Re: [Bier] In reply to the formal complaints

Greg Shepherd <gjshep@gmail.com> Tue, 29 June 2021 14:06 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 C311C3A3569 for <bier@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 29 Jun 2021 07:06:43 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.097
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 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, 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 vzZCL6dSeFp4 for <bier@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 29 Jun 2021 07:06:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ed1-x52b.google.com (mail-ed1-x52b.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::52b]) (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 09A363A3568 for <bier@ietf.org>; Tue, 29 Jun 2021 07:06:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ed1-x52b.google.com with SMTP id n25so4952495edw.9 for <bier@ietf.org>; Tue, 29 Jun 2021 07:06:38 -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=RY3T3IRbwA2YPQD+hYUC7ylolQCAm2THS63QaahRZGc=; b=oKH4eWmTtc67vafB8blML3/x698k8P2e9MCS0R9faTeNTYX/JcvSF95y/4mWgtpVWa RQuyBJLNzCfTsJ6zXoznWNNWDFMNROzF769qDx28yxjoJvbjB+wfDtNBOH51/hgVDB9J vPiSk0MoJ8tZAroGhkn1Awbo0xRwAnFxuOMpxLQCnu+XkeIObKhVTKCQjYC4PwsNQeZf i2ERuHWoc72k8V3K+xLNImrIKYMRV1YsW9WUG4L9YvmlD2TliLiZTVdO2g3MWlPkyg7b HjwPE1ecdagq1xVh7chze91uNsJZOmF/m3OyXYu5iFlxkIPUAW7mSPTEHLOTSs7KNG3t zrqg==
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=RY3T3IRbwA2YPQD+hYUC7ylolQCAm2THS63QaahRZGc=; b=TrJJSjeispu901/joQcYQkuTEuT8GiJrTQLI76vV30NyF7rmRiNXO0FD88sen0usMx LOwzyuXWsmd4h29WA9kuJDlL1db9CNvLTzefS+q3L1HD+XOzovOAsvHQBT+O7NmMZ6ap YekV3ox/DgZCz7sMQsaTwtSdY+8mWL2w3I/Ityb1WUIUskwLMuX8pP2bmrdO1PRhlpsC w2ZxeRVnJ95BckCaz2UsBNXuVeHkMoxVklPtCLIfNcgjUUHhk81ACo6XslUQTRdwpi+g K1wE9dMxGM1Ds0eIiUgWM613TcEglURnbOf+w/UZSGBU82yv1D/OYUS5V8Ij1VT0+ZF4 ybpg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533exfWjRsetn4j4Uu4VEZ6FhPGo+oOLIH0XVfwkQAkWNR0hhIYh SuuyBZyin9VQZlff2K9RUHVsFJzRRpP/MiuwYww=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJx1T9H32H476H1n0JJ+pj505QUepEZWbB0Uzd9ctUqN+2uoMv9R1oDJOBoTvlHZZZ9K7tto0oenmZOvLtrEys8=
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6402:1777:: with SMTP id da23mr39672958edb.72.1624975596452; Tue, 29 Jun 2021 07:06:36 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <a2a82830-faf2-0992-c4bf-b02cdb8e6e4c@nokia.com> <6509bf2874d94e0ca49d6a2a84bd9fed@huawei.com> <913d606b-31cf-18ab-1ed9-46918283a741@nokia.com> <BYAPR13MB2582B3EBCD5FB7F1C635A72FD00E9@BYAPR13MB2582.namprd13.prod.outlook.com>
In-Reply-To: <BYAPR13MB2582B3EBCD5FB7F1C635A72FD00E9@BYAPR13MB2582.namprd13.prod.outlook.com>
Reply-To: gjshep@gmail.com
From: Greg Shepherd <gjshep@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2021 07:06:25 -0700
Message-ID: <CABFReBqTC7m=M=Ric6EKGHacErvog6WFX2VpnL-4VP=9BDWvkA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Michael McBride <mmcbride@futurewei.com>
Cc: Martin Vigoureux <martin.vigoureux@nokia.com>, "Xiejingrong (Jingrong)" <xiejingrong@huawei.com>, "bier@ietf.org" <bier@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000031ff8205c5e81d9e"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/bier/i1p-6tyslU70SUmOyvYMpdiGdns>
Subject: Re: [Bier] In reply to the formal complaints
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: Tue, 29 Jun 2021 14:06:44 -0000

Mike,

Sorry for responding so quickly without taking the time to think this
through, again. My position on this draft is no secret, but let me clarify:
Inline GS:

On Wed, Jun 16, 2021 at 5:47 PM Michael McBride <mmcbride@futurewei.com>
wrote:

> Howdy,
>
> Le 2021-06-11 à 13:40, Xiejingrong (Jingrong) a écrit :
> > Dear Martin,
> >
> > We've responded to the summary from chairs on that thread. I think it
> reflects the key technical differences between us and the chairs.
> >>From chairs' point of view, BIERv6 violates BIER architecture, which is
> L2 in nature and should not be IPv6/SRv6 dependent.
> >>From our point of view, BIERv6 does not violate BIER architecture, which
> should be interpreted by RFC8279 text instead of other informal
> interpretation.
>
> >it appears to me that this is the discussion the WG needs to have and
> reach consensus on.
>
> My take from the chairs summary is that they believe BIERv6 is simply
> unnecessary, not that it violates the bier architecture.


