[Detnet] A question on draft-ietf-detnet-ip

Greg Mirsky <gregimirsky@gmail.com> Tue, 19 November 2019 04:00 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 C908A120818 for <detnet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 18 Nov 2019 20:00:03 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.998
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.998 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-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 Y6-R77oRe-Cv for <detnet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 18 Nov 2019 20:00:02 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-lf1-x134.google.com (mail-lf1-x134.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::134]) (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 2B6D3120817 for <detnet@ietf.org>; Mon, 18 Nov 2019 20:00:02 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-lf1-x134.google.com with SMTP id v8so15720045lfa.12 for <detnet@ietf.org>; Mon, 18 Nov 2019 20:00:02 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=uJBO+6acG1lvnyKDH/hEuHuE3KjGnf1vSEjd2mDBpfI=; b=irYeh6wx/oBN/JDOkQPjldR5D9KkqCE5jQC7HyAYoY8+rAK6mHoaryeeJTHeRCCn0g bnOkR0cn6IBYUSFcgSqcpa0Y/vaO2jMYOZtdQqSPV7eBPNr2DVTZsb4LFXX2AF5gcUxp 1de66+oRjAKxezKTzTPXqFl4Hie0RbiwgFSxAfcVabytAp22ymM0TSCAilIRTUlzK2ks ESMj33tFbRjLGPMOjyuI2LPUDhM2t1UCkZ8yRVkcsCdFSCBfH+DkqXGZD8ZnFNyVAt/U hkxs8XY8UjkeI6yVRVO5FwSU65gEKVgLVIRUKTazE8d9jURiNnHa2t0PWpvetTFKvFXL bqiw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=uJBO+6acG1lvnyKDH/hEuHuE3KjGnf1vSEjd2mDBpfI=; b=iZIW4CJpa0dvvXTJM73KDKuWihLl/qvHJ63ildViOTSgPU+k988g6IdQFJrYpdOksw B7+xNl3fPpkzxD6HK0uLdWWADb28tHM82z3tD9zl0xsrI4vMz+tSZ4eHghz+C6deUT3n m+n2u4q8a5knund3XixGn0Q8Z2cfSqirfCGyYOGrJW/WCj6diMWYC+lhaaVSvN2HvxG5 7INVbBqEoeTiIcAS33YEuNjWE22p/XI8F1dRfk5kfbsgyTj08zLOVzUzrd86Q58DRW0J IzBGm/DHis6Sgzw/nr7m/AUhFXWKax8NU/HnkmmFyl1BRUvdxOG0qzjslRBo/FDvEKHW ID8Q==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAVnfDc1e150K3NgDog+eTqx7VcvQEhezjLX0MNTzSNP8l5I3hyl acKMo2aG1cDOy8wMyeqVzGJ0/UKi0BPeZZOVBUajzINFsAM=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqyHSxMFsFqoUplWu3o/NKGesb2EygCTC0Ix86KL6z/kyV8j8dSVITAapNPKmmRZndwYw5i+G4nmqN8ONnXPxlk=
X-Received: by 2002:a19:8a46:: with SMTP id m67mr974907lfd.73.1574135999900; Mon, 18 Nov 2019 19:59:59 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
From: Greg Mirsky <gregimirsky@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Nov 2019 11:59:48 +0800
Message-ID: <CA+RyBmXNhWTiSH0PHiqccVw-=Bq8jgGyAKNkyQ+xPA7d_FmAQw@mail.gmail.com>
To: DetNet WG <detnet@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000001a33990597ab1906"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/detnet/kxZLFkc9tYbeyHjPm4Rlj1AJDNM>
Subject: [Detnet] A question on draft-ietf-detnet-ip
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: Tue, 19 Nov 2019 04:00:04 -0000

Dear Authors, et al.,
apologies for the belated question and I greatly appreciate your
consideration and clarification. The last paragraph in Section 4.1 notes:
   In order to maximize reuse of 5-tuple based mechanisms, e.g,
   traceroute, DetNet-aware applications and end systems SHOULD NOT mix
   DetNet and non-DetNet traffic within a single 5-tuple.
Could you help me understand the reference to the traceroute in the text
above? If the reference is to ICMP traceroute, then, I'll note, it is using
the ICMP protocol, not UDP or TCP. And, as I understand DetNet in IP, a
DetNet IP flow is not envisioned to be using ICMP. Perhaps the intention
was to point to the use of 5-tuple based load balancing in the ECMP
environment?

Regards,
Greg