Re: [Bier] What does BIERin6 propose to satisfy the requirements? //RE: draft-ietf-bier-ipv6-requirements-09

Greg Mirsky <gregimirsky@gmail.com> Thu, 26 November 2020 04:11 UTC

Return-Path: <gregimirsky@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: bier@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: bier@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 073CF3A03F8 for <bier@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 20:11:56 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.997
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.997 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_MESSAGE=0.001, HTTPS_HTTP_MISMATCH=0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id wRnJZY3-pxlG for <bier@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 20:11:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-lf1-x136.google.com (mail-lf1-x136.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::136]) (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 4D1083A03F5 for <bier@ietf.org>; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 20:11:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-lf1-x136.google.com with SMTP id u18so531832lfd.9 for <bier@ietf.org>; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 20:11:53 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=FCyZuycFfU/1zKMD8oBfhoNJ5Ov56grDwf3e45i6Zns=; b=t+kGs6QrbQ29JlS9LdmbRgJcNUSqYMmgn5nSI0uQaYlbrikXI7sDZniRRfLAdhRsMf 5D+SNPsRhhb88EPHxfzXPkaD3Zz+T6IYAve+CQaYPutcVRyCoaglWp8ohdvzSSEGv0d0 IiuX/GBPdf+sHq+VBOzh2u15YEz8H5IzZsFeQdxagCK1odJnN6ISVXjeSfuuituAUcJc ucUex5TmpwKPA+n9LZ4VG4f4Mm6hPR6ZAAmP+0+LldVJ3y5K3GMLyt5/0bD5TWmeAcFo siX83KeKqmHeszJ0+P6gdV+rgqe+Lh3BK1mADW/km8Vi1qqLjHfkjCfa9w9lNttKtD+1 lV9A==
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=FCyZuycFfU/1zKMD8oBfhoNJ5Ov56grDwf3e45i6Zns=; b=ecyIQwWeVBM8bRKTc2y7TPJafS5IoqHwwnmgRdPSkiYJfsADi8vkKwxbXOEtC4uwRu okcN86ElvDrp7eos6pltrJe/tRRbu1tVYyvDfhxBSLagAIgpSAOhu3+D7kaJpSOUDc42 orQ9/krH117axZupqoxY5FrhJP8xFCr2kFm7TnmtOWwNi2y4RyuTkH4TQ5amaCiEl/SC Vt13REeltvb2L+fTH5Ud/zIGwi88H9xB2k6yItWhmD6zH4X9Lf93ysts5g/uMQBnc3vn HNTDxh4ALVo56mH49bwlqIKl6vCk3LTFuO7ZkniK3xTksT4EvRQ6pmjiLnfW5sRDdVA1 +FHw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533lvIDWvjq2Yk9HlHKVragMoJHg4s15W2VHqYd6w6TSpW1bF11r 3qcytz8ftgkM5426hfs1hhnJvvbIKCIzaz6R0Eo=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwxW9qu7STMxIVTd6lqll+nI+wZgjLH4mdWPakKMQjHWkmklU6nuaykEEa51KB+Qql0W2Q3hsrv+K+VyLirvQU=
X-Received: by 2002:a19:3f09:: with SMTP id m9mr538476lfa.433.1606363911437; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 20:11:51 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <d518b2ac16a2468e8aa80bf77d0bc5d9@huawei.com> <CABFReBrz+to4JPRxZzAykTbPyvsX=axMHhv2a5rghetnt9jNrg@mail.gmail.com> <368c96a825734b7e958e0c3f0af649f8@huawei.com> <MN2PR05MB5981A5FE43B26EB4DB701E85D4FA0@MN2PR05MB5981.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> <ddf881b1f7ff4950a6a5bbeed3030384@huawei.com>
In-Reply-To: <ddf881b1f7ff4950a6a5bbeed3030384@huawei.com>
From: Greg Mirsky <gregimirsky@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2020 20:11:40 -0800
Message-ID: <CA+RyBmXPdEYXRbvbJgz0FNCjoVK=oaaZ00hN5vaU7c2R+9CLJA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Tianran Zhou <zhoutianran@huawei.com>
Cc: "Jeffrey (Zhaohui) Zhang" <zzhang@juniper.net>, "gjshep@gmail.com" <gjshep@gmail.com>, "Xiejingrong (Jingrong)" <xiejingrong@huawei.com>, BIER WG <bier@ietf.org>, Gyan Mishra <hayabusagsm@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000052418405b4fabe7a"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/bier/Lx9T4UvJA7u-VSOl4-I0w1-3uD4>
Subject: Re: [Bier] What does BIERin6 propose to satisfy the requirements? //RE: draft-ietf-bier-ipv6-requirements-09
X-BeenThere: bier@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "\"Bit Indexed Explicit Replication discussion list\"" <bier.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/bier>, <mailto:bier-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/bier/>
List-Post: <mailto:bier@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bier-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bier>, <mailto:bier-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2020 04:11:56 -0000