GS - My position from the beginning is that it violates the BIER
architecture. I have been clear about this since rev 0. But, I have also
said that IF there was some compelling benefit from the proposal that it
should be considered. But it doesn't offer anything over standard
encapsulation. So, 'yes', it violates the BIER architecture, and 'yes' it
is unnecessary in that it doesn't provide any value over standard
encapsulation.

It is also my position that re-asking the same question in hopes to find
some crack to squeeze through is not operating in good-faith within the WG
or the IETF.

Please let me know if there's anything else I need to restate to make
clear. Again.

Thanks,
Greg


> There are many of us who believe using EH for the bitstring is a great use
> of IPv6 with bier. This was presented in 6man with positive feedback.
> Perhaps the time has come to propose this work in an IPv6 EH friendly WG?
>
> mike
>
> >
> > For the detailed technical points in the BIERv6 solution, we think they
> have been checked carefully in BIER WG and other WGs for long time, and
> have been proven by implementation and test.
> > Also there are solid requirements from industry to have well-adapted
> BIER solution in IPv6/SRv6 network.
> >
> > We seek for your guidance to move our work forward in IETF. We would
> like to propose two options about what should be done in the next step:
> > 1) Consider to adopt BIERv6 in BIER WG, if BIERv6 complies with BIER
> architecture.
> > 2) Move BIERv6 work to other WG, e.g., PIM or SPRING, if BIERv6 does not
> comply with BIER architecture.
> >
> > Thank you very much for your help.
> >
> > Jingrong
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: BIER [mailto:bier-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Martin
> > Vigoureux
> > Sent: Monday, May 31, 2021 9:29 PM
> > To: bier@ietf.org
> > Subject: [Bier] In reply to the formal complaints
> >
> > WG
> >
> > First, I'd like to apologize for the time this has taken.
> >
> > I have reviewed the two formal complaints that were sent early March,
> and I have also reviewed most of the e-mails that were sent on the bier
> mailing list for the past 12 months or so, relating to BIER and IPv6.
> >
> > I will not individually discuss the various points raised, rather I will
> make a general statement.
> >
> > It is my opinion that a certain number of points are not critical (in
> the sense of not needing an AD to step-in) and some typically happen
> sometimes as part of the life cycle of WGs. Yet, I do recognize that some
> points are more problematic than others.
> > Further, it is my opinion that the points listed may arise from a
> variety of intentions and as such it is hazardous to associate them with a
> particular one.
> > It is however my opinion that the multiplicity of concerns is, in
> itself, a concern.
> > I have talked with the chairs. They do recognize that, at some
> occasions, their communication was not the most effective one, and I trust
> they will pay attention to that in the future.
> >
> > About the adoption poll on draft-zhang-bier-bierin6. Although the way
> this was handled raised some concerns, I'd like to remind that an adoption
> poll is not formally part of our processes, even if it is common practice,
> and in fact it only marks the start of the WG discussion. As such, I have
> little arguments to go back on this.
> >
> > The last part is about the progress of a so-called BIER v6 solution.
> > Here, I have asked the chairs to establish a summary of the discussions
> regarding that type of solution in general and regarding the specific
> document which proposes a solution. They should publish it some time after
> this e-mail.
> >
> > Following that, it is my expectation that the WG has a fair and open
> discussion, ideally focussing on the general aspects, and then concludes on
> the way forward.
> >
> >
> > Martin
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > BIER mailing list
> > BIER@ietf.org
> > https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.
> > ietf.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fbier&amp;data=04%7C01%7Cmmcbride%40fut
> > urewei.com%7C251aa4cc378a4f70fee008d92f2c3757%7C0fee8ff2a3b240189c753a
> > 1d5591fedc%7C1%7C0%7C637592689222267034%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIj
> > oiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&am
> > p;sdata=ng78EEFJ0jNyOSdkvfv4Ic6xB3%2FpZkfY66Q%2BWdGZfIk%3D&amp;reserve
> > d=0
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> BIER mailing list
> BIER@ietf.org
>
> https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ietf.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fbier&amp;data=04%7C01%7Cmmcbride%40futurewei.com%7C251aa4cc378a4f70fee008d92f2c3757%7C0fee8ff2a3b240189c753a1d5591fedc%7C1%7C0%7C637592689222277027%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&amp;sdata=dcV1PufJOI0NEKjONjsDIKK3Ib7%2BBF7xiHasDrnGTQs%3D&amp;reserved=0
>
> _______________________________________________
> BIER mailing list
> BIER@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bier
>