Re: [Detnet-dp-dt] about identity labels.. was Re: new versions of my slides
Jouni Korhonen <jouni.korhonen@broadcom.com> Mon, 06 March 2017 18:23 UTC
Return-Path: <jouni.korhonen@broadcom.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 5B6A512994F
for <detnet-dp-dt@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 6 Mar 2017 10:23:12 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.001
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.001 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_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001]
autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key)
header.d=broadcom.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 Jt3cqYjgLiKj for <detnet-dp-dt@ietfa.amsl.com>;
Mon, 6 Mar 2017 10:23:10 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-wr0-x22d.google.com (mail-wr0-x22d.google.com
[IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c0c::22d])
(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 131121294AC
for <detnet-dp-dt@ietf.org>; Mon, 6 Mar 2017 10:23:10 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-wr0-x22d.google.com with SMTP id g10so122826058wrg.2
for <detnet-dp-dt@ietf.org>; Mon, 06 Mar 2017 10:23:09 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=broadcom.com; s=google;
h=reply-to:subject:references:to:cc:from:message-id:date:user-agent
:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding;
bh=XfesLtSEzOSfQtwYRKQFvCCIgER9KZS6tDPmxcB9kzQ=;
b=iHOleIukiNCVAtBC8SEmLf6SbJgkdoaQgTfb/AZXOxngyG/jNtQuMvrEQ5U1sUxPef
jtgHbCLJ1b2ZUefuDWzwC6gD1kEB122LikQU4OGIoEKQgSydd42rte8lpg9ZmCnbLKH1
qV0TqOO7Nyu5dhP1//GRtoXKmQvX6SmgqK8Vw=
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20161025;
h=x-gm-message-state:reply-to:subject:references:to:cc:from
:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to
:content-transfer-encoding;
bh=XfesLtSEzOSfQtwYRKQFvCCIgER9KZS6tDPmxcB9kzQ=;
b=FRH8JO6vFWGZWQnJknJ5s8dql2+66nv55zoWknaHDCibapOQKqMzqIoErV0jwSLtUC
7ixm/CZaons7FwTHilli1HIYlLEaP+4d2qBkpKJEP+y8VOHbg3h2Kw4R/Nv8uVXjS7QU
DCto540YOWkinICPNiPOyAOdy7sP7lAefIQoqQD95FV2DQoPw4TPk4rZK+NBhTgFPL/M
+mWblUSYFusQsm0DVzhT2a9c9ACNqBIskt96Q7L/S6Uo1mKXSbMKUM1HP2AmOy/Xwh64
6331SnWRXvfXWOp6BS5h53S0WQ63g8Yl1kEG7D3QRyD68xIMU3DHoGSvEgz6XoUIIJat
Jw/w==
X-Gm-Message-State: AMke39mlHo4uHfaE0RTaQ+yyxX9yhOAncs2Td89t5NOLZmZO//mOpLpycNq7KLMkkKza+NIE
X-Received: by 10.223.176.225 with SMTP id j30mr15052291wra.25.1488824588329;
Mon, 06 Mar 2017 10:23:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.88.100] ([216.31.219.19])
by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id o31sm1873104wrc.27.2017.03.06.10.23.06
(version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128);
Mon, 06 Mar 2017 10:23:07 -0800 (PST)
References: <bc92627a-e1c2-ca97-9af9-8aedd37a772c@pi.nu>
<3DF0466E9510274382F5B74499ACD6F8C3CB2F@dfwpml702-chm.exmail.huawei.com>
<3DF0466E9510274382F5B74499ACD6F8C3CB40@dfwpml702-chm.exmail.huawei.com>
<cde5c41f-2a48-7007-279a-ffa44ef43bec@pi.nu>
<DBXPR07MB128512162D9FA45A2A10624AC570@DBXPR07MB128.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com>
<75B5D515-73E0-44C0-8CE2-824731505589@broadcom.com>
<1488621691.3705.1.camel@it.uc3m.es>
<5278d70a-c266-7748-3b16-dfd4848420fc@pi.nu>
<87E21B14-30D0-4E1F-A0D2-BEE6804E9BAB@broadcom.com>
<b38b8840-4209-3a7e-9f5b-32adfeab2676@pi.nu>
<DBXPR07MB1280B2C4A1E0B7388118D52AC2C0@DBXPR07MB128.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com>
To: =?UTF-8?Q?Bal=c3=a1zs_Varga_A?= <balazs.a.varga@ericsson.com>,
