Re: [Detnet] [spring] Comments on draft-saad-mpls-miad-usecases

Greg Mirsky <gregimirsky@gmail.com> Mon, 28 February 2022 20:58 UTC

Return-Path: <gregimirsky@gmail.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 1C8AF3A095C; Mon, 28 Feb 2022 12:58:00 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.007
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.007 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, HTTPS_HTTP_MISMATCH=0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.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 yUhow-D22H1u; Mon, 28 Feb 2022 12:57:55 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-ej1-x635.google.com (mail-ej1-x635.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::635]) (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 D1FE03A0105; Mon, 28 Feb 2022 12:57:54 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-ej1-x635.google.com with SMTP id bg10so27386265ejb.4; Mon, 28 Feb 2022 12:57:54 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=hRMJJamlsBl+b8rtbb38/tqYZnD18CFOeUrw7X6aqM0=; b=bT0DZv2jPKH5V2sjjJRcHYwV0ojiKC2Vifk7bz/5mthox+hHwU56nWFBk91dzzXHHs OZYnoitO1NFW2isSFlJLstPgu0SYJOmBXlBU1G7jJyumB0vEQ3ABqydCzoI0lk76/8CV +ib/oHxbVPuBF6TwJCe/5eZrWul4grNRIdQDzjP/2ASxBmwiLa2pw6BUgFA5Bg+sRqA1 BhRl1onapDc2gs5lX3dncPbiQa9beV3JoIWn/OKq2hL0a88WLaaqq9EwLKHIoOR+sD0k tV5mPScS+MZd+oSsJnbZpLrEacvIfteffGIxqEXR73p7fRoRsF21p+fQ5sIPVBapd1pq kdpA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=hRMJJamlsBl+b8rtbb38/tqYZnD18CFOeUrw7X6aqM0=; b=qAyy2JrcLWI/2TD4qEGJR/xEmYTj4jFJUtGdqisvds+hnqElyiwwt2p9oVsUsw7sc4 0N98MdxNsAYB2fH8v02uf5JejMhwrRH5hasVtEY7P2l5SdwxWJ6DpPleVKKCxJ7LXU2C krqfA5vvH+EmS2k9pJPFv4N1f596Aq04FIahrMcA8sWKOefowDvEPfHqOrTEu9U/6LVQ FiSq1GgmhJcC1JPtp7uFDrpCb24Ky6Z9YcdvLa8KvgN71NDry8bRXAWtoe/3JD9bIT5F 717c23g5sffdS9PJXWVa6xTaJQB1I5Lp8Zpv0ZTkZrdF5lOBA1MfYvnkWKRqHbLaE1Kp TAkA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5322OlPQ1OsWpb2h+2DfiKcmkM83qZjRM+O2tlyTovMYqlwuaBvR T/i7OB43hlPISQOMQmtwnsH+8ES9wH6XEP0xgw0=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzGN8lUGzXCzsllaYp5PCx0SIyIDajlK/3MGFSCoaR7XlOIbh0M+xckqmdMyB8t/yCKdmHUECcPdFOJZ/h73UA=
X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:2695:b0:6ce:f9c:b476 with SMTP id t21-20020a170906269500b006ce0f9cb476mr16561560ejc.235.1646081872638; Mon, 28 Feb 2022 12:57:52 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CA+RyBmX5=yagQ9FcNo1UKUzBavEa3L+c2mnbgVnqZvyszDOTSQ@mail.gmail.com> <DM5PR1901MB2150B2E45032A4DF5839AD14FC3D9@DM5PR1901MB2150.namprd19.prod.outlook.com> <CA+RyBmVUZnP--1C+W-Z3ewJc7q=Gm7DGGY2o5r2yTT6PgXWSXA@mail.gmail.com> <BY3PR13MB4787C8798BF17C923278B3009A3E9@BY3PR13MB4787.namprd13.prod.outlook.com> <CA+RyBmVwssUwe-BGbPvRENZjpVSy2XOg72kD1Bg208P_KuoXSQ@mail.gmail.com> <BY3PR13MB4787E6BEE884F834500A113D9A3E9@BY3PR13MB4787.namprd13.prod.outlook.com> <CA+RyBmVu0cAbxpf3QgonxBb=LuknER6__GX4GQNEqHBcy0+uwg@mail.gmail.com> <BY3PR13MB478792ACD5719D06DCAD2A6F9A019@BY3PR13MB4787.namprd13.prod.outlook.com> <CA+RyBmUJn9uyFP9qRqy1yE4zftO4gnTt6FCNnyfsgnEYXKUcWw@mail.gmail.com> <BY3PR13MB478700BD417E744807B770459A019@BY3PR13MB4787.namprd13.prod.outlook.com>
In-Reply-To: <BY3PR13MB478700BD417E744807B770459A019@BY3PR13MB4787.namprd13.prod.outlook.com>
From: Greg Mirsky <gregimirsky@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2022 12:57:40 -0800
Message-ID: <CA+RyBmVFFzLiH7H45wyPtcupBc2eYYxqpNtsGWkfcQmzwMxJqw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Haoyu Song <haoyu.song@futurewei.com>
Cc: Tarek Saad <tsaad.net@gmail.com>, mpls <mpls@ietf.org>, pals@ietf.org, DetNet WG <detnet@ietf.org>, spring <spring@ietf.org>, draft-saad-mpls-miad-usecases@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000004a36d805d91a4d79"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/detnet/E3OzvPn50u_QjClDJ7z-UvU-Vhg>
Subject: Re: [Detnet] [spring] Comments on draft-saad-mpls-miad-usecases
X-BeenThere: detnet@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Mon, 28 Feb 2022 20:58:01 -0000