Hi Tianran,
I just recently read both proposals - BIERin6 and BIERv6. Understandably, I
was interested in how each solution handles BIER OAM.
draft-zhang-bier-bierin6 explains that:
   BIER has its own OAM function, so generally the IPv6 OAM function is
   not needed.
And I agree with that conclusion. BIER OAM will work because BIER header is
used as defined in RFC 8296, including using OAM value in the Proto field.
draft-xie-bier-ipv6-encapsulation states that:
        How BIER-PING is supported in BIERv6
        encapsulation without using this Proto field is outside the
        scope of this document.
That left me with many questions. Thus, from my point of view, BIERv6 needs
to demonstrate how BIER OAM, as defined in numerous WG drafts, works in
BIERv6 domain. Without that, I cannot compare the two proposals fairly.

Regards,
Greg


On Wed, Nov 25, 2020 at 7:50 PM Tianran Zhou <zhoutianran@huawei.com> wrote:

> Hi Jeffrey,
>
>
>
> Bierv6 is a nice design. It works very well in IPv6 scenario.
>
> Given we already have Bierv6, I do not understand why we are still arguing
> the requirement for Bier in 6.
>
> I just see no need for Bier in 6.
>
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> Tianran
>
>
>
> *From:* Jeffrey (Zhaohui) Zhang [mailto:zzhang@juniper.net]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, November 25, 2020 10:14 PM
> *To:* Tianran Zhou <zhoutianran@huawei.com>om>; gjshep@gmail.com;
> Xiejingrong (Jingrong) <xiejingrong@huawei.com>
> *Cc:* BIER WG <bier@ietf.org>rg>; Gyan Mishra <hayabusagsm@gmail.com>
> *Subject:* RE: [Bier] What does BIERin6 propose to satisfy the
> requirements? //RE: draft-ietf-bier-ipv6-requirements-09
>
>
>
> Hi Tianran,
>
>
>
> I had answered/countered every question/comment that Gyan/Jingrong raised,
> some repeatedly.
>
>
>
> Ø  Bier in 6 is just a wrong solution and direction.
>
>
>
> Love to hear your arguments for the above.
>
>
>
> Jeffrey
>
>
>
> *From:* Tianran Zhou <zhoutianran@huawei.com>
> *Sent:* Wednesday, November 25, 2020 1:01 AM
> *To:* gjshep@gmail.com; Xiejingrong (Jingrong) <xiejingrong@huawei.com>
> *Cc:* Jeffrey (Zhaohui) Zhang <zzhang@juniper.net>et>; BIER WG <bier@ietf.org>rg>;
> Gyan Mishra <hayabusagsm@gmail.com>
> *Subject:* RE: [Bier] What does BIERin6 propose to satisfy the
> requirements? //RE: draft-ietf-bier-ipv6-requirements-09
>
>
>
> *[External Email. Be cautious of content]*
>
>
>
> Why do you want to stop valid comments and valid discussions?
>
> I think both Gyan and Jingrong just raised the key technique points.
>
> Bier in 6 is just a wrong solution and direction.
>
>
>
> Tianran
>
>
>
> *From:* BIER [mailto:bier-bounces@ietf.org <bier-bounces@ietf.org>] *On
> Behalf Of *Greg Shepherd
> *Sent:* Wednesday, November 25, 2020 1:16 PM
> *To:* Xiejingrong (Jingrong) <xiejingrong@huawei.com>
> *Cc:* Jeffrey (Zhaohui) Zhang <zzhang@juniper.net>et>; BIER WG <bier@ietf.org>rg>;
> Gyan Mishra <hayabusagsm@gmail.com>
> *Subject:* Re: [Bier] What does BIERin6 propose to satisfy the
> requirements? //RE: draft-ietf-bier-ipv6-requirements-09
>
>
>
