Re: [Bier] Comments on Montreal IETF 105 BIER Agenda

Greg Shepherd <gjshep@gmail.com> Mon, 22 July 2019 21:05 UTC

Return-Path: <gjshep@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 8203D1200FD; Mon, 22 Jul 2019 14:05:12 -0700 (PDT)
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, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, 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 3_2LxT0N-LjY; Mon, 22 Jul 2019 14:05:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-io1-xd29.google.com (mail-io1-xd29.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::d29]) (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 0A27A1200A3; Mon, 22 Jul 2019 14:05:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-io1-xd29.google.com with SMTP id f4so77148192ioh.6; Mon, 22 Jul 2019 14:05:08 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:reply-to:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc; bh=87BgV2XAMzhoKWtAE8or5Ou/axYDfPWcPWBbn8LM/U0=; b=dD96PN1wLK86UmTMxTWwAtL/BY623E9mTZXghcMvW8gZ/rC73Eki7trjZgAp3Ni/xj suQAoRkGURvqIZlglqFmnGHs0OnfOE003xbjeR+CZCYdq4HDPFg79FXHhH0xAoUT8IqW KrXOvGifbTMTxENrPX/MAQGZUKOdX+8CMZfr66mB+eZvR7SeSZVVtPzptbZ+RMVBDgmD 4DxgEULSzIiO8se/3cGCGKJha3PMnGixFBtEcq8O2dxAjkUiwlDU+fDy9ICIOPhLdgHm vgZ5XGYkBoPCQsFJYgF9PevafhO5ShL5LPZ7GNpniypSuxZXzTDdQ8Q/nQyXP7QfI2/N OoKg==
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:reply-to :from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=87BgV2XAMzhoKWtAE8or5Ou/axYDfPWcPWBbn8LM/U0=; b=Z0pAFr1EULLCqk0nvTLFOHATRIXC6t+8PQwxAzY9oQXP0XXqZ0Adlf5dGQ0oqSHjIA 7n9wWDBbzP431f3524LoBWThlMKqX0L5CrQiHJnhATwBc3hofmShQUVE6ymgkw6fDqzx kC7xqYuqupqxIM/+Tq//1WupCKsuYdnnapD3dreGngKvWObU2nr/d7N0YGh5h/yPvOQU mSnEvA97UebYa7h8z6+FS+3X/EZcFBbb2+A271Rxp50BbmoLSlDPtYDY2u8EzzHOCFFZ Zp49T2mrngnNkgdeu7GhcSz1OUrMdYL7ABZgYWA2a+jFpbdf/26CbtuKgzCWtoYyPdVY +s+Q==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAWaQIe8dlNbrjv6dHhxItwCswh2tUbhsZx+179litttlEfBP7ls tYlrVoS7BeDB0z+w1i38omwZ8qfnSHRyD3j2Gvc=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwZARbFfcXopnHwhMONn3/xXh+XDebO+QFH97YtPVzRXeMyXt/B8v8NmYdBJY0gvXaee3eewddVEoQ8XvWjdjk=
X-Received: by 2002:a5d:9749:: with SMTP id c9mr1316662ioo.258.1563829507402; Mon, 22 Jul 2019 14:05:07 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <16253F7987E4F346823E305D08F9115AAB90985C@nkgeml514-mbs.china.huawei.com> <CABFReBpnEmHKTFfcHaum5BzKdh0KYSB90rsThyKgZqz7nXjLuA@mail.gmail.com> <16253F7987E4F346823E305D08F9115AAB909B4F@nkgeml514-mbs.china.huawei.com>
In-Reply-To: <16253F7987E4F346823E305D08F9115AAB909B4F@nkgeml514-mbs.china.huawei.com>
Reply-To: gjshep@gmail.com
From: Greg Shepherd <gjshep@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 14:04:56 -0700
Message-ID: <CABFReBqkC38RmJAGJUS7erLB8ffLMdc=w_GAV_mMwOPUW8uzkw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Xiejingrong <xiejingrong@huawei.com>
Cc: "bier-ads@ietf.org" <bier-ads@ietf.org>, BIER WG <bier@ietf.org>, "bier-chairs@ietf.org" <bier-chairs@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000472fe9058e4b6e16"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/bier/NxyCNIr9KX6P7XgSbQasqzjHoV0>
Subject: Re: [Bier] Comments on Montreal IETF 105 BIER Agenda
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: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 21:05:12 -0000

Thank you for your input. The fact that draft-ietf-bier-ipv6-requirements
is an adopted WG document should be confirmation that this work is being
seriously fconsidered by the WG regardless of current charter
interpretation, just as I've outlined in email here more than once. Seems
the only remaining concern is the pace of the IETF WG process. Sorry. I too
wish things move more quickly. I look forward to further discussions on
Thurs.

