Re: [Bier] Call for adoption: draft-hj-bier-ldp-signaling

"IJsbrand Wijnands (iwijnand)" <iwijnand@cisco.com> Fri, 25 January 2019 20:21 UTC

Return-Path: <iwijnand@cisco.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 9D62E130F07 for <bier@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 25 Jan 2019 12:21:52 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.643
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.643 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.142, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.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 jZsXBK3oCfO6 for <bier@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 25 Jan 2019 12:21:50 -0800 (PST)
Received: from alln-iport-2.cisco.com (alln-iport-2.cisco.com [173.37.142.89]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C776D130F09 for <bier@ietf.org>; Fri, 25 Jan 2019 12:21:41 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=3442; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1548447701; x=1549657301; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-id:content-transfer-encoding: mime-version; bh=7kSRPPq0rJyGYn7oDwJpoRstKd3WPbMP/yxvFXk1jG0=; b=izdY66Ipjbmk58+623k51rfeTMQ2sWm6NUjcNLNurtRdnnZ79qoMiMIe FLfTWRDp1ACm8+KtAPxZyyHWhcYhvkTny8q71K8HIPZLGi8W26ld4SmWJ RAbsPdSEPGLKqSv86Cb5pI3GufuOgLrTgN66CDz7QlJ/JdbpSbozHq+3l I=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0ADAAABb0tc/4kNJK1kGQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQcBAQEBAQGBUQQBAQEBAQsBggNngQMnCoN3iBqLdoFoJZgHgXsLAQEYC4RJAheCcyI0CQ0BAwEBAgEBAm0cDIVKAQEBAQIBAQEbBhEzBwsFCwIBCBEEAQEBAgIjAwICAiULFAEICAIEAQ0FG4MHAYF5CA+qYYEvhEJBQIRrBYELizYXgUA/gRABJwwTgkyDHgEBAwGCA4JjMYImAqI4CQKHKop+GIFqhTSDO4dOihOFJYtmAhEUgScfOIFWcBU7KgGCQYsdhT4BQTGKD4EfAQE
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.56,522,1539648000"; d="scan'208";a="231317384"
Received: from alln-core-4.cisco.com ([173.36.13.137]) by alln-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 25 Jan 2019 20:21:40 +0000
Received: from XCH-RCD-006.cisco.com (xch-rcd-006.cisco.com [173.37.102.16]) by alln-core-4.cisco.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id x0PKLefd025898 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Fri, 25 Jan 2019 20:21:40 GMT
Received: from xch-rcd-009.cisco.com (173.37.102.19) by XCH-RCD-006.cisco.com (173.37.102.16) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1395.4; Fri, 25 Jan 2019 14:21:39 -0600
Received: from xch-rcd-009.cisco.com ([173.37.102.19]) by XCH-RCD-009.cisco.com ([173.37.102.19]) with mapi id 15.00.1395.000; Fri, 25 Jan 2019 14:21:40 -0600
From: "IJsbrand Wijnands (iwijnand)" <iwijnand@cisco.com>
To: BIER WG <bier@ietf.org>, "gjshep@gmail.com" <gjshep@gmail.com>
CC: "Jeffrey (Zhaohui) Zhang" <zzhang@juniper.net>
Thread-Topic: [Bier] Call for adoption: draft-hj-bier-ldp-signaling
Thread-Index: AQHUtNoAqO9xTS65gEGK/8WHHq8sMqXAwL4AgAARSoA=
Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2019 20:21:40 +0000
Message-ID: <A06F9963-E156-4363-B725-A4585E841317@cisco.com>
References: <CABFReBrQj+hMYd7JxuxQ-VbxAgB1SakGgaNcX+rQWNOFJ4hPtg@mail.gmail.com> <CO2PR05MB245537F2CA6097F54B7CC1BED49B0@CO2PR05MB2455.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
In-Reply-To: <CO2PR05MB245537F2CA6097F54B7CC1BED49B0@CO2PR05MB2455.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [10.60.202.91]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-ID: <4F9B597ED4FB7449B17AA948C1E5E590@emea.cisco.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Outbound-SMTP-Client: 173.37.102.16, xch-rcd-006.cisco.com
X-Outbound-Node: alln-core-4.cisco.com
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/bier/jIJU8w-DqfIKSSzgHxzu29jSsLA>
Subject: Re: [Bier] Call for adoption: draft-hj-bier-ldp-signaling
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, 25 Jan 2019 20:21:53 -0000

The problem that this draft attempts to solve is something that is worth to be addressed. However, based on the discussions I’ve had with various people last IETF, I don’t see us converging on the solution as documented in this draft. As Jeffrey explain, there are other ways to solve the problem with are fundamentally different as to what is documented in this draft and need to be discussed in the WG. I’m against adoption of this draft because of that reason.

Thx,

Ice.

> On 25 Jan 2019, at 20:19, Jeffrey (Zhaohui) Zhang <zzhang@juniper.net> wrote:
> 
> There were quite some offline discussions on this, and I don’t think we’re ready to adopt this draft yet.
> 
>  
> 
> There are basically three options to signal mLDP over a BIER core:
> 
>  
> 
> 	• RFC7060 mLDP over Targeted sessions
> 	• BGP-MVPN/GTM with mLDP as the PE-CE protocol
> 	• This draft-hj
>  
> 
> #1 is already a RFC and can be easily applied to a BIER core.
> 
> For #2, RFC6514 already covers mLDP as PE-CE protocol. Now with a BIER core, the only difference is that the provider tunnel is BIER. Although draft-ietf-bier-mvpn talks about (C-S/*,C-G), other than that all the procedures apply to mLDP as PE-CE protocol. All we need to do is to extend GTM RFC7716 (global table multicast with BGP-MVPN) to cover mLDP as the access protocol.
> 
>  
> 
> #3 converts hard state LDP label mapping/withdraw into soft state messages carried in BIER. To me that just does not make sense.
> 
> One reason given for doing #3 is that operators would not want to run LDP session over the core. I am not yet convinced on that – on the border routers you need to run LDP on the access interfaces anyway, I really don’t see the concern with running targeted session over the core.
> 
>  
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> Jeffrey
> 
>  
> 
> From: BIER [mailto:bier-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Greg Shepherd
> Sent: Friday, January 25, 2019 1:15 PM
> To: BIER WG <bier@ietf.org>
> Subject: [Bier] Call for adoption: draft-hj-bier-ldp-signaling
> 
>  
> 
> Please read and reply to this thread with your vote for/against adoption of:
> 
>  
> 
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-hj-bier-mldp-signaling/
> 
>  
> 
> ..as a BIER WG document.
> 
>  
> 
> This starts a two week counter.
> 
>  
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Chairs
> 
> (Shep)
> 
> _______________________________________________
> BIER mailing list
> BIER@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bier