Hi Haoyu,
I wouldn't say that I don't like any use case, I just don't understand how
the RFC 8596 is related to MIAD work. As for your questions, I believe that
all these scenarios should be discussed by the SFC WG. In fact,
draft-ietf-sfc-ioam-nsh defines one them already.

Regards,
Greg

On Mon, Feb 28, 2022, 12:50 Haoyu Song <haoyu.song@futurewei.com> wrote:

> Hi Greg,
>
>
>
> How about IOAM (or other types of OAM) + SFC (i.e., apply OAM
> simultaneously) ? Or Slicing + SFC (i.e., apply SFC on a particular slice)
> ? I think these scenarios are possible. Maybe I misunderstand something.
> Could you please give more explanation on why you don’t like this use case
> particularly? Thanks.
>
>
>
> Best,
>
> Haoyu
>
>
>
> *From:* Greg Mirsky <gregimirsky@gmail.com>
> *Sent:* Monday, February 28, 2022 10:56 AM
> *To:* Haoyu Song <haoyu.song@futurewei.com>
> *Cc:* Tarek Saad <tsaad.net@gmail.com>; mpls <mpls@ietf.org>;
> pals@ietf.org; DetNet WG <detnet@ietf.org>; spring <spring@ietf.org>;
> draft-saad-mpls-miad-usecases@ietf.org
> *Subject:* Re: [spring] Comments on draft-saad-mpls-miad-usecases
>
>
>
> Hi Haoyu,
>
> can you give an example of "the other use cases in the same packet"? I
> don't think that discussing some hypothetical scenarios is a productive way
> for the Open DT.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Greg
>
>
>
> On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 10:05 AM Haoyu Song <haoyu.song@futurewei.com>
> wrote:
>
> Hi Greg,
>
>
>
> What I think is that whatever output is from MIAD, it will provide a new
> solution to support NSH SFC in MPLS.
>
> RFC 8596 shows a way to support NSH SFC in MPLS, but it may not be
> cooperative with the other use cases in the same packet. MIAD tries to
> solve this problem.
>
>
>
> Best,
>
> Haoyu
>
>
>
> *From:* Greg Mirsky <gregimirsky@gmail.com>
> *Sent:* Saturday, February 26, 2022 4:36 PM
> *To:* Haoyu Song <haoyu.song@futurewei.com>
> *Cc:* Tarek Saad <tsaad.net@gmail.com>; mpls <mpls@ietf.org>;
> pals@ietf.org; DetNet WG <detnet@ietf.org>; spring <spring@ietf.org>;
> draft-saad-mpls-miad-usecases@ietf.org
> *Subject:* Re: [spring] Comments on draft-saad-mpls-miad-usecases
>
>
>
> Hi Haoyu,
>
> I am sorry, but after reading your note, I cannot find an answer to my
> question How the MIAD work is applicable to the informational RFC 8596? In
> other words, What do you see as missing in the solution described in RFC
> 8596 that MIAD is expected to address?
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Greg
>
>
>
> On Fri, Feb 25, 2022 at 11:34 AM Haoyu Song <haoyu.song@futurewei.com>
> wrote:
>
> Hi Greg,
>
>
>
> There have been some existing standards (e.g., EL and this one) and
> proposals (some are listed in the document) with each dealing with a
> specific use case. I think it’s beneficial to list them all and then
> consider to use a generic mechanism to handle all these otherwise piecemeal
> solutions. Of course, finally we would need to pick which shall actually be
> supported with the generic method, but at this point, we shall not limit
> ourself.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Haoyu
>
>
>
> *From:* Greg Mirsky <gregimirsky@gmail.com>
> *Sent:* Friday, February 25, 2022 9:54 AM
> *To:* Haoyu Song <haoyu.song@futurewei.com>
> *Cc:* Tarek Saad <tsaad.net@gmail.com>; mpls <mpls@ietf.org>;
> pals@ietf.org; DetNet WG <detnet@ietf.org>; spring <spring@ietf.org>;
> draft-saad-mpls-miad-usecases@ietf.org
> *Subject:* Re: [spring] Comments on draft-saad-mpls-miad-usecases
>
>
>
> Hi Haoyu,
>
> in RFC 8596 I don't find anything that would require any modification to
> the existing MPLS architecture. I would agree that SFC NSH using MPLS to
> connect SFP components might benefit from the new enhancements to the MPLS,
> but so would any other client that uses the MPLS network. Do you think that
> the use case document should list them all?
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Greg
>
>
>
> On Fri, Feb 25, 2022 at 9:42 AM Haoyu Song <haoyu.song@futurewei.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>    - in my earlier comments, I've noted that the informational RFC 8596
