IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Detnet-dp-dt] Quick notes from 4/11/17 call

Jiangyuanlong <jiangyuanlong@huawei.com> Thu, 13 April 2017 01:31 UTC

Return-Path: <jiangyuanlong@huawei.com>
X-Original-To: detnet-dp-dt@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: detnet-dp-dt@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E9361287A5 for <detnet-dp-dt@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 12 Apr 2017 18:31:17 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.221
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.221 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 9LNKBxYngCgO for <detnet-dp-dt@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 12 Apr 2017 18:31:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [194.213.3.17]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6C508126C7B for <Detnet-dp-dt@ietf.org>; Wed, 12 Apr 2017 18:31:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from 172.18.7.190 (EHLO LHREML710-CAH.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.7.190]) by lhrrg01-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.3.7-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id DKU63601; Thu, 13 Apr 2017 01:31:12 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from DGGEML406-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.3.17.50) by LHREML710-CAH.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.33) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.301.0; Thu, 13 Apr 2017 02:31:11 +0100
Received: from DGGEML507-MBX.china.huawei.com ([169.254.2.240]) by dggeml406-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.3.17.50]) with mapi id 14.03.0301.000; Thu, 13 Apr 2017 09:31:02 +0800
From: Jiangyuanlong <jiangyuanlong@huawei.com>
To: Jouni Korhonen <jouni.korhonen@broadcom.com>
CC: "Detnet-dp-dt@ietf.org" <Detnet-dp-dt@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [Detnet-dp-dt] Quick notes from 4/11/17 call
Thread-Index: AQHSs8xgln3qLVDvf0eVaUwGH41kzqHCfaug
Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2017 01:31:01 +0000
Message-ID: <3B0A1BED22CAD649A1B3E97BE5DDD68BBB527CE7@dggeml507-mbx.china.huawei.com>
References: <E4C018B0-436B-4CAF-94EE-D11646B0CCD8@broadcom.com>
In-Reply-To: <E4C018B0-436B-4CAF-94EE-D11646B0CCD8@broadcom.com>
Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US
Content-Language: zh-CN
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.74.203.119]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
X-Mirapoint-Virus-RAPID-Raw: score=unknown(0), refid=str=0001.0A020202.58EED4E0.00F7, ss=1, re=0.000, recu=0.000, reip=0.000, cl=1, cld=1, fgs=0, ip=169.254.2.240, so=2013-06-18 04:22:30, dmn=2013-03-21 17:37:32
X-Mirapoint-Loop-Id: 4d5b3821e365aafe058caeb13f9fba4f
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/detnet-dp-dt/9J0QAjZ5IxWAbO-QDzOOyq_ZjkQ>
Subject: Re: [Detnet-dp-dt] Quick notes from 4/11/17 call
X-BeenThere: detnet-dp-dt@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: DetNet WG Data Plane Design Team <detnet-dp-dt.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/detnet-dp-dt>, <mailto:detnet-dp-dt-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/detnet-dp-dt/>
List-Post: <mailto:detnet-dp-dt@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:detnet-dp-dt-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/detnet-dp-dt>, <mailto:detnet-dp-dt-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2017 01:31:17 -0000

Hi Jouni,

Many thanks for the notes. It is quite a good progress IMO.
But could you give some more hints on the point "incoming PW labels have to be the same to trigger the duplicate detection"?
I missed the discussion on this point, but as shown in my previous slides:
1. Multiple PW labels can be mapped to the same duplicate detection module.
2. If a DA-S-PE receives the same PW label from both DA-T-PE and its peer DA-S-PE, the traffic from them will be indistinguishable, and traffic from the peer DA-S-PE will be looped on the S-PE in some cases. As a result, duplicate detection on the peer S-PE will become more challenging.

Thanks,
Yuanlong

-----Original Message-----
From: Detnet-dp-dt [mailto:detnet-dp-dt-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Jouni Korhonen
Sent: Thursday, April 13, 2017 4:36 AM
To: Detnet-dp-dt@ietf.org
Subject: [Detnet-dp-dt] Quick notes from 4/11/17 call

Present: Jouni, Janos, Balazs, David, Loa, Norm, Yuanlong

Agenda:
* recap of the IETF98 corridor discussions & descisions
* list of things to do

Discussion & decision:
* Jouni sent out RFC6621 pointer for Simplified Multicast Forwarding that does duplicate detection and elimination
* Solutions draft:
 - update the PW encapsulation i.e., no Flow-ID and incoming PW labels have to be the same to trigger the duplicate detection. 
 - IPv6 use flow label for detnet flow identification, new extension header for seqnum.
 - on IPv6 path stitching policy routing, multicast with with proper distribution tree and segment routing were discussed as possible alternatives instead of tunneling. Needs more discussion.
 - no good solution for IPv4. Just left it out. One can use PWs to transport IPv4 as a packet PW.
 - CoS/QoS update to be done. CoS is “easier” to start with.. first describe how the TC or DSCP bits need to be brought all the down to the most outer level.
* Alternatives draft (now expired):
 - update the conclusions to state PW + IPv6 (native IP mode) are way to go. No good solution for IPv4.
* Problem Statement:
 - Norm will ship an update.
* Webex time will change. It will be Tuesday 6AM Pacific starting from next call.
* solutions and alternative draft updates hopefully out this week.

Next call:
 no call next week 4/18/17.

-- 
Jouni Korhonen, Broadcom, Core Switching Group
+1-408-391-7160



_______________________________________________
Detnet-dp-dt mailing list
Detnet-dp-dt@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/detnet-dp-dt

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email