IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Detnet] Initial DP split documents available

"Andrew G. Malis" <agmalis@gmail.com> Mon, 23 April 2018 15:54 UTC

Return-Path: <agmalis@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 089EB12D77E for <detnet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 23 Apr 2018 08:54:27 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.699
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.699 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_LOW=-0.7, 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 Mrfn0FkRQ-ko for <detnet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 23 Apr 2018 08:54:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-oi0-x22f.google.com (mail-oi0-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c06::22f]) (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 9661612D777 for <detnet@ietf.org>; Mon, 23 Apr 2018 08:54:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-oi0-x22f.google.com with SMTP id x9-v6so14740874oig.7 for <detnet@ietf.org>; Mon, 23 Apr 2018 08:54:24 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=qB5vEUhSF1QQRBD3l1Q8WkQez7pvCzFP/p+JtqDUUcA=; b=iKhClDk0bfcB7IIzzS4lYaKc6owNLmm949kpxBUdBR+xtTWya8qpRphxCvUkSsW/TR rVGgaeCSipE+P+xd0Ys47OszwgZjBnE3y9p34TZyz5kUzmJFKslYYiyhA+0qpD5oKxuP vFGuTybcxO9OcYOS3YW/xFVN365bTmyHKc/zCipcWR0aiwZpYKPpxW2DvSHqfplDZWne 22VhQe+wIATAP4irOTkq1c3kmdnUSApCopf9dZQxPvENSoADwmmNZSP00qv1nxplZefX /VPXZ6ffLr1WK790+yHUeNoC8+pXRSxmUXTXVX1aQt4bAuQWsu6sf+AWKAGfQhWQ8Fb4 3Bqw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=qB5vEUhSF1QQRBD3l1Q8WkQez7pvCzFP/p+JtqDUUcA=; b=ucVeXPLbtvkd1gfdy/M3KdobYgnuQuEWKv89WlP3htdp3hsMws8Ng+hLQYq1bWSNSP SCo0X/Xj/wcBI+1Qs37YH842Go4ojdX6n2NSWfVhAX1tMY45vJQuWDYcZgkXYJpUcibK aUPVPMDHRXNcz1lK9ItFOH1SCaYAJJR+YR0JuVRAppsNeGvkf7nFhlb5lPpbduhbS4qv LgWih7fl6pzkuNC5Mfc0WiPResUiYHoSXW5UQWqLlLwCNVw4oWlBrcmpI1oqE1HQPLL3 WW0B0iLjGbZmeuxVX9JX6JJ+igbcc2xuBREBc+DxjsNL9I61Qv51q32r9gd3FOptBAWT 7ZwQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALQs6tB3CGw2JRSoOt1XrhwLgqFg3A3ytyGyIeXLRBAR70Ln0bK/x0xx dXVejvSMI3ivziHx0p2zx4INgGKC7dTgJiau/8A=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AIpwx491CiHArCA3FO+lqgt8fwkZXcV6QBugp/xfmr8ToCdTgLUuC0WCEbQyBOqYvPpI+EMH0SLNH25DPcXjkIS43aM=
X-Received: by 2002:aca:5cd7:: with SMTP id q206-v6mr12173997oib.154.1524498863977; Mon, 23 Apr 2018 08:54:23 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 2002:a9d:1f3a:0:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Mon, 23 Apr 2018 08:54:03 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <558da407-e814-b411-b816-043007caa19a@labn.net>
References: <DB4PR07MB065371BC2D2B6F348D24864AACB00@DB4PR07MB0653.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com> <DB4PR07MB0653F67DB2ACBFF68F2B2BA9AC8A0@DB4PR07MB0653.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com> <CAA=duU3eErGPd6gAP9wd7b6vq+9VTCtnRXJPu_arh_-dg_P0FQ@mail.gmail.com> <0358461b-b79b-8e5e-f73d-b6325fe77a0a@labn.net> <CAA=duU2n3En=tvOB0ezXZTxHwMYUhdj4yQaw7Fp5P-BcxaxL5w@mail.gmail.com> <558da407-e814-b411-b816-043007caa19a@labn.net>
From: "Andrew G. Malis" <agmalis@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 11:54:03 -0400
Message-ID: <CAA=duU3CW8anNLo3u_0i=kA_wNz754veacAomvJV2ccbcpefxg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net>
Cc: Balázs Varga A <balazs.a.varga@ericsson.com>, "detnet@ietf.org" <detnet@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000003f7b1b056a860d00"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/detnet/qVHLzJG9D2_gb6hzwA-F5YxOzIs>
Subject: Re: [Detnet] Initial DP split documents available
X-BeenThere: detnet@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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, 23 Apr 2018 15:54:27 -0000

Lou,



On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 11:29 AM, Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net> wrote:
>
> On 4/23/2018 10:43 AM, Andrew G. Malis wrote:
>
> Lou,
>
> I prefer option (b). The reason is that the IP flows sourced from an IP
> node are already covered in section 6 of draft-ietf-detnet-dp-sol-ip-00,
>
> Humm, I just looked at this draft a bit more.
>
> (as chair), based on the latest direction discussed in the WG - I think
> section 6 should be come the meat of this document and *all* references to
> MPLS in the earlier sections need to be removed.
>

We can discuss how do to do this on the call tomorrow. I suggested two
possible alternatives.

> while section 7 of that draft is the proper place for the draft-malis
> text, and already contains a placeholder for it. It will indeed reference
> the MPLS draft for the definition of the S-Label, Control Word, etc.
>
>
> (as ??? - perhaps all hats) I really don't think MPLS has a place in this
> document.  Just like RFC 791 doesn't define MPLS or XYZ over IP...
>

Except that the DetNet encapsulation that supports PR and EF for transport
over an IPv4 or IPv6 transport network reuses the MPLS encapsulation within
UDP, as we agreed in London.

So we have to decide if the IP draft is to discuss IP DetNet clients,
DetNet over an IP transport network, or both. Currently it is both.

Cheers,
Andy


>
>
> Lou
>
>
> Cheers,
> Andy
>
>
> On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 10:11 AM, Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net> wrote:
>
>> Andy,
>>
>> One comment below.
>>
>> On 4/23/2018 9:36 AM, Andrew G. Malis wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> 2. The text from draft-malis-detnet-ip-dp-00 has not yet been
>>> incorporated into draft-ietf-detnet-dp-sol-ip-00. This can happen in
>>> the next revision.
>>>
>>
>> This draft really is about carrying MPLS over an IP PSN and not native IP
>> flows sourced from any IP node, including hosts, right? As such I think
>> this falls in the category of an interworking function and we should decide
>> if it belongs in (a) the MPLS solution doc and references the IP solution
>> doc, (b) in the IP solution doc and references the MPLS solution doc or (c)
>> in it's own document which references both solutions docs.  My inclination
>> is either (a) as IP only devices won't care about MPLS,  or (c) as then we
>> have an RFC that makes it clear that a conformant implementation supports
>> the IWF.
>>
>> What do you/others think?
>>
>> Lou
>>
>>
>
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email