Cheers,
Greg
(chairs)

On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 1:40 PM Xiejingrong <xiejingrong@huawei.com>; wrote:

> Dear Greg,
>
> 7) BIER in IPv6 : A mechanism to use BIER natively in IPv6 may be
> standardized if coordinated with the 6MAN WG and with understood
> applicability.
>
> As of now, the WG has decided that modifying the v6 header to encode BIER
> is no longer native v6
> [XJR]
> Maybe the "natively" in the charter is subjective. Let's think about "BIER
> in IPv6".
> BIERv6 is BIER in IPv6 extension header, and BIERin6 is BIER in IPv6
> payload.
> Which one do you think is more "native" ? say one is 50% native and one is
> 60% native?
> It's clear when this charter text was discussing, we want to have a useful
> BIER IPv6, instead of limiting ourselves by "native" or not.
> This can be refered to
> https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/bier/Zd8mcNc_UoHBrxza7iar8jMjYJg
> This conclusion above will unnecessarily kill the work we have done on
> BIERv6 so far, and discourage the work later.
>
> Please review the minutes from IETF 104 in Prague:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/minutes-104-bier/
> [XJR]
> I have read the minutes many times. Maybe we went wrong to judge native or
> not from this. For example here is one of the discussion about native:
> Because bier uses its own header, no matter how you do it, we cannot call
> it ipv6 native.
> From this, the "native" does not really exist. How do we explain the
> charter text then ?
>
> If these solutions are out of scope of our charter, we can propose
> changing the charter to include this
> work at that time, as necessary.
> [XJR]
> I don't think the BIERv6 is out of our current charter.
> Quite the contrary, it is the reason why we gether here, thinking,
> discussion, arguing and producing.
> The current charter is not a far thing, just a year approximately.
> Maybe the current AD Alvaro can give us the guidence.
>
> Thanks
> Jingrong
>
> ------------------------------
> *From:* Greg Shepherd [gjshep@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Tuesday, July 23, 2019 2:30
> *To:* Xiejingrong
> *Cc:* BIER WG; bier-chairs@ietf.org; bier-ads@ietf.org
> *Subject:* Re: Comments on Montreal IETF 105 BIER Agenda
>
> Jingrong,
>
> The agenda stands as a reflection of the decisions of the WG according to
> our procedures and charter. From the charter:
>
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/bier/about/
>
> 7) BIER in IPv6 : A mechanism to use BIER natively in IPv6 may be
> standardized if coordinated with the 6MAN WG and with understood
> applicability.
>
> As of now, the WG has decided that modifying the v6 header to encode BIER
> is no longer native v6
>
> Please review the minutes from IETF 104 in Prague:
>
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/minutes-104-bier/
>
> There was a productive discussion in the room. The consensus in the room,
> which was confirmed from the list, was that this work will focus on the
> problem statement first. If one or more unique use-cases are presented that
> require a new encoding or encapsulation then we can address solutions to
> these use-case in the associated drafts. If these solutions are out of
> scope of our charter, we can propose changing the charter to include this
> work at that time, as necessary.
>
> I'm sorry the WG is not moving as fast as you like. I agree with you. :)
> We have more than a handful of active drafts ready for WGLC and we can't
> get volunteers for Doc Shepherds. Some WGLC email responses were so
> depressingly low it can't be considered much of a consensus. But it's what
> we have and where we are at this time.
>
> I look forward getting deeper into the use-cases draft this week. Thanks
> for you help and patience.
>
> - Shep
> (chairs)
>
> On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 5:40 AM Xiejingrong <xiejingrong@huawei.com>;
> wrote:
>
>> Dear Greg & Chairs,
>> I have sent my concerns days ago but haven't got any response, so I have
>> to use a new title on the mail.
>> I request now to have a *guaranteed* time slot about 10 minutes for
>> <draft-xie-bier-ipv6-encapsulation-03> draft, and give up the requested
>> time slot for the other 3 drafts.
>> I have the following reasons:
>> (1) It is the time now to discuss encapsulation proposals, to help
>> making the <bier-ipv6-requirements> more clear.
>> (2) the <bierin6> draft is on the agenda with guaranteed time. Obviously
>> it is an encapsulation draft. It even has many open questions on the list
>> which I think is serious.
>> (3) as a cmpromise, I ack to give up the time slot request on other 3
>> drafts. Does that work for you ?
>> (4) I have given many comments on the drafts, which I think can shorten
>> the presentation time. Maybe each for 2 minutes?
>>
>> Please let me know your thoughts.
>>
>> Thanks
>> Jingrong
>>
>> ------------------------------
>> *From:* BIER [bier-bounces@ietf.org] on behalf of Greg Shepherd [
>> gjshep@gmail.com]
>> *Sent:* Wednesday, July 17, 2019 23:08
>> *To:* BIER WG
>> *Subject:* Re: [Bier] BIER WG, Call For Agenda, Montreal IETF 105
>>
>> Just updated the agenda:.
>>
>> IETF 105, Montreal
>> BIER WG Agenda
>>
>> WG Status Update 15mins, chairs
>> draft-zzhang-bier-tether-02, 15 minutes, Jeffrey Zhang
>> draft-hb-bier-mldp-signaling-over-bier, 10 mins Hooman Bidgoli
>> draft-ietf-bier-multicast-http-response-01, 10 mins, Dirk Trossen
>> draft-ietf-bier-pmmm-oam 10min, Greg Mirsky
>> draft-ietf-bier-te-arch 10min, Toerless Eckert
>> draft-ietf-bier-mld-02, 10min, Stig Venaas
>> draft-zhang-bier-bierin6-03
>>  draft-zhang-bier-source-protection-00, 15min, Sandy Zhang
>> draft-ietf-bier-ipv6-requirements, 15min, Mike McBride
>> - additional drafts to be discussed if room decides, based on the above
>> - requirements draft.
>>   draft-xie-bier-ipv6-encapsulation-02
>>   draft-xie-bier-ipv6-isis-extension-00
>>   draft-xie-bier-ipv6-mvpn-01
>>   draft-geng-bier-ipv6-inter-domain-00
>>
>> On Tue, Jul 16, 2019 at 12:59 PM Greg Shepherd <gjshep@gmail.com>; wrote:
>>
>>> I just uploaded the first draft agenda. Here it is for your review
>>> (below). Please send corrects here, and slides to me directly (unicast to
>>> this gmail address).
>>>
>>> IETF 105, Montreal
>>> BIER WG Agenda
>>>
>>> WG Status Update 15mins, chairs
>>> draft-zzhang-bier-tether-02, 15 minutes, Jeffrey Zhang
>>> draft-hb-bier-mldp-signaling-over-bier, 10 mins Hooman Bidgoli
>>> draft-ietf-bier-multicast-http-response-01, 10 mins, Dirk Trossen
>>> draft-ietf-bier-pmmm-oam 10min, Greg Mirsky
>>> draft-ietf-bier-te-arch 10min, Toerless Eckert
>>> draft-ietf-bier-mld-02, 10min, Stig Venaas
>>> draft-ietf-bier-ipv6-requirements, 10min, Mike McBride
>>> - additional drafts to be discussed if room decides, based on the above
>>> - requirements draft.
>>>   draft-xie-bier-ipv6-encapsulation-02
>>>   draft-xie-bier-ipv6-isis-extension-00
>>>   draft-xie-bier-ipv6-mvpn-01
>>>   draft-geng-bier-ipv6-inter-domain-00
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jul 8, 2019 at 12:37 PM Greg Shepherd <gjshep@gmail.com>; wrote:
>>>
>>>> Please send agenda items with title, draft, speaker name, and requested
>>>> time to this thread.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Shep
>>>> (chairs)
>>>>
>>>