IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Detnet-dp-dt] An optional scheme that can support Detnet with a single layer of PW label

Jouni Korhonen <jouni.korhonen@broadcom.com> Wed, 22 February 2017 04:02 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 60C70129585 for <detnet-dp-dt@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 21 Feb 2017 20:02:17 -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 hcEjvxEx20gL for <detnet-dp-dt@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 21 Feb 2017 20:02:15 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pg0-x234.google.com (mail-pg0-x234.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c05::234]) (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 8FA9712956F for <detnet-dp-dt@ietf.org>; Tue, 21 Feb 2017 20:02:15 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-pg0-x234.google.com with SMTP id s67so35395418pgb.3 for <detnet-dp-dt@ietf.org>; Tue, 21 Feb 2017 20:02:15 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=broadcom.com; s=google; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=bqiTYQB5qRUfyTk80sd6wp4zp/95/+xFSMcvxmaT1gE=; b=YliAv5qoGTJ617sy+84dNYvTE8UymjskJc7tGErB22w6z+0SolzHISMG3LWvYSuipm I5a9/1RqtbWHibLANenf0D80xhb+x2p+gyaVPHbKeakNvy7+96NaeScVwsafWUyS/wfM 15L68r06DymICsXsk4a6YZusCNZ8cGesaZiNE=
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=bqiTYQB5qRUfyTk80sd6wp4zp/95/+xFSMcvxmaT1gE=; b=Xu7/KmcZKpd1B5d/Y9MV8PEjFNqYmtWz16g+hLMQwWwYt11QvUF+5oVMgPQdDnAivG grNYdpHmYOv6m+lRTxRMT7Ha4gnnFZXR4IBNcSEAR49ZDgYh7J4bIWXyAH5sN2J2gUkk j3DxQ50TlU/fVVywUEBEkmfwz1dVTKRASNz+qQW+hPeMh4vZ4+li3g9W/bkDmeKeVEuj MGoqiouyUGrH5V3ZmPFZ2J14g5Pm82JSqyk9eGnr3sKV1PkLGwmjAmyRkkiFgSjrqJZV 1r2YDWV6R953g/B24bqseST4Ae65XsYQXDTIfTpzvSYSeld++Oen2+T+7bA1DHjTImRf kIig==
X-Gm-Message-State: AMke39mEt3U0a83VWrC1WiiCFhsluQP3d63CCENjb1szhHkTmqWJ/0AeAnmGYvZbNbzq98QW
X-Received: by 10.84.229.151 with SMTP id c23mr22878711plk.27.1487736135006; Tue, 21 Feb 2017 20:02:15 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ?IPv6:2601:647:4200:e520:1937:f73:b500:623? ([2601:647:4200:e520:1937:f73:b500:623]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id n79sm14732pfj.31.2017.02.21.20.02.14 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 21 Feb 2017 20:02:14 -0800 (PST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.2 \(3259\))
From: Jouni Korhonen <jouni.korhonen@broadcom.com>
In-Reply-To: <3B0A1BED22CAD649A1B3E97BE5DDD68BBAB13DD5@szxema506-mbs.china.huawei.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2017 20:02:13 -0800
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <6DEC4B10-226C-4DBB-9E06-D72F4AA1721E@broadcom.com>
References: <BDABA4E9-F3F5-4EA3-BB16-BE877A70F0B6@broadcom.com> <FBC4D57C-51D4-41A8-95D7-56AF22084852@broadcom.com> <9E4E59F6-0E62-476B-897F-D2D59E94C6EB@broadcom.com> <f3bbb70a-0f5d-b515-6c5a-1d31ba5ae5a2@pi.nu> <6F2B8081-ADB8-4B4F-BACD-78DFB63B8FBE@broadcom.com> <bbfe82c3-5127-31de-01b7-3e6e820d5142@pi.nu> <EA2608B3-C11A-444B-B1E8-379B8A195B6D@broadcom.com> <c9e9931d-6f74-9ae0-2e34-e400c5cf92b4@pi.nu> <AA485196-3AC7-4D0B-BD3A-A61E07AF23D7@broadcom.com> <3B0A1BED22CAD649A1B3E97BE5DDD68BBAB13DD5@szxema506-mbs.china.huawei.com>
To: Jiangyuanlong <jiangyuanlong@huawei.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3259)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/detnet-dp-dt/TK7Pp4FfU3rldVyPxmJ9YkHPJrA>
Cc: "detnet-dp-dt@ietf.org" <detnet-dp-dt@ietf.org>, Loa Andersson <loa@pi.nu>
Subject: Re: [Detnet-dp-dt] An optional scheme that can support Detnet with a single layer of PW label
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: Wed, 22 Feb 2017 04:02:17 -0000

A quick question. What is the difference between PW and D-PW in your slides?

- Jouni

--
Jouni Korhonen, Broadcom Ltd.
M: +1-408-391-7160

> On Feb 21, 2017, at 1:30 AM, Jiangyuanlong <jiangyuanlong@huawei.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> The intention of this slide is to provide an optional scheme that can support Detnet with a single layer of PW label. 
> For the time being the slide demonstrates that it is possible in the data plane.
> Your comments are very welcome.
> 
> Best regards,
> Yuanlong
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Detnet-dp-dt [mailto:detnet-dp-dt-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Jouni Korhonen
> Sent: Sunday, February 19, 2017 3:29 PM
> To: Loa Andersson
> Cc: detnet-dp-dt@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [Detnet-dp-dt] FRER example.. maybe a way forward? was Re: quick notes from call 2/14/15
> 
> Loa,
> 
>> On 18 Feb 2017, at 23:26, Loa Andersson <loa@pi.nu> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On 2017-02-19 15:22, Jouni Korhonen wrote:
>>> 
>> <snip>
>>>> I don't follow - let us say we have one Ethernet and one TDM PW 
>>>> crossing the domain, id e use the same d-pw label, how do we know 
>>>> which one we do Ethernet NSP and which one we do TDM NSP on??
>>> 
>>> Of course each e2e detnet flow have their own d-pw. Otherwise you cannot make a difference between them. Being the same means an e2e detnet flow would have a single d-pw label throughout the detnet/administrative domain in each x-PE.
>>> 
>> OK . so what you are saying is that replicated packets will have the same d-pw? I agree to that!
> 
> Yes. 
> 
> - JOuni
> 
>> 
>> /Loa
>>> - Jouni
>> <snip>
>> --
>> 
>> 
>> 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
> <detnet-one-PW.ppt>

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email