV".
>
>
>
> Keeping PHP case aside, In general, Do you think we should reserve a space
> [0 - 15] as special purpose BIFT-id's?
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Senthil
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 30, 2019 at 9:29 PM Jeffrey (Zhaohui) Zhang <
> zzhang@juniper.net> wrote:
>
> For the specific case of PHP, it does not use a special BIFT-ID to signal
> PHP (especially when you consider the fact that we’re talking about
> “BIFT-ID”). The php draft says:
>
>
>
>    A BIER incapable router, if acting as a multicast flow overlay
>
>    router, MUST signal its BIER information as specified in [RFC8401
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__tools.ietf.org_html_rfc8401&d=DwMFaQ&c=HAkYuh63rsuhr6Scbfh0UjBXeMK-ndb3voDTXcWzoCI&r=f7wsLGcfzAWDNS6XNTBZwj_OLAOsZZqdrR2IDAzeZqE&m=N_OTgZiZr2c6GaNIafdyf5kQ8zK4jBPSgKonPyjdJBE&s=sOU2zHHHLHfCiNpA0iy1ILFQPIPfKVmyvr_Hf-IEtcA&e=>]
> or
>
>    [I-D.ietf-bier-ospf-bier-extensions] or [I-D.ietf-bier-idr-
>
>    extensions], with a PHP sub-sub-TLV included in the BIER sub-TLV
>
>    attached to the BIER incapable router's BIER prefix to request BIER
>
>    PHP from other BFRs.  The sub-sub-TLV's type is TBD, and the length
>
>    is 0.
>
>
>
>    With MPLS encapsulation, the BIER incapable multicast flow overlay
>
>    router MAY omit the BIER MPLS Encapsulation sub-sub-TLV, or MUST set
>
>    the Label Range Base in BIER MPLS Encapsulation sub-sub-TLV to
>
>    Implicit Null Label [RFC3032
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__tools.ietf.org_html_rfc3032&d=DwMFaQ&c=HAkYuh63rsuhr6Scbfh0UjBXeMK-ndb3voDTXcWzoCI&r=f7wsLGcfzAWDNS6XNTBZwj_OLAOsZZqdrR2IDAzeZqE&m=N_OTgZiZr2c6GaNIafdyf5kQ8zK4jBPSgKonPyjdJBE&s=yTKr1Q5Qg2oczBEXNXpPmI1XxKzgirvheMi5wxlpdf0&e=>
> ].
>
>
>
>
>
> Jeffrey
>
>
>
> *From:* BIER [mailto:bier-bounces@ietf.org] *On Behalf Of *Senthil
> Dhanaraj
> *Sent:* Wednesday, January 30, 2019 1:02 AM
> *To:* Xiejingrong <xiejingrong@huawei.com>
> *Cc:* BIER WG <bier@ietf.org>
> *Subject:* Re: [Bier] Fwd: New Version Notification for
> draft-dhanaraj-bier-lsr-ethernet-extensions-00.txt
>
>
>
> Hi Xiejingrong,
>
>
>
> RFC8296 do not reserve any BIFT-id's (for non-mpls networks) to be used
> for special purposes.
>
>
>
> But yes, it might be a good idea to reserve a BIFT-id range to be used for
> special purposes in non-MPLS networks.
>
> One use case i can think of is PHP (use special values like Implicit NULL,
> Explicit NULL label in MPLS) which could be applied to non-MPLS networks as
> well like BIER over Ethernet.
>
>
>
> BIER'ers, kindly shoot your opinion !
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Senthil
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 30, 2019 at 7:54 AM Xiejingrong <xiejingrong@huawei.com>
> wrote:
>
> Hi  Senthil
>
> I have one comment/question:
>
> Section 1, is BIFT-id 1/2/3/4/5/6 been allowed in non-mpls case?
>
>
>
> In MPLS encapsulation, value 0 to 15 is reserved and should not be allowed
> as BIER label I guess.
>
>
>
> Thanks
>
> Jingrong
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* BIER [mailto:bier-bounces@ietf.org] *On Behalf Of *Senthil
> Dhanaraj
> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 29, 2019 10:04 PM
> *To:* BIER WG <bier@ietf.org>
> *Subject:* [Bier] Fwd: New Version Notification for
> draft-dhanaraj-bier-lsr-ethernet-extensions-00.txt
>
>
>
> Hi Folks,
>
>
>
> Renamed draft-dhanaraj-bier-isis-non-mpls-extensions to
> draft-dhanaraj-bier-lsr-ethernet-extensions
>
>
>
> Major updates:
>
> 1) Added packet format details for OSPFv2 as well
>
> 2) Updated text to better explain the signalling of BIFT-id's
>
> 3) Renamed "non-mpls" to "ethernet" as this specific draft covers only
> "BIER over Ethernet".
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Senthil
>
> _______________________________________________
> BIER mailing list
> BIER@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bier
>