Loa Andersson <loa@pi.nu>
From: Jouni Korhonen <jouni.korhonen@broadcom.com>
Message-ID: <26bd8110-8f1b-8af4-4891-233c879367ac@broadcom.com>
Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2017 10:23:04 -0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/45.7.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <DBXPR07MB1280B2C4A1E0B7388118D52AC2C0@DBXPR07MB128.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/detnet-dp-dt/QPkGbgXntkdaHJ-9o0IL4kdmM4g>
Cc: "cjbc@it.uc3m.es" <cjbc@it.uc3m.es>,
"detnet-dp-dt@ietf.org" <detnet-dp-dt@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Detnet-dp-dt] about identity labels.. was Re: new versions of
my slides
X-BeenThere: detnet-dp-dt@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
Reply-To: jouni.korhonen@broadcom.com
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: Mon, 06 Mar 2017 18:23:12 -0000
Balazs, Your proposed Section 4.x would definitely be good to have. I am not too much for Section 4.y since I do not see it would not be needed in the final document, except for the definitions that should go to Section 2. Regarding the two choices we have now I just add prologue text and describe (graphically both). The logic of the "identity label/tag" is mostly the same independent of the location in the stack. The processing is of course different. - Jouni 3/6/2017, 9:49 AM, Balázs Varga A kirjoitti: > Hi Jouni, > > > > just for clarification: Do we intend to list all options in the draft ??? > > They all have pros and cons ... > > > > Anyway I think we need a structure like below in the draft for example > > in section 4. Is it inline with your intention? Shall I prepare some text > > around this items for the call on Wednesday? > > > > *4.x DP solution requirements* > > List of prerequisites for a proper solution on an x-PE: > > 1, to distinguish PWs going through (operation label-swap) and PWs need > DetNet serving (e.g., FRER) > > 2, to handle PW-label collisions (without major implementation > difficulties) > > 3, to work with both centralized control and distributed control (signaling) > > > > *4.y DP solution toolset* > > Description of the toolset discussed so far: > > A, L-label: additional label between t-label and PW-label > > B, different PW-labels per segment: similar to the MS-PW label > allocation mechanism > > C, e2e PW label: no change of the PW-label (same PW-label value between > T-PE nodes) > > D, d-id label: additional label used as T-PE identification > > E, Flow-ID outside of the label stack > > > > Cheers > > Bala'zs > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Detnet-dp-dt [mailto:detnet-dp-dt-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of > Loa Andersson > Sent: Monday, March 06, 2017 3:07 AM > To: Jouni Korhonen <jouni.korhonen@broadcom.com> > Cc: cjbc@it.uc3m.es; detnet-dp-dt@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [Detnet-dp-dt] about identity labels.. was Re: new versions > of my slides > > > > Jouni, > > > > On 2017-03-06 07:36, Jouni Korhonen wrote: > >> > > <snip> > >>> > >>> - global as the special purpose labels, seems unlikely > >>> - global as unique with in the domain, though we know there is a > >>> scaling problem > >>> - global for one sender, not that different from d-id, other that the > >>> placment in the stack > >>> > >>> ??? > >> > >> In my small mind I reasoned it to be unique within one domain. Since > the identity would now be 32 bits (there is no need to restrict it to 20 > bits since it is part of the _encapsulation_header_ not the label > stack), the scaling concern is more relaxed. Assuming each node in the > domain would like to be able to name 4k unique detnet flows of their own > then the domain could host 1M such detnet nodes.. not too bad for one > domain. > > > > My earlier calculations estimated that we would have about the number of > PWs between any pair of T-DetNet-PEs would be about 400 and the number > T-DetNet-PEs about 1000. > > > > 32 bits is 4 000 millions, so there is ample number of flow id's even > if we would have to configure a range on each T-DetNet-PE. > > > > So you look at the flow-id and then compare the CW/Seq #, right? > > > > Now, range configuration is a kludge, can we find a way to avoid it, > maybe d-pw + node-id would work, all this would have to happen in the > context of the (outgoing) d-pw anyway, right? > > > > /Loa > > > >> > >> - Jouni > >> > >> > >> > >> > >>> > >>> /Loa > >>>> > >>>> Carlos > >>>> > >>>>> - Jouni > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>> Detnet-dp-dt mailing list > >>>> Detnet-dp-dt@ietf.org <mailto:Detnet-dp-dt@ietf.org> > >>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/detnet-dp-dt > >>>> > >>> > >>> -- > >>> > >>> > >>> Loa Andersson email: loa@mail01.huawei.com > <mailto:loa@mail01.huawei.com> > >>> Senior MPLS Expert loa@pi.nu <mailto:loa@pi.nu> > >>> Huawei Technologies (consultant) phone: +46 739 81 21 64 > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Detnet-dp-dt mailing list > >> Detnet-dp-dt@ietf.org <mailto:Detnet-dp-dt@ietf.org> > >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/detnet-dp-dt > >> > > > > -- > > > > > > Loa Andersson email: loa@mail01.huawei.com > <mailto:loa@mail01.huawei.com> > > Senior MPLS Expert loa@pi.nu <mailto:loa@pi.nu> > > Huawei Technologies (consultant) phone: +46 739 81 21 64 > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Detnet-dp-dt mailing list > > Detnet-dp-dt@ietf.org <mailto:Detnet-dp-dt@ietf.org> > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/detnet-dp-dt >
- [Detnet-dp-dt] new versions of my slides Loa Andersson
- Re: [Detnet-dp-dt] new versions of my slides Norman Finn
- Re: [Detnet-dp-dt] new versions of my slides Norman Finn
- [Detnet-dp-dt] Dyslexia -- Re: new versions of my… Loa Andersson
- Re: [Detnet-dp-dt] new versions of my slides Loa Andersson
- Re: [Detnet-dp-dt] Dyslexia -- Re: new versions o… Norman Finn
- Re: [Detnet-dp-dt] new versions of my slides Balázs Varga A
- [Detnet-dp-dt] PW-type discussion - Re: new versi… Loa Andersson
- Re: [Detnet-dp-dt] PW-type discussion - Re: new v… Balázs Varga A
- Re: [Detnet-dp-dt] PW-type discussion - Re: new v… Loa Andersson
- [Detnet-dp-dt] about identity labels.. was Re: ne… Jouni Korhonen
- Re: [Detnet-dp-dt] about identity labels.. was Re… Jouni Korhonen
- Re: [Detnet-dp-dt] about identity labels.. was Re… Carlos Jesús Bernardos Cano
- Re: [Detnet-dp-dt] about identity labels.. was Re… Carlos Jesús Bernardos Cano
- Re: [Detnet-dp-dt] about identity labels.. was Re… Loa Andersson
- Re: [Detnet-dp-dt] about identity labels.. was Re… Jiangyuanlong
- Re: [Detnet-dp-dt] about identity labels.. was Re… Jouni Korhonen
- Re: [Detnet-dp-dt] about identity labels.. was Re… Jouni Korhonen
- Re: [Detnet-dp-dt] about identity labels.. was Re… Loa Andersson
- Re: [Detnet-dp-dt] about identity labels.. was Re… Balázs Varga A
- Re: [Detnet-dp-dt] about identity labels.. was Re… Jouni Korhonen
- Re: [Detnet-dp-dt] about identity labels.. was Re… Loa Andersson