>    appears not posing any requirements for enhancements in the MPLS data
>    plane. If I am missing something, please let me know.
>
> Hi Greg,
>
>
>
> The RFC is mentioned because it shows that SFC NSH has been considered to
> be supported in MPLS as well, so it’s a legitimate use case like the others
> in the draft. When we need to support multiple such use cases at the same
> time, we need a generic mechanism to support them, so the use-case draft
> serves as a motivation for our work in the ODT.
>
> Hopefully this answers your question. Thanks,
>
> Haoyu
>
>
>
> *From:* Greg Mirsky <gregimirsky@gmail.com>
> *Sent:* Thursday, February 24, 2022 5:09 PM
> *To:* Tarek Saad <tsaad.net@gmail.com>
> *Cc:* mpls <mpls@ietf.org>; pals@ietf.org; DetNet WG <detnet@ietf.org>;
> spring <spring@ietf.org>; draft-saad-mpls-miad-usecases@ietf.org
> *Subject:* Re: [spring] Comments on draft-saad-mpls-miad-usecases
>
>
>
> Hi Tarek,
>
> thank you for your thoughtful consideration of my comments. I've reviewed
> the diff and got several follow-up notes:
>
>    - the new text in the Introduction section explains the ISD as being
>    encoded as labels:
>
> within the label stack, e.g., encoded as labels, referred to as In
>
>                  Stack Data (ISD), and
>
> I think s/as labels/into label stack elements/ makes the text a bit more
> accurate. What do you think?
>
>
>    - in my earlier comments, I've noted that the informational RFC 8596
>    appears not posing any requirements for enhancements in the MPLS data
>    plane. If I am missing something, please let me know.
>    - I might have missed it earlier. The TSN is the term used for a very
>    specific technology developed at IEEE to support, for example, URLLC
>    services. The DetNet WG defines the methodology in support of these
>    services using IETF technologies - MPLS and IP. I think it would be
>    appropriate if an IETF document refers to Deterministic Networking, not
>    TSN. What is your opinion?
>
> Regards,
>
> Greg
>
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Feb 24, 2022 at 5:52 AM Tarek Saad <tsaad.net@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Greg,
>
>
>
> Thanks for your comments. I’ve addressed several of your comments. The
> latest diffs (revision to be uploaded soon) can be found at:
>
>
> https://tools.ietf.org//rfcdiff?url1=https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-saad-mpls-miad-usecases-00.txt&url2=https://raw.githubusercontent.com/tsaad-dev/drafts/master/miad-usecases/draft-dt-mpls-miad-usecases.txt
> <https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ftools.ietf.org%2Frfcdiff%3Furl1%3Dhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.ietf.org%2Farchive%2Fid%2Fdraft-saad-mpls-miad-usecases-00.txt%26url2%3Dhttps%3A%2F%2Fraw.githubusercontent.com%2Ftsaad-dev%2Fdrafts%2Fmaster%2Fmiad-usecases%2Fdraft-dt-mpls-miad-usecases.txt&data=04%7C01%7Chaoyu.song%40futurewei.com%7Cda35e9b46e054e41cf9b08d9faec0dc5%7C0fee8ff2a3b240189c753a1d5591fedc%7C1%7C1%7C637816714042137291%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=NBW4%2BTmNyQz%2Fs7HwwxW0U1MFxejG7DlRZObINe14Iw0%3D&reserved=0>
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Tarek (for co-authors)
>
>
>
> *From: *spring <spring-bounces@ietf.org> on behalf of Greg Mirsky <
> gregimirsky@gmail.com>
> *Date: *Friday, February 18, 2022 at 4:15 PM
> *To: *draft-saad-mpls-miad-usecases@ietf.org <
> draft-saad-mpls-miad-usecases@ietf.org>, mpls <mpls@ietf.org>,
> pals@ietf.org <pals@ietf.org>, DetNet WG <detnet@ietf.org>, spring <
> spring@ietf.org>
> *Subject: *[spring] Comments on draft-saad-mpls-miad-usecases
>
> Dear Authors,
>
> thank you for your work putting this document together. It helps to
> analyze essential use cases in the scope of the work at the Open DT.
> Attached, please find a copy of the draft with my notes and some
> editorial suggestions. I hope you'll find some of them helpful.
>
> I am looking forward to your feedback and questions.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Greg
>
>