> Please try to keep comments on track and in-line with the thread.
> Stand-alone questions like this are just digging up ground we've already
> sowed.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Shep
>
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 24, 2020 at 7:27 PM Xiejingrong (Jingrong) <
> xiejingrong@huawei.com> wrote:
>
> (to make clean, raise a new topic)
>
> I am confused too by the claiming a solution can do everything and it is
> an "existing" solution, while requesting allocation of IPv6 Next Header /
> IPv4 Protocol value which is non-trivial.
>
> We need to know, what does *the* BIERin6 draft propose, and how does *the*
> BIERin6 draft satisfy the bier-ipv6-requirements.
> Take req-1 as an example, suppose there are PPP-over-SONET(POS, RFC2615)
> links in an IPv6 network, can the existing RFC8296 solve ? What does *the*
> BIERin6 draft propose to solve ?
>
> Please note in my question the word *the* does not include anything that
> RFC8296 can solve. Any existing RFC8296 solution is not belonging to *the*
> BIERin6 proposal. Please tell us *the* BIERin6 proposal.
>
> Thanks
> Jingrong
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Gyan Mishra [mailto:hayabusagsm@gmail.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, November 25, 2020 9:34 AM
> To: Jeffrey (Zhaohui) Zhang <zzhang@juniper.net>
> Cc: Alvaro Retana <aretana.ietf@gmail.com>om>; BIER WG <bier@ietf.org>rg>;
> EXT-zhang.zheng@zte.com.cn <zhang.zheng@zte.com.cn>cn>; Tony Przygienda <
> tonysietf@gmail.com>gt;; draft-ietf-bier-ipv6-requirements <
> draft-ietf-bier-ipv6-requirements@ietf.org>gt;; gjshep@gmail.com
> Subject: Re: draft-ietf-bier-ipv6-requirements-09
>
> Jeffrey
>
> About the two lingering points it does shed light on something that has
> been disturbing me with the BIERin6 solution.
>
>
> I thought about this some more and I think what creates a lot of confusion
> in my mind with BIERin6 solution is the L2/tunnel component.
>
> As the main reason is that the L2/tunnel exists today with RFC 8296 “Non
> MPLS BIER Ethernet” with the special allocated next header code point to
> account for BIER next header 0xAB37.
>
> I honestly think the L2 should be removed from the BIERin6 draft so that
> the optional IPV6 encapsulation is no longer “optional” in the draft as
> that now is the draft.
>
> This also provides the “IPv6 encapsulation” commonality with BIERv6 at
> least showing clearly that their is a strive for commonality and parity
> between the two solutions.
>
> Also the “muddying” of the water is eliminated by removing L2 making the
> solution crystal clear to operators.
>
>
> Kind Regards
>
> Gyan
>
> _______________________________________________
> BIER mailing list
> BIER@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bier
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bier__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!Si-OI7n2KWZpZrAUn6G14gDTm6ICWah6GxBVRm00DTGFWCb0rs1cnBoFCUdkIsCQ$>
>
>
>
> Juniper Business Use Only
> _______________________________________________
> BIER mailing list
> BIER@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bier
>