[i2rs] Question on opstate/ephemeral update

Joe Clarke <jclarke@cisco.com> Wed, 16 November 2016 06:56 UTC

Return-Path: <jclarke@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: i2rs@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: i2rs@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 188E71295F8 for <i2rs@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 15 Nov 2016 22:56:38 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -16.018
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-16.018 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=-1.497, SPF_PASS=-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 wiGo0ZSFYevJ for <i2rs@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 15 Nov 2016 22:56:29 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com [173.37.86.80]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4892D12964E for <i2rs@ietf.org>; Tue, 15 Nov 2016 22:56:29 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=898; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1479279389; x=1480488989; h=to:from:subject:message-id:date:mime-version: content-transfer-encoding; bh=eFm4krokatFykizbCdDpOHgc2ZsfNDUblCXpt90O+2E=; b=bpzcyNVsZDmqyu7EPArG7yHPsBno8xuvfXvdhWv7NoGRgIucbIZrPpjo dZQL/qWKzjchmw00+/g4E5N3hfCAWngNoZ7NZohYzrGVL09RqOdrk0biG s1dvzqeiLa5PGh7kyaw5ULW4mAoGKvvd06hepp/3r7wQg9x6YCd7G5eA2 4=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0DiBABeAixY/4MNJK1dGgEBAQECAQEBA?= =?us-ascii?q?QgBAQEBgzcBAQEBAR9YLFSNPqtvggcqiAU/FAECAQEBAQEBAWIdC4RmJRV2AiY?= =?us-ascii?q?CXw0IAQGIaA6hYI98gimLZQEBAQEGAQEBAQEdBYEJhTOBfQiGboMzgl0Fj1yKZ?= =?us-ascii?q?YFDjyGBb4gShiGHQYoUHjeBB4VXIDQBh2kBAQE?=
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.31,647,1473120000"; d="scan'208";a="169559881"
Received: from alln-core-1.cisco.com ([173.36.13.131]) by rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA; 16 Nov 2016 06:56:28 +0000
Received: from [10.24.68.176] ([10.24.68.176]) by alln-core-1.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id uAG6uRQV024672 for <i2rs@ietf.org>; Wed, 16 Nov 2016 06:56:27 GMT
To: "i2rs@ietf.org" <i2rs@ietf.org>
From: Joe Clarke <jclarke@cisco.com>
Organization: Cisco Systems, Inc.
Message-ID: <8419df8b-4861-edb7-0a66-c2c123148727@cisco.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2016 01:56:26 -0500
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.12; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/i2rs/LhDBjGB4XrYNT07iCOKLZ