IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Detnet] Implementing the discussion at IETF 97 on architecture doc

"Pascal Thubert (pthubert)" <pthubert@cisco.com> Thu, 09 March 2017 08:07 UTC

Return-Path: <pthubert@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: detnet@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: detnet@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 976C2128E18; Thu, 9 Mar 2017 00:07:10 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.522
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.522 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_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.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 58EQcy5du5sP; Thu, 9 Mar 2017 00:07:09 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rcdn-iport-4.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-4.cisco.com [173.37.86.75]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 030441204D9; Thu, 9 Mar 2017 00:07:08 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=2359; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1489046828; x=1490256428; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=BgodML5xAoswDXTCQGi1cRv6EssZHuUZeryq0cNZzG4=; b=lvmxPtr6iZKIOsS/66p7aW4Ui94pS1gjttliceOhdIJm2CexMwvlGZSv QtC/qv8EulvChbArgN8xAcMOWR8NqqgVDFlbiV2dcUkC4gP/FTRs1u/iT y8XvfsEvPqrtrv6vLz1HXFoocMhk8Y5ASa4kZ5MKXlI9HyDNY9xC7b2P7 A=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0AUAQDCDMFY/4gNJK1dGQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBBwEBAQEBg1FhgQoHjWWRTJU4gg0fC4UuSgKCRz8YAQIBAQEBAQEBayiFFQEBAQECAQEBODQLBQcEAgEIEQEDAQEfCQcnCxQDBggBAQQBDQUIE4lcCA6yJ4puAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBGAWGToRvihofBZw2AZIukSmTPQEfOD5FVhU/hlR1iQaBDQEBAQ
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.36,267,1486425600"; d="scan'208";a="218111855"
Received: from alln-core-3.cisco.com ([173.36.13.136]) by rcdn-iport-4.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA; 09 Mar 2017 08:07:07 +0000
Received: from XCH-ALN-005.cisco.com (xch-aln-005.cisco.com [173.36.7.15]) by alln-core-3.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id v29878RQ026319 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Thu, 9 Mar 2017 08:07:08 GMT
Received: from xch-rcd-001.cisco.com (173.37.102.11) by XCH-ALN-005.cisco.com (173.36.7.15) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1210.3; Thu, 9 Mar 2017 02:07:07 -0600
Received: from xch-rcd-001.cisco.com ([173.37.102.11]) by XCH-RCD-001.cisco.com ([173.37.102.11]) with mapi id 15.00.1210.000; Thu, 9 Mar 2017 02:07:07 -0600
From: "Pascal Thubert (pthubert)" <pthubert@cisco.com>
To: "jouni.korhonen@broadcom.com" <jouni.korhonen@broadcom.com>, "detnet@ietf.org" <detnet@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [Detnet] Implementing the discussion at IETF 97 on architecture doc
Thread-Index: AdKXaaxVJ2Qp+lFeQni37G6Mk1RVbgBFFFAAAAtvSPA=
Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2017 08:06:57 +0000
Deferred-Delivery: Thu, 9 Mar 2017 08:06:40 +0000
Message-ID: <e9f6e0d2f3fe4c89b4ea9faba9187c73@XCH-RCD-001.cisco.com>
References: <772d53cbc39549a889d356f5be511c12@XCH-RCD-001.cisco.com> <6d8ec0b1-581a-9cbf-2dc9-bd1f3fcc6864@broadcom.com>
In-Reply-To: <6d8ec0b1-581a-9cbf-2dc9-bd1f3fcc6864@broadcom.com>
Accept-Language: fr-FR, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [10.55.22.4]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/detnet/BAOiF66mmlF-LSaL4rd6FBRJMVU>
Cc: "draft-ietf-detnet-architecture@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-detnet-architecture@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Detnet] Implementing the discussion at IETF 97 on architecture doc
X-BeenThere: detnet@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions on Deterministic Networking BoF and Proposed WG <detnet.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/detnet>, <mailto:detnet-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/detnet/>
List-Post: <mailto:detnet@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:detnet-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/detnet>, <mailto:detnet-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2017 08:07:10 -0000

I agree, Jouni, 

we seem to be placing the horses before the cart.
Let us comment out that text for now.

Take care,

Pascal

-----Original Message-----
From: Jouni Korhonen [mailto:jouni.korhonen@broadcom.com] 
Sent: mercredi 8 mars 2017 21:37
To: Pascal Thubert (pthubert) <pthubert@cisco.com>; detnet@ietf.org
Cc: draft-ietf-detnet-architecture-all@tools.ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Detnet] Implementing the discussion at IETF 97 on architecture doc

Hi,

[snip]

> 4.9.2.  Flow attribute mapping between layers
>
>
>    Transport of DetNet flows over multiple technology domains may
>    require that lower layers are aware of specific flows of higher
>    layers.  Such an "exporting of flow identification" is needed each
>    time when the forwarding paradigm is changed on the transport path
>    (e.g., two LSRs are interconnected by a L2 bridged domain, etc.).
>    The three main forwarding methods considered for deterministic
>    networking are:
>
>    o  IP routing
>
>    o  MPLS label switching
>
>    o  Ethernet bridging
>
>    The simplest solution for generalized flow identification could be to
>    define a unique Flow-ID triplet per DetNet flow (e.g., [IP: "IPv6-
>    flow-label"+"IPv6-address"; MPLS: "PW-label"+"LSP-label"; Ethernet:

The discussion on this part has not yet completed in DP design team. I am a bit worried writing this specific part down before we actually know how we are going to implement on the data plane. The above is not, as far as I understand, aligned with the DT progress. To get around the chicken-egg thing here either defer documenting for now or emphasize more that the above is an example.

- Jouni

>    "VLAN-ID"+"MAC-address").  This triplet can be used by the DetNet
>    encoding function of technology border nodes (where forwarding
>    paradigm changes) to adapt to capabilities of the next hop node.  It
>    means that a packet may contain multiple (forwarding paradigm
>    specific) Flow-IDs during its transport.  Technology border nodes may
>    add / remove a (forwarding paradigm specific) Flow-ID.

[snap]

> What do you think?
>
>
>
> Pascal and Norm
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> detnet mailing list
> detnet@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/detnet
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email