IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Bier] Meeting Notes 110

Greg Mirsky <gregimirsky@gmail.com> Wed, 10 March 2021 22:45 UTC

Return-Path: <gregimirsky@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 F1DB13A0853 for <bier@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 10 Mar 2021 14:45:52 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.096
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.096 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_BLOCKED=0.001, 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 NcUyP6hQBoFN for <bier@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 10 Mar 2021 14:45:51 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-lf1-x132.google.com (mail-lf1-x132.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::132]) (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 B9BDA3A084C for <bier@ietf.org>; Wed, 10 Mar 2021 14:45:50 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-lf1-x132.google.com with SMTP id u4so36409304lfs.0 for <bier@ietf.org>; Wed, 10 Mar 2021 14:45:50 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=49UJZjL9L0Miw+sUyw/J27sfiRajl7sBClQ4sG+XY7c=; b=njksHTod+bSRjuJIkRk6i4XIylMroZ92JeGvU1XRbXIiXE45QjPQO8FBgvbPAWxgZn P0Nmxu25Tiq3tp9LjYcYJazYboGIfAuGtNiX2H1b/QhH1lyhU8fQTBbAsWirYjDwT+jO peKZgMFsQ0g6RH/jUwFYxB7Zevzrhn/W82bzqJOEeyv8FszTOT05zU4gktbUueiJkDy5 aXbLtZi227dtEJpGhm0cojhEhbuOwhJIRzSgFHhWGHhStlI87JE0SQvlsewWEal4ojYl jQiuOQKPlHry9xx3uMw5CbyElHWCCvjb6Zuc1OPmbBWhm6stwlj7rgDBnNpP3Tw/4Ohv MjOg==
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:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=49UJZjL9L0Miw+sUyw/J27sfiRajl7sBClQ4sG+XY7c=; b=An5FUcUOgUba26tW0tUcFlZcN8CGmS6sD27OVdpiSERUh3SRi8gctYVl9sIl7woQFn UiZEEQgBbkDBrPSyLZaIwCGm5G3VaZIVn/jFcqc+iIi33DqTyPrvQwQU4GVyjCzMW3nP gWsjukhZ7NSn40xVAnF3ddrqdpcZVKjReMd6gY/n4yFM8at+Q+upqYQF8UbRPv5aT5l3 tHvsMsjrWHHSXcOFJnzLb6n8htec1U9VOttepezfprQUxocomWzVqpGJi67HFAcB+7Y7 UuSMJW3+Dugmfyr3IC+y9IkQ90g86v3CWPmm2+0Oj74+SonD3EJ3u3uKxJ5JIbpLIW4L I2lA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533mHeuGKTwqpdg1+CCIMLZdJqbUs5bP7BLbwm5TtHgQmJ/X1S4k ETQZUOu5MOyKv7779cV6U/ID7DHQ7I8imPs9GtU=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJz2EvIFm8guZbUfqDmn/yo5R2Gwr4DRwoZUEnRGIql6GSBmT6fF/dXo8dyUiDdBJ+WWa2OgL82uIEwx+ELA+aQ=
X-Received: by 2002:ac2:5e62:: with SMTP id a2mr442894lfr.385.1615416347741; Wed, 10 Mar 2021 14:45:47 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CA+wi2hPuNL6BCAtwoVdYLf7s_NrqA91xO2w3HisP58Y5+PPxCw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CA+wi2hPuNL6BCAtwoVdYLf7s_NrqA91xO2w3HisP58Y5+PPxCw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Greg Mirsky <gregimirsky@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2021 14:45:36 -0800
Message-ID: <CA+RyBmW80w6ddnHVJvBcH+WOmmiVA-=2Ye=-nc2pWZoR4u7EVg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Tony Przygienda <tonysietf@gmail.com>
Cc: BIER WG <bier@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000092523205bd366d43"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/bier/pyaSUSmS4Lc-T4AuCH9AG6IE5ic>
Subject: Re: [Bier] Meeting Notes 110
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: Wed, 10 Mar 2021 22:45:53 -0000

Hi Tony,
thank you for taking notes and sharing them with the group.
Asking for a volunteer to shepherd draft-ietf-bier-path-mtu-discovery was
one of the points I've wanted to convey in the presentation. Other points:

   - Would the WG decide to publish the BIER OAM requirements document or
   let it expire and use it as an informative reference in BIER OAM solution
   documents?
   - Authors of draft-ietf-bier-pmmm-oam worked on addressing comments
   received in the AD Review. Much appreciate the feedback from AD.
   - Ready to work with Shepherds of all BIER OAM drafts to progress
   documents.

Regards,
Greg

On Tue, Mar 9, 2021 at 6:14 AM Tony Przygienda <tonysietf@gmail.com> wrote:

> BIER Session Minutes Mar, 9, 2021
>
>
> Draft Tethering Egress Protection Update
> ========================================
>
> Huaimo: Should we have a dedicated document to egress protection only?
> Chairs: Yes, possibly good idea, let's go to the list and find consensus
> on that.
>
> BIER Implementation
> ===================
>
> Discussion on research networks & different implemenations
>
> MLD
> ===
>
> WG LC: 8 in favor, goes to the list
>
> MLDP
> ====
>
> Adopted already, call for any additional comments
>
> WG LC: 5 in favor, goes to the list
>
> OAM
> ===
>
> Calls for shepherds
>
> Hooman: Shepherds path-mtu-discovery
>
> TE Drafts (egress & FRR)
> ========================
>
> no further discussion
>
> BIER FRR
> ========
>
> Adoption: 8 for, 1 against
> Greg: too much state
> Tony P: we already have this state with IGP anyway
> Hooman: is that just IGP protection nexthop?
> Huaimo: we have FRR table for the nexthop
> Thorless: sender/receivers do not change state so it's BIER
> Hooman: but we'll have interop confusion about differnt FRR
> Tony P: draft probably has to be very explicit about what happens when IGP
> is signalling and in which cases you use this solution and what happens in
> case of overlaps
>
>
> INGRESS PROTECTION
> ==================
>
> Huaimo: why detect failures nodes in the middle?
> Greg/Sandy: it's the same as ingress protection. only mechanism we have is
> p2mp BFD
> Call for Adoption: 9 to 0, take to the list
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> BIER mailing list
> BIER@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bier
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email