Re: [Detnet] [mpls] Continuing with my comments on draft-decraene-mpls-slid-encoded-entropy-label-id
Greg Mirsky <gregimirsky@gmail.com> Sat, 22 January 2022 21:34 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 5ECDE3A1399; Sat, 22 Jan 2022 13:34:20 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.097
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 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, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, 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 Q4UgVuLHYivz; Sat, 22 Jan 2022 13:34:15 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-ej1-x633.google.com (mail-ej1-x633.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::633]) (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 D05673A1382; Sat, 22 Jan 2022 13:34:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-ej1-x633.google.com with SMTP id m4so10282713ejb.9; Sat, 22 Jan 2022 13:34:14 -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=Yjsv+i7TmRYg5qQSH6qnrChmlUE+CPHlTO6iToune0I=; b=ltdzhJ1KK+Gw0o13elp94o2yY1mfBN6JTQs/9ZcQLjK/8VwN9SBF40oU0Kt0sVBzGd gn3/4nb/zLNs3pG27zlrj8F8+5w/8J4PhNXWP2QWS0xhVjIDCG8rtzfrukwdxJVQ+gy7 3wHrlnottuIom9ENoPPDNuGE2eJcp7mKP0c12N5HuuVQLQIs5bWQ87WBRoDcVAM98xWj bOPy1dERQ1IJ6ZBvpxag4sQq1rialOwvKhPkPvYK2F4OiJTjU0fHToCqmS169NAmymUx YUp5WEr/BAe3Iy7zbmf3LXHm2cq43+FGvDp4oyENRxo6P2n+sHB5AKAlFRMJz0rp6mTU nMDQ==
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=Yjsv+i7TmRYg5qQSH6qnrChmlUE+CPHlTO6iToune0I=; b=EE4RBHrdDeQl+0q/fU17ZD3ST/gjvA+ROfCjZ4JRdqf2snG0aGAPAvr7x0l6q0cdGi 3tS9JdbdDHR6yT26xVFQleOaw/wjsqOYSesnhoJESy+j5pR1khjbbxGcGvQYEcQLrdNz s9PfuLNO65oc7jtD/qJ0KYGdMQzXA0z8JHu56SCB34VJ06wihj4zBA6kDWrj013GSFgB q8FRrAWP2V6P8D0oCQ8fpR2jNleQPdhqGbeBNOCwrQApWDFOKbZ/UY1J0ZkKbTAx0EVo bUOov8JKj1zmgUut9gCAsotkAWxHe31l65D6qT7jKfa7nfrsz5R+bicrSSRtjgqxJiBo sMWA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533F6iWWJu01/N5UXviMdPHuqI4vqfOZzvymNehKCTEQENBy8vy7 kTWewTw0MjabODsqKU/xCyyUTLx0dTHoODCP/7fKf1ty
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzm3/f7rZbYVoNoD8zlI11in/I4/Z39ZTi4f6yg+9AykMAC3gsoQbgM4gXwQl14Tc0NrAU/42MYePo2TOP+eEc=
X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:2802:: with SMTP id r2mr7994877ejc.172.1642887252031; Sat, 22 Jan 2022 13:34:12 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CA+RyBmXiJeH+n583QnKMmUpDkgdUAaEEDxNDAskXrw1vyp4X5g@mail.gmail.com> <11050_1642436674_61E59842_11050_100_1_0d0176823ddd4cb4ad825e3ee88445a3@orange.com> <CA+RyBmWUDHP-me+CTZw3QPNH8MJgKhFxYq1wkxNT3wwOq8xjyQ@mail.gmail.com> <6217_1642787863_61EAF417_6217_204_1_8dd254d74cdc46e58328d6889c6984a2@orange.com>
In-Reply-To: <6217_1642787863_61EAF417_6217_204_1_8dd254d74cdc46e58328d6889c6984a2@orange.com>
From: Greg Mirsky <gregimirsky@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2022 13:34:00 -0800
Message-ID: <CA+RyBmXsF_qXP4UDSQW+xA9TsMzyGjwWEARD4MS-BkqXM7AzbA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Bruno Decraene <bruno.decraene@orange.com>
Cc: mpls <mpls@ietf.org>, "pals@ietf.org" <pals@ietf.org>, DetNet WG <detnet@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000103d1305d6327fc7"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/detnet/tcBrwaoroHl4Zv73aZZkJFawGT8>
Subject: Re: [Detnet] [mpls] Continuing with my comments on draft-decraene-mpls-slid-encoded-entropy-label-id
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: Sat, 22 Jan 2022 21:34:21 -0000
Hi Bruno, thank you for your detailed response to my notes. I am looking forward to the new version of the draft and continued discussion. Regards, Greg On Fri, Jan 21, 2022 at 9:57 AM <bruno.decraene@orange.com> wrote: > Hi Greg, > > > > Thank you for the follow up. Please see inline [Bruno2] > > > > > > Orange Restricted > > *From:* Greg Mirsky <gregimirsky@gmail.com> > *Sent:* Friday, January 21, 2022 2:09 AM > *To:* DECRAENE Bruno INNOV/NET <bruno.decraene@orange.com> > *Cc:* mpls <mpls@ietf.org>; pals@ietf.org; DetNet WG <detnet@ietf.org> > *Subject:* Re: [mpls] Continuing with my comments on > draft-decraene-mpls-slid-encoded-entropy-label-id > > > > Hi Bruno, > > thank you for your kind consideration of my comments. Please > find follow-up notes in-line below under the GIM>> tag. > > > > Regards, > > Greg > > > > On Mon, Jan 17, 2022 at 8:24 AM <bruno.decraene@orange.com> wrote: > > Hi Greg, all > > > > Greg, thanks for taking the time to read the draft and comment. > > > > WG, for context, we are discussing a subset of the draft: the ability to > advertise indicator as part of the existing Entropy Label TTL as described > in section 2 of the draft (it’s 1 page): > > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-decraene-mpls-slid-encoded-entropy-label-id-02#section-2 > > > > Please see inline [Bruno] > > > > > > Orange Restricted > > *From:* mpls <mpls-bounces@ietf.org> *On Behalf Of *Greg Mirsky > *Sent:* Thursday, January 13, 2022 11:41 PM > *To:* mpls <mpls@ietf.org>; pals@ietf.org; DetNet WG <detnet@ietf.org> > *Subject:* [mpls] Continuing with my comments on > draft-decraene-mpls-slid-encoded-entropy-label-id > > > > Hi Bruno, et al. > > Thank you for presenting this work at the MPLS Open DT meeting today. > Below please find the summary of my comments and questions with the > additional thoughts that came after we've closed the call. I greatly > appreciate the consideration and opinions of the authors and the group. > > - Compatibility with nodes that support only RFC 6790. > > > - If the proposed indicators are used to signal the presence of an > ISD, that seems to create a problem for an RFC6790-only node as it might > not be able to process the ISD. > > [Bruno] > > - Draft(*) extends the use of the Entropy Label TTL field which is > essentially specified as a Reserved field in RFC 6790. Hence draft is > backward compatible with RFC 6790. > > GIM>> I agree, that if the mechanism is limited to re-use of the TTL > field of the label element that includes the entropy label, then there are > no possible issues. But then, how useful is a mechanism that allows for > only seven indicators of processing instructions? Of course, if the model > does not support a combination of instructions, then the new field might be > viewed not as a set of flags but as a scalar with each value defining a > different processing type. > > [Bruno2] Thank you for acknowledging that it would work. In terms of > possible usages, the draft lists 3 ones in sections 3, 4 and 5. > > > > - Draft does not specify ISD so this is out of scope of this draft. That > been said: > > - You are right that before sending ISD in a new extension, the > capability for the receiver/egress to support this ISD needs to be known by > the sender. This is priori required by all ISD solution. > > - You seemed to assume that ISD are always necessary but IMHO indicators > and ISD are two different extensions and Indicators may be used without ISD > extensions .e.g., cf sections 4, 5, 3 of the draft > > GIM>> I agree, that in some scenarios the ability to signal processing in > a label stack is sufficient and useful. Though, having a method of doing a > subset of what can be done with Ancillary Data and Action indication seems > like an unnecessary overlap. > > [Bruno2] Thank you for the agreement. If one/a use case wants to > advertise more data, it’s possible to extend the proposal (actually one > should be published shortly) > > > - If one of the indicators is to be used to signal the presence of the > extension, that, similarly to the scenario above, might not be correctly > processed by an RFC6790-only node. > > [Bruno] idem > > - Scaling > > > - If the proposed method to signal the ancillary data is used in, for > example, a strict explicit routing environment, the Entropy Label is not > needed. If that is the case, using the indicators, as described in the > draft, seems to waste 20 bits in a label element compared to the mechanism > proposed in draft-kompella-mpls-mspl4fa. > > [Bruno] And for all other cases, the scaling is very good as we carry > indicators with zero extra label. So the net benefit is dependent of the > relative usage of strict explicit routing traffic vs traffic which can be > ECMP. In my environment, the latter is much more prevalent, hence the net > benefit is positive. > > GIM>> I agree that there are cases and scenarios when seven indicators can > solve the operator's immediate problems. Though I believe that a > future-proof solution is preferable. > > [Bruno2] If needed, I believe that this proposal may be extended for the > use cases that would require more. I see no reason for such extension to > not be equally future-proof. > > > > Regards, > > --Bruno > > > > PS : by « draft » I mean section 2 of the draft as this is the scope of > the discussion. > > Regards, > > -Bruno > > Regards, > > Greg > > _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ > > > > Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc > > pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler > > a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration, > > Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci. > > > > This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law; > > they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation. > > If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments. > > As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified. > > Thank you. > > _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ > > Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc > pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler > a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration, > Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci. > > This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law; > they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation. > If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments. > As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified. > Thank you. > >
- [Detnet] Continuing with my comments on draft-dec… Greg Mirsky
- Re: [Detnet] [mpls] Continuing with my comments o… bruno.decraene
- Re: [Detnet] [mpls] Continuing with my comments o… Greg Mirsky
- Re: [Detnet] [mpls] Continuing with my comments o… bruno.decraene
- Re: [Detnet] [mpls] Continuing with my comments o… Greg Mirsky
- Re: [Detnet] [mpls] Continuing with my comments o… Loa Andersson
- Re: [Detnet] [mpls] Continuing with my comments o… bruno.decraene
- Re: [Detnet] [mpls] Continuing with my comments o… bruno.decraene
- Re: [Detnet] [Pals] [mpls] Continuing with my com… Loa Andersson