IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Detnet-dp-dt] high level questions on detnet dataplane

Jiangyuanlong <jiangyuanlong@huawei.com> Thu, 23 February 2017 01:46 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 1CDD61294B6; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 17:46:02 -0800 (PST)
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 hPidegIMFiaj; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 17:46:00 -0800 (PST)
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 DAB691294B4; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 17:45:59 -0800 (PST)
Received: from 172.18.7.190 (EHLO lhreml705-cah.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.7.190]) by lhrrg02-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.3.7-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id DBO01689; Thu, 23 Feb 2017 01:45:57 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from SZXEMA419-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.82.72.37) by lhreml705-cah.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.46) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.301.0; Thu, 23 Feb 2017 01:45:56 +0000
Received: from SZXEMA506-MBS.china.huawei.com ([169.254.4.67]) by SZXEMA419-HUB.china.huawei.com ([10.82.72.37]) with mapi id 14.03.0235.001; Thu, 23 Feb 2017 09:45:48 +0800
From: Jiangyuanlong <jiangyuanlong@huawei.com>
To: "jouni.nospam" <jouni.nospam@gmail.com>, Loa Andersson <loa@pi.nu>
Thread-Topic: [Detnet-dp-dt] high level questions on detnet dataplane
Thread-Index: AQHSjPcEOBf8Q5ELWUqgPHgPBN5lY6F0pnAAgAErWCA=
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2017 01:45:47 +0000
Message-ID: <3B0A1BED22CAD649A1B3E97BE5DDD68BBAB1454A@szxema506-mbs.china.huawei.com>
References: <DBXPR07MB12832861ED58D86FD3D0A09AC510@DBXPR07MB128.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com> <F278A381-1E43-4607-8015-5CFDE871D382@broadcom.com> <DBXPR07MB1287715CE1D6AA6B6CC932DAC500@DBXPR07MB128.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com> <1645a73b-0260-327f-c45b-8bb084235689@pi.nu> <B3001E3F-39E4-4F10-95F4-622700F95203@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <B3001E3F-39E4-4F10-95F4-622700F95203@gmail.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=0001.0A0B0202.58AE3ED6.0050, ss=1, re=0.000, recu=0.000, reip=0.000, cl=1, cld=1, fgs=0, ip=169.254.4.67, so=2013-06-18 04:22:30, dmn=2013-03-21 17:37:32
X-Mirapoint-Loop-Id: c27ce80219f549fb69dd3a0c68e54b4d
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/detnet-dp-dt/KMgcjJN2vyg6BLBrsHxd-ddkPYg>
Cc: "detnet-dp-dt@ietf.org" <detnet-dp-dt@ietf.org>, DetNet Chairs <detnet-chairs@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Detnet-dp-dt] high level questions on detnet dataplane
X-BeenThere: detnet-dp-dt@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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, 23 Feb 2017 01:46:02 -0000

Totally agreed. To understand the requirements, a slide on the IEEE 802.1 web site may help us further:
http://www.ieee802.org/1/files/public/docs2013/cb-nfinn-packet-loss-ratio-10-13-v03.pdf

Thanks,
Yuanlong
-----Original Message-----
From: Detnet-dp-dt [mailto:detnet-dp-dt-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of jouni.nospam
Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2017 11:49 PM
To: Loa Andersson
Cc: DetNet Chairs; detnet-dp-dt@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Detnet-dp-dt] high level questions on detnet dataplane

Hi,

> On Feb 22, 2017, at 2:32 AM, Loa Andersson <loa@pi.nu> wrote:
> 
> Folks,
> 
> two questions, the first because I've be taling it for granted, the second brought up bu two indenpendent people I talked about DetNet with.
> 
> - is a design criteria that the existing MPLS control plane protocols  
> shall be able to use with the DetNet dataplane?

My understanding is “as much as possible” but not restricted by it if something is missing at this point.

> - I’ve heard the opinion (from two different directions) that doing

Who are? Because, I have not heard complaints myself other than those we have discussed in the DT..

>  replication/elimination other than at the egress/ingress will make 
> the

This I definitely agree, but still want to solve it.

>  solution to complicated. Do we have a good motiation why we need it?

Too complicated meaning:
1) it changes too many things architecturally/conceptually, or
2) the current sw would need a facelift, or
3) the current hw would need a facelift

Replication/elimination was one of the criterias we set up when we started working on data plane alternatives. That originates from the “service protection”, and in a case of protection we wanted to match what 802.1CB is capable of at the L2.

- Jouni

> 
> /Loa
> --
> 
> 
> Loa Andersson                        email: loa@mail01.huawei.com
> Senior MPLS Expert                          loa@pi.nu
> Huawei Technologies (consultant)     phone: +46 739 81 21 64

_______________________________________________
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