Re: [Bier] Deborah Brungard's Block on charter-ietf-bier-01-06: (with BLOCK)

Antoni Przygienda <prz@juniper.net> Thu, 22 February 2018 02:06 UTC

Return-Path: <prz@juniper.net>
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 F36ED12E6A3; Wed, 21 Feb 2018 18:06:27 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.7
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, 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=juniper.net
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 qHuKzFXA0HC2; Wed, 21 Feb 2018 18:06:26 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mx0a-00273201.pphosted.com (mx0a-00273201.pphosted.com [208.84.65.16]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 006E5126C83; Wed, 21 Feb 2018 18:06:25 -0800 (PST)
Received: from pps.filterd (m0108159.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-00273201.pphosted.com (8.16.0.22/8.16.0.22) with SMTP id w1M1XkXc011488; Wed, 21 Feb 2018 17:33:46 -0800
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=juniper.net; h=from : to : cc : subject : date : message-id : references : in-reply-to : content-type : content-id : content-transfer-encoding : mime-version; s=PPS1017; bh=94tsHrLnZxwWEi8ARQ3gKSIyh3KBoW9sXklsMQ/cPC0=; b=LaUMylGoRAUSmbS5tYOQwW/8Qb6Gj9VpZD2Jny3e1Bu0/Z2taonTm8EFDvaikEu+uv7h IdhK1U3rzFSx7hFdJV5bI6zdK3nkQ2TIvD1i8UIITgo+AT776q8Ma0JDxmqUyAlROLRF 9nPCZ/ELRWvRZ1QC5kz8fCCuXUB3jDPDdb3G58C3tdXbWQD3AcnkjZs1Fa+xXZlnYjZ9 tRscsZZ1HISjAKiQFbcshlpV/boH88/IOZ9SGihrrABuVF05AKpaOzZvX9qOaJeMTpid RZa21E1G1lxugZKFykBerGNoyUsxPj7ApMfz4HOvR4ZSiVWXdQssBBKAOgr/P6Y3+Efv VQ==
Received: from nam02-cy1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-cys01nam02lp0056.outbound.protection.outlook.com [207.46.163.56]) by mx0a-00273201.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2g9m6n80d7-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 21 Feb 2018 17:33:46 -0800
Received: from CY1PR05MB2506.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.167.10.27) by CY1PR05MB1993.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.162.216.27) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.527.6; Thu, 22 Feb 2018 01:33:44 +0000
Received: from CY1PR05MB2506.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([10.167.10.27]) by CY1PR05MB2506.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([10.167.10.27]) with mapi id 15.20.0527.017; Thu, 22 Feb 2018 01:33:44 +0000
From: Antoni Przygienda <prz@juniper.net>
To: Deborah Brungard <db3546@att.com>, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
CC: "bier-chairs@ietf.org" <bier-chairs@ietf.org>, "bier@ietf.org" <bier@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: Deborah Brungard's Block on charter-ietf-bier-01-06: (with BLOCK)
Thread-Index: AQHTq3mpVw0EbLWTRkClxnyk9ztNbKOvHUoA
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2018 01:33:44 +0000
Message-ID: <B5A29621-B66F-4806-8122-D635668A6FFE@juniper.net>
References: <151926171240.21109.8042886067471225222.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
In-Reply-To: <151926171240.21109.8042886067471225222.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/f.20.0.170309
x-originating-ip: [66.129.239.15]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; CY1PR05MB1993; 7:ZxXJ33hk4nVdhEBb/GwkeR16ibB1WTxHQ7Z9Eiql3garq7G5rut3YaIzKShr1B9fJc/3ssBQo/70N4w1hKpcBkq4o0edn+GB9Iwj8DLJ7CnfFd8VrAOaI4IfXpC7Pvujvqw7NR7OZRSXJrnLFF4iOngA47CZ0q32QipJhC/TFuFchIIMnT7sRpYkm9/8DfrbivPYSVDsscq+dwMjti5Vkg1aUGijgl188/ytmPsGyNmJyBX/QY44DXvPUZ8J9yXi
x-ms-exchange-antispam-srfa-diagnostics: SSOS;
x-ms-office365-filtering-ht: Tenant
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 8944d363-8fe5-45c7-93bd-08d579944fdd
x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(7020095)(4652020)(48565401081)(4534165)(4627221)(201703031133081)(201702281549075)(5600026)(4604075)(3008032)(2017052603307)(7153060)(7193020); SRVR:CY1PR05MB1993;
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: CY1PR05MB1993:
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <CY1PR05MB19931B175759818B1E754156ACCD0@CY1PR05MB1993.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:(190756311086443)(10436049006162)(97927398514766);
x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(6040501)(2401047)(5005006)(8121501046)(93006095)(93001095)(3002001)(10201501046)(3231101)(944501161)(6055026)(6041288)(20161123558120)(20161123564045)(20161123560045)(201703131423095)(201702281528075)(20161123555045)(201703061421075)(201703061406153)(20161123562045)(6072148)(201708071742011); SRVR:CY1PR05MB1993; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:CY1PR05MB1993;
x-forefront-prvs: 059185FE08
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(346002)(396003)(39860400002)(376002)(366004)(39380400002)(37854004)(199004)(189003)(4326008)(305945005)(86362001)(2950100002)(575784001)(26005)(2900100001)(8936002)(81166006)(8676002)(59450400001)(68736007)(102836004)(186003)(6506007)(83716003)(66066001)(3280700002)(81156014)(33656002)(58126008)(54906003)(110136005)(316002)(5660300001)(36756003)(7736002)(2906002)(53936002)(76176011)(6306002)(6512007)(6246003)(99286004)(3660700001)(6486002)(105586002)(478600001)(97736004)(3846002)(6436002)(106356001)(82746002)(6116002)(966005)(77096007)(25786009)(14454004)(229853002)(42262002); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:CY1PR05MB1993; H:CY1PR05MB2506.namprd05.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; A:1; MX:1; LANG:en;
received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: juniper.net does not designate permitted sender hosts)
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: NWix73wtTRbjtO85/6JvbgXEdfOEXzmvkQVansQlsgFGXujidOjYIJ65AmhpALBuXczoTbuZTBUmtRy157qrY6bFLsT0ZbkrZz/BpW3CwDMf4QjxH9/sEy360eIr3I7msWDo+yZ7/mmYDjJydEhUJ/agaO1bKh5YNBB8BUE2R2k=
spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:99
spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-ID: <A10D8FC4D24CDE42A857FE4C5ED86E34@namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: juniper.net
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 8944d363-8fe5-45c7-93bd-08d579944fdd
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 22 Feb 2018 01:33:44.4522 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: bea78b3c-4cdb-4130-854a-1d193232e5f4
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: CY1PR05MB1993
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:, , definitions=2018-02-21_09:, , signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_spam_notspam policy=outbound_spam score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1011 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 impostorscore=0 mlxlogscore=808 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1711220000 definitions=main-1802220019
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/bier/vgVi-p3VC_0aNsS5Cai_9veOhEg>
Subject: Re: [Bier] Deborah Brungard's Block on charter-ietf-bier-01-06: (with BLOCK)
X-BeenThere: bier@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: Thu, 22 Feb 2018 02:06:28 -0000

