IETF Logo Mail Archive

[Dcrouting] draft-przygienda-rift-03

Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net> Thu, 11 January 2018 09:30 UTC

Return-Path: <rraszuk@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: dcrouting@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dcrouting@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4AD4512EAD2; Thu, 11 Jan 2018 01:30:10 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.399
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.399 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.25, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no 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 lkVx0_wrXYd6; Thu, 11 Jan 2018 01:30:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-wr0-x22c.google.com (mail-wr0-x22c.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c0c::22c]) (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 D4B1912EAC4; Thu, 11 Jan 2018 01:30:02 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-wr0-x22c.google.com with SMTP id f8so1559890wre.4; Thu, 11 Jan 2018 01:30:02 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:sender:from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=kh8T7brrv/cjhjR3OTaVmYAvcRZYJ+BCUuJ8lf9m7ps=; b=lzdbeFPNe0CGQSHrqbDeVhv7OV3PbN+iIYIzgMBBq0SZue6/+eWy/GACahvDIgFQu2 rAv2rKJGQp0l0PYAsy/SzRc0HO7nqpxQq7p1nEUBn2bTl+75fGbl4qpyIUpj9Natgdma sh1llgUskEJtelne6QdzqAd8O+arehmoB2wYZPm7gVNwUIumbFcaKDP665oW929sZ8eN Qc9bH0pSibr3Iuyf2S+ZSQAkXDT/S1vAqE7MfpP+fdbCe++Tir8hzO9oRVRvMQLKQE02 Y/IwyPuGXpxX7LeVUeK8h1YCsavehDvBpRWmLkW++S9dbBQg69nt2uc1ZJ57PmfjFEmH wSgg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:from:date:message-id:subject :to:cc; bh=kh8T7brrv/cjhjR3OTaVmYAvcRZYJ+BCUuJ8lf9m7ps=; b=igaBGZttTe1RW8hDBkQzQmwP48DgNHFVNKo4Udu2OKDQWbHHfeJbHGMRVW1fwftZCx HTQgZLPUZNL2ou71kq49pZMOGKR6+0bXp7GJp1qDqYcZY0WGB+I7lrqC5i/DBW/c63mt f37NZHqaKVOUg0Q29PPaVq5up2JVQH3+WyOLDMh9Ze1qRczgMAOTXOjxnkFCuIweXmgI gFcVQpkybSsGRxFCviaXi68VFFagp4wFzKcphvNDyhDo635mIk+i/HbUY+DyrJr4M67Q OviW9LqzmhKmiA/3InIHMdesc1cIAtxwJtpFKIa0x9dqBraeo3bHNBXXvN5aULwNzOvS zmbQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AKGB3mIS5vWi8b4EuljH9cFfSyn2yjgCbT4g+U3KW48Jzt7OZO20KE1S 9J0EffnjSoD5vttGpxd86sEXOWsM+YU0vseFhycBPA==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACJfBouGfOqpROp74qVWV2bAPOh1k9+n/jJnzJbnwG8gHj3iTZTMXxEPccQQ3ct2PCtfRTj9wyF90HY7n4f5VyTHuew=
X-Received: by 10.223.162.138 with SMTP id s10mr18444858wra.239.1515663000744; Thu, 11 Jan 2018 01:30:00 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: rraszuk@gmail.com
Received: by 10.28.24.71 with HTTP; Thu, 11 Jan 2018 01:30:00 -0800 (PST)
From: Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net>
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2018 10:30:00 +0100
X-Google-Sender-Auth: J8FHB4iM-Aawfk291TNE-C289v0
Message-ID: <CA+b+ERnOc7V7+OL2wsfZsRsdSpjeSQmQQdH7SX_WLbySaVtxKw@mail.gmail.com>
To: rift@ietf.org
Cc: spring@ietf.org, dcrouting@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="f403045e97f8c2381405627cca15"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dcrouting/ICZVOGW_MzJbOlnaeI7b69yXChE>
Subject: [Dcrouting] draft-przygienda-rift-03
X-BeenThere: dcrouting@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Routing in the Data Center: discussions about problems, requirements and potential solutions." <dcrouting.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dcrouting>, <mailto:dcrouting-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dcrouting/>
List-Post: <mailto:dcrouting@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dcrouting-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dcrouting>, <mailto:dcrouting-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2018 09:30:10 -0000

Hi,

I have one little question/doubt on scalability point of RIFT ...

Assume that someone would like to signal IPv6 prefix SID for Segment
Routing in the underlay within RIFT.

Wouldn't it result in amount of protocol state in full analogy to massive
deaggregation - which as of today is designed to be very careful and
limited operation only at moments of failure(s) ?

I sort of find it a bit surprising that RIFT draft does not provide
encoding for SID distribution when it is positioned as an alternative to
other protocols (IGPs or BGP) which already provide ability to carry all
types of SIDs.

Cheers,
Robert.

PS1: Horizontal links which were discussed could be installed to offload
from fabric transit massive amount of data (ex: storage mirroring) directly
between leafs or L3 TORs and not to be treated as "backup".

PS2: Restricting any protocol to specific topologies seems like pretty
slippery slope to me. In any case if protocol does that it should also
contain self detection mechanism of "unsupported topology" and flash red
light in any NOC.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email