Re: [Detnet-dp-dt] a quick look at the replication/discarding case for detnet flows

Norman Finn <nfinn@alumni.caltech.edu> Tue, 17 January 2017 14:41 UTC

Return-Path: <nfinn@alumni.caltech.edu>
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 CA21C1293E0 for <detnet-dp-dt@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 17 Jan 2017 06:41:43 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.499
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.499 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-3.199] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=alumni.caltech.edu
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 gEByQ215bkQg for <detnet-dp-dt@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 17 Jan 2017 06:41:41 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.alumni.caltech.edu (mail.alumni.caltech.edu [131.215.242.114]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C85AC1294AC for <detnet-dp-dt@ietf.org>; Tue, 17 Jan 2017 06:41:41 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [10.100.16.199] (unknown [38.101.229.226]) (Authenticated sender: nfinn@alumni.caltech.edu) by mail.alumni.caltech.edu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B3CD11201D3; Tue, 17 Jan 2017 06:41:40 -0800 (PST)
X-DKIM: Sendmail DKIM Filter v2.8.3 mail.alumni.caltech.edu B3CD11201D3
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=alumni.caltech.edu; s=enforce; t=1484664100; bh=5C7d9kvVHLF48gbjyFn7hLq5cKkvXn6qBv+1FEpWr0I=; h=Content-Type:Mime-Version:Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-Id:References:To; b=JGGPf2Mrkbh2ymk15LI9w/x2Vv3eBLQaH3vNIZGQIx08yPZUPehF9gVNT0lzwhw+8 y05kCeHFnuL2Dq3vlkdJDvY9Gv6Zn8psa0brwfJVIVr6In0EVTfYeddfZq5a7rcGNy Ab8yJ5M/+v04gr8o1doFvauZ1qoS3Pd61JATkLS0=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.2 \(3259\))
From: Norman Finn <nfinn@alumni.caltech.edu>
In-Reply-To: <6ff03919-9584-0a48-da2e-7ded7d2aacbb@pi.nu>
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2017 09:41:39 -0500
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <55BCA431-23FC-4641-A221-08DE0ABDB5B3@alumni.caltech.edu>
References: <6ff03919-9584-0a48-da2e-7ded7d2aacbb@pi.nu>
To: Loa Andersson <loa@pi.nu>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3259)
X-MailScanner-Information-Alumni:
X-Alumni-MailScanner-ID: B3CD11201D3.A716F
X-MailScanner-Alumni: No Virii found
X-Spam-Status-Alumni: not spam, SpamAssassin (not cached, score=-1.1, required 5, ALL_TRUSTED -1.00, DKIM_SIGNED 0.10, DKIM_VALID -0.10, DKIM_VALID_AU -0.10)
X-MailScanner-From: nfinn@alumni.caltech.edu
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/detnet-dp-dt/NITULFWDRNtOzdw_shWDNHDD3tQ>
Cc: "detnet-dp-dt@ietf.org" <detnet-dp-dt@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Detnet-dp-dt] a quick look at the replication/discarding case for detnet flows
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: Tue, 17 Jan 2017 14:41:44 -0000

Thanks for the slides!

Question: You don’t introduce the cross-connect with intermediate packet deletion until slide 9.  Is there any reason you could not add the cross-connect to slide 5, You could have PW5 (B to C) and PW6 (C to B).  B would discard duplicates between PW1 and PW6, outputting the remaining packets on PW2.

I assume that you didn’t put this idea in the slides, because you’re assuming that the two streams have to have the same PW label in order for you to discard duplicates.  I’m assuming that you can direct two PW labels to a single state machine.  Is that necessarily a problem?

— Norm

> On Jan 13, 2017, at 23:28, Loa Andersson <loa@pi.nu> wrote:
> 
> Folks,
> 
> I took a quick look at the replication / discarding case we talked about at the meeting this week.
> 
> Please remember that so far this is not a proposal, just a demonstration
> that there is at least one way of doing it.
> 
> What is there can bee revised, improved, changed or discarded if we
> find something better. Take a look a send comments.
> 
> /loa
> 
> Warning: I have a grave case of dyslexia, so any odd or inventive
> spelling is pure accident.
> -- 
> 
> 
> Loa Andersson                        email: loa@mail01.huawei.com
> Senior MPLS Expert                          loa@pi.nu
> Huawei Technologies (consultant)     phone: +46 739 81 21 64
> <detnet-replication.pptx>_______________________________________________
> Detnet-dp-dt mailing list
> Detnet-dp-dt@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/detnet-dp-dt