In fact, quite interesting observation and thanks for putting the finger on it, Deborah. 

To throw a further related observation in, I just quote something recently put out that came from discussions with people looking @ applicability of BIER in new service planning roadmaps. 

“
   Suggested traffic engineering architecture for BIER
   [I-D.ietf-bier-te-arch] offers a very limited scalability only.  It
   would be desirable to subject BIER to proper TE point-to-multipoint
   computation.  Albeit BIER results can be shaped with multi topology
   again, a computation including TE metrics and constraints and maybe
   even multicast specific metrics like node fanouts could introduce a
   distributed, scalable TE for BIER.  Such a computation could be
   performed in a centralized fashion of course and resulting BIFTs
   downloaded to routers as well but such an approach is outside the
   scope of this document.
“

I am agnostic whether this really means something like RSVP-TE computation albeit I observe that BIER being inherently bi-directional mp2mp technology may seem to precondition something different computation-wise @ first look. 

I don’t even say it is practically achievable and I surely don’t say who/which group should/may be chartered to do anything like that or even be chartered to do it at all. 

It is just that BIER as great it is right now awakens desires to TE it ;-) which in a sense goes counter its minimum-state-in-network possibly and it may merit discussing it out. 

As long it was an experimental duckling things weren’t that important, if it moves STD now I think contemplating where it should and is allowed to go if it’s able to is worth doing …  

Thanks

--- tony
 

<db3546@att.com> spake:

    Deborah Brungard has entered the following ballot position for
    charter-ietf-bier-01-06: Block
    
    When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
    email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
    introductory paragraph, however.)
    
    
    
    The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
    https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__datatracker.ietf.org_doc_charter-2Dietf-2Dbier_&d=DwICaQ&c=HAkYuh63rsuhr6Scbfh0UjBXeMK-ndb3voDTXcWzoCI&r=maKXfKzgRTpiLitqHnJiww&m=a2Y6gmdaqrJECBifS1ZwCJhkY3fp1vEOFkB28zxrrjI&s=m-IDoUf3yXpmLJJQSMRR8c_rg8lxBCcI96ZaC-mVO6E&e=
    
    
    
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------
    BLOCK:
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    While a Discuss, this should be simple to address as I think it's a bit of a misnomer
    which Alvaro has already noted.
    About:
    "8) BIER Traffic Engineering: Definition of an architecture, and
       specification of the associated technology, for a BIER-based
       mechanism to support traffic engineering."
    
    Looking at the wg draft (which it seems this new charter item is based on),
    the draft says:
    "It does support traffic engineering by explicit hop-by-hop forwarding"
    and "it is more similar to SR than RSVP-TE".
    
    So it is not TE, it is explicit forwarding. As Alvaro noted, this should not
    be identified in the charter as TE. I don't see any need for this new item to
    be in the charter (as Alvaro noted).
    
    This is a Discuss because if this is not a simple misnomer, then this work
    clashes with TEAS. TEAS is chartered and responsible for "Traffic-engineering
    architectures for generic applicability across packet and non-packet networks.
    This includes both networks that include the use of PCE and those that do not."