IETF Logo Mail Archive

[Bier] [BIER] Anycact BIER prefix and Conflict resolution

Senthil Dhanaraj <senthil.dhanaraj.ietf@gmail.com> Fri, 15 February 2019 07:29 UTC

Return-Path: <senthil.dhanaraj.ietf@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 57B2712008F for <bier@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 14 Feb 2019 23:29:26 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 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_PASS=-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 A3IlBFRx-XtU for <bier@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 14 Feb 2019 23:29:24 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-ed1-x534.google.com (mail-ed1-x534.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::534]) (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 56D8A12426E for <bier@ietf.org>; Thu, 14 Feb 2019 23:29:24 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-ed1-x534.google.com with SMTP id 10so7134549eds.7 for <bier@ietf.org>; Thu, 14 Feb 2019 23:29:24 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=RPZGYreLeEvz4u9l0kGFWAQia+pyYNBQcwRt+bE+7O8=; b=LgcGcjEHEXKAlSjLWh6RTV8GFzfHU5RYYVyECmJaYhuMLAs/t9ilPYb1487aHqeQBR f0vPz5eoRNb5b/1eHW4dPLqulvoXmfke+tqAmCjVH+Hd6QRgzalIuDJqH/d0IsrtGJWd kdoQQnShCVMou0EOgqxJZoMXYQnXmPiB86FglDB4yvnY1r1mHVRmgnHaojyWDbnN1RjM y+wyu8zeMcZLzR6sHMJQOBT+cWo2X7B3WXGoaBz67rKiINHtuZU3G+Hp874gve98hm19 SofBt64vKT38S10gcfnmQReFVitQAfyeaOf17kvTuYjbKI++BFpBOUmN3VJWo+cVYq6m Hy4A==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=RPZGYreLeEvz4u9l0kGFWAQia+pyYNBQcwRt+bE+7O8=; b=bk4KVTpN59wxK3oSkw2gjj3F+XD87siTtJUCJ0yK38T5ZM8lUnYePHgCO4ElMq9Pua AFJ9uMYmBtfR1+2iWJo8ln4g3AdJRfXCQeKEZTywoMweCmsvF4czMtDUBz94x8xS1WDO sSG/kXCsrrwQdYcsGN0DpoT/EwCvIWKyxbOREpj1p/ErgXsKhGv4wXiZG5TB1GMjSdJY ZE/7P8Y4m32hnMUFBBdUz4z04Bca0RFME9eGgdmV0BAwip5a96UEGnBJo3DhSlyMaluv yI4g4S6iXj4bb6kwnQxqIIvC9J+ICQf9/+t0y+RKwtrZRE5O7oI2zzLFgazV8GGV6M5B E0HQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AHQUAuY8AqfHa12w5UqeE8FPixHvSZ4keeSuP5Rfc1PXp6DZELELAVRp UCjipYf+PakifDDcGS/QEii7h+BHC3Ini2kD2ObN1uva
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AHgI3Ibeji34+Tl7n4LOxbSPmcZfgMAdw7mv/hcISCBbUQQDkEuf0fgapfC6NvFnvwxW2Dp4VoybtMdS3EjxC+3q2qQ=
X-Received: by 2002:a50:ade7:: with SMTP id b36mr6167252edd.215.1550215762452; Thu, 14 Feb 2019 23:29:22 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
From: Senthil Dhanaraj <senthil.dhanaraj.ietf@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2019 13:00:35 +0530
Message-ID: <CAG9=0bKW3ixi+eFvvuTUPe8tBihWahGvBp-nFvKAwMa5YQAn+w@mail.gmail.com>
To: BIER WG <bier@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000d8a38c0581e9bb59"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/bier/djxTq0D0D6w2oTKZDUWoraj1dx0>
Subject: [Bier] [BIER] Anycact BIER prefix and Conflict resolution
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: Fri, 15 Feb 2019 07:29:26 -0000

Hi all,

How about any-cast prefix being used as BIER prefix ? Example,,

RTA ---(Prefix P1, SD=0, Bfrid=, ...)---
                                       |
                                       |--- RTC
                                       |
RTB ---(Prefix P1, SD=0, Bfrid=, ...)---

(Note: RTA,RTB could be a BFR or BFER.)

1) Procedures @RTC for constructing BIFT?
2) If the BIER parameters advertised by RTA and RTB are different, how RTC
should resolve the conflict ?
3) How an ABR should leak the prefix with BIER TLVs to other area in above
cases?

I think, it is better we bring out different cases and standardize the
procedure (say draft-bier-conflict-resolution) to be followed to ensure
deterministic network behavior. Kindly let me know what y'all think.

Thanks,
Senthil

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email