IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [CCAMP] Network Assigned Upstream Label - Draft Update

Igor Bryskin <IBryskin@advaoptical.com> Fri, 28 February 2014 15:04 UTC

Return-Path: <IBryskin@advaoptical.com>
X-Original-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 84C671A0819 for <ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 28 Feb 2014 07:04:27 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.446
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.446 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.547] autolearn=ham
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 7EUopquaOcuv for <ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 28 Feb 2014 07:04:24 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail3.advaoptical.com (mail3.advaoptical.com [74.202.24.82]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 66A211A081D for <ccamp@ietf.org>; Fri, 28 Feb 2014 07:04:24 -0800 (PST)
Received: from atl-srv-mail10.atl.advaoptical.com (atl-srv-mail10.atl.advaoptical.com [172.16.5.39]) by atl-vs-fsmail.advaoptical.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id s1SF4JpD032088 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Fri, 28 Feb 2014 10:04:19 -0500
Received: from ATL-SRV-MAIL10.atl.advaoptical.com ([fe80::c4d6:b136:bc16:77ae]) by atl-srv-mail10.atl.advaoptical.com ([fe80::c4d6:b136:bc16:77ae%17]) with mapi id 14.03.0174.001; Fri, 28 Feb 2014 10:04:19 -0500
From: Igor Bryskin <IBryskin@advaoptical.com>
To: "Zafar Ali (zali)" <zali@cisco.com>, Vishnu Pavan Beeram <vishnupavan@gmail.com>, "Giovanni Martinelli (giomarti)" <giomarti@cisco.com>
Thread-Topic: [CCAMP] Network Assigned Upstream Label - Draft Update
Thread-Index: AQHPMdsl0nyzjldrhEutv4HHhP94LJrGIV6AgAAgTgCABC0SgIAAghAAgAAHuACAABbVgIAADEgA//+sWlA=
Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2014 15:04:18 +0000
Message-ID: <CDAC6F6F5401B245A2C68D0CF8AFDF0A403D1B03@atl-srv-mail10.atl.advaoptical.com>
References: <CA+YzgTvd+U9o69k2b+yW6PTK+0FPN1HNEZTt3zoHH=6aHmSsjQ@mail.gmail.com> <CF3608F3.9E0AC%zali@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <CF3608F3.9E0AC%zali@cisco.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [172.21.1.111]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_CDAC6F6F5401B245A2C68D0CF8AFDF0A403D1B03atlsrvmail10atl_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:5.11.87, 1.0.14, 0.0.0000 definitions=2014-02-28_04:2014-02-28, 2014-02-28, 1970-01-01 signatures=0
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ccamp/snFueWmJ6MqbLTR8GLls-LD6TY0
Cc: "ccamp@ietf.org" <ccamp@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [CCAMP] Network Assigned Upstream Label - Draft Update
X-BeenThere: ccamp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion list for the CCAMP working group <ccamp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ccamp>, <mailto:ccamp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ccamp/>
List-Post: <mailto:ccamp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ccamp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ccamp>, <mailto:ccamp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2014 15:04:27 -0000

Zafar,
As of today the label set object cannot govern label selection for the upstream label. You need either:

a)      Notion of label-symmetrical bidirectional LSPs or

b)      Notion of upstream label set
None of this defined in the documents you refer to.

Igor

From: CCAMP [mailto:ccamp-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Zafar Ali (zali)
Sent: Friday, February 28, 2014 10:00 AM
To: Vishnu Pavan Beeram; Giovanni Martinelli (giomarti)
Cc: ccamp@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [CCAMP] Network Assigned Upstream Label - Draft Update

Hi Pavan:

The acceptable label set is picked from the label set (e.g., one of the labels from the label set). So it's not a compromised solution. It works and is deployed.

Thanks

Regards ... Zafar

From: Vishnu Pavan Beeram <vishnupavan@gmail.com<mailto:vishnupavan@gmail.com>>
Date: Friday, February 28, 2014 9:16 AM
To: "Giovanni Martinelli (giomarti)" <giomarti@cisco.com<mailto:giomarti@cisco.com>>
Cc: zali <zali@cisco.com<mailto:zali@cisco.com>>, "ccamp@ietf.org<mailto:ccamp@ietf.org>" <ccamp@ietf.org<mailto:ccamp@ietf.org>>
Subject: Re: [CCAMP] Network Assigned Upstream Label - Draft Update

Giovanni, Hi!

Can you please elaborate on why you think the LABEL_SET having good labels help in this context/argument? If the upstream-node doesn't guess right (when picking the upstream-label), you'll get a PATH-ERR back with the ACCEPTABLE_LABEL_SET. And this would happen for every setup request. Wouldn't you call this a compromised solution?

Regards,
-Pavan

On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 7:54 AM, Giovanni Martinelli (giomarti) <giomarti@cisco.com<mailto:giomarti@cisco.com>> wrote:
Hi Vishnu,

On 28 Feb 2014, at 13:26, Vishnu Pavan Beeram <vishnupavan@gmail.com<mailto:vishnupavan@gmail.com>> wrote:


(2) The use of Label-Set/Acceptable Label-Set was meant to be used for exceptions. Using it always for every setup request is a compromised solution.


At the time we discussed the wson signaling (http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ccamp-wson-signaling-06), the acceptable label set was considered good enough. Not sure it comes into play at every request since your label_set should have reasonably good labels.

Cheers
G

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email