Re: [Bier] A comment about draft-xzlnp-bier-ioam

["Jeffrey (Zhaohui) Zhang" <[e-mail]>]

Hi Xiao Min,

Please see zzh> below.


Juniper Business Use Only

-----Original Message-----
From: [e-mail] <[e-mail]> 
Sent: Tuesday, March 22, 2022 6:57 AM
To: Jeffrey (Zhaohui) Zhang <[e-mail]>
Cc: [e-mail]
Subject: Re:[Bier] A comment about draft-xzlnp-bier-ioam

[External Email. Be cautious of content]


Hi Jeffrey,

Please see inline with <XM>>>.

Best Regards,
Xiao Min
------------------原始邮件------------------
发件人：Jeffrey(Zhaohui)Zhang
收件人：肖敏10093570;
抄送人：[e-mail];
日 期 ：2022年03月22日 02:21
主 题 ：RE: Re:[Bier] A comment about draft-xzlnp-bier-ioam

 Hi Xiao Min, The purpose of GDF is to use the same extension header format for functionalities that may be used at different layers. Fragmentation was one example, and IOAM is another.
<XM>>> I see your preference :)
Note that fragmentation is for edge-to-edge, however IOAM is for both edge-to-edge and hop-by-hop, trying to combine them is ambitious and not easy.

Zzh> Whether it is edge-to-edge or hop-by-hop, if we need extension headers, we need to consider all cases holistically.

For that, it is ideal if IPv6/MPLS/BIER all could use the same extension headers.
<XM>>> Note that IPv6 IOAM draft (draft-ietf-ippm-ioam-ipv6-options) has passed WG LC in IPPM WG.

Zzh> that's why I have been proposing to reuse IPv6 headers (if possible) at different layers. *If it is possible to * reuse IPv6 IOAM header (in BIER extension header) for BIER purpose, wouldn't it be nice? We can talk about it further in the BIER meeting.
Zzh> Thanks.
Zzh> Jeffrey

While this draft is about IOAM, if we talk about BIER extension headers we need to consider it holistically.
Jeffrey
Juniper Business Use Only
-----Original Message-----
From: [e-mail] <[e-mail]>
Sent: Saturday, March 19, 2022 7:31 AM
To: Jeffrey (Zhaohui) Zhang <[e-mail]>
Cc: [e-mail]
Subject: Re:[Bier] A comment about draft-xzlnp-bier-ioam [External Email. Be cautious of content] Hi Jeffrey, Thank you for bringing it up to our attention.
I do agree your GDF draft provides a third option on how to encapsulate IOAM over BIER, which is different from the two options already described and compared in this BIER-IOAM draft.
To my understanding, the initial and main motivation to introduce GDF is to provide a fragmentation header for MPLS/BIER etc, just like IPv6 FH.
With that in mind, one possible way to push this "Encapsulating IOAM in BIER" work forward is to add the third option into BIER-IOAM draft for comparison, that makes it focused and easy to follow.
What's your opinion?
Best Regards,
Xiao Min
------------------原始邮件------------------
发件人：Jeffrey(Zhaohui)Zhang
收件人：'[e-mail]';[e-mail];
日 期 ：2022年03月18日 20:56
主 题 ：[Bier] A comment about draft-xzlnp-bier-ioam Hi, For IOAM data in BIER, I want to point out that we should use a generic header format that can be used for BIER/MPLS/IPv6. The same extension mechanism can be used for other purposes like fragmentation/security, etc..
This was discussed in https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-zzhang-intarea-generic-delivery-functions-02.txt__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!Q-3JJzNBtHRy-DGJNrQ4wqe7oXPyU1zkyW42eRc0vbprEoml9zmtJ_tA5MyGUkgy$ , and was mentioned in slide #6 of https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/112/materials/slides-112-bier-03-bier-slicing-and-differentiation-00__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!Q-3JJzNBtHRy-DGJNrQ4wqe7oXPyU1zkyW42eRc0vbprEoml9zmtJ_tA5F-dbdqg$  in IETF112 BIER session.
Thanks.
Jeffrey
Juniper Business Use Only
_______________________________________________
BIER mailing list
[e-mail]
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bier__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!Q-3JJzNBtHRy-DGJNrQ4wqe7oXPyU1zkyW42eRc0vbprEoml9zmtJ_tA5JjrM0gJ$