Re: [Bier] BIER IPv6 Requirement

["Gengxuesong (Geng Xuesong)" <[e-mail]>]

Hi Gyan,

Sure, thanks for your work!
I will also go back to the previous comments from Greg to consider what could be modified.

Best Regards
Xuesong

From: Gyan Mishra [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Friday, August 21, 2020 4:22 AM
To: Greg Shepherd <[e-mail]>
Cc: Gengxuesong (Geng Xuesong) <[e-mail]>; [e-mail]; Mike McBride <[e-mail]>; [e-mail]
Subject: Re: [Bier] BIER IPv6 Requirement

Yes will do.

Thanks

Gyan

On Thu, Aug 20, 2020 at 3:55 PM Greg Shepherd <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
I had comments from a previous thread that need to be considered as well.

Shep
Sent from my iPhone


On Aug 20, 2020, at 08:53, Gyan Mishra <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:

Hi Xuesong

I am working on an update I will be posting to GitHub using Mikes version.

The main item I am updating is clarifying the BIER layers definition In the drawing and verbiage with the three layers so it’s crystal clear that we discussed in our understanding discussion.

Their were some comments that Alvaro mentioned so I am trying to address some of those as well.

I will be completed tomorrow and then you can update the draft with comments.

Mike has a -mm version that I am building on in GitHub link below.

 https://github.com/mmcbride7/bier-v6-requirements<https://github..com/mmcbride7/bier-v6-requirements>

Thanks

Gyan



On Thu, Aug 20, 2020 at 3:14 AM Gengxuesong (Geng Xuesong) <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:













Hi Mike, authors and WG,



I have read through the existing version of draft-ietf-bier-ipv6-requirements and the comments in the mailing list..  The concerns for this document mainly comes from three aspects:



1..

The problem statement: why we need BIER IPv6 solution (which I think is straight forward: we need solution(s) to deploy BIER in an IPv6 domain)



2..

The conceptual model for BIER IPv6 encapsulation (the existing model classification seems to be roughly agreed in the WG but the descriptions should be modified based on the comments)



3..

The requirement items and classification



I think the previous two points mainly request editing work and a document with some my personal recommended text could be found in the attachment just for your reference.

For the third point, I list the requirement items based on the existing discussions in the WG as follows:

Mandatory:



•

L2 Agnostic (may be removed)



•

Align to BIER architecture defined in RFC8279 (may be removed)



•

Support deployment with Non-BFR routers



•

Support OAM



•

Support overlay service, e.g., MVPN, EVPN

Optional:



•

Support native IPv6 functions, e.g., IPSEC, Fragmentation



•

Support inter-AS multicast deployment



•

Provide necessary security methods (may be removed)



I suggest to discuss and confirm these items in WG first, including what should be included/excluded, which one should be mandatory etc., then we could work on the detailed explanations for each

item.



Best Regards

Xuesong








_______________________________________________

BIER mailing list

[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>

https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bier
--

[图像已被发件人删除。]<http://www.verizon.com/>

Gyan Mishra

Network Solutions Architect

M 301 502-1347
13101 Columbia Pike
Silver Spring, MD

_______________________________________________
BIER mailing list
[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bier


--

[图像已被发件人删除。]<http://www.verizon.com/>

Gyan Mishra

Network Solutions Architect

M 301 502-1347
13101 Columbia Pike
Silver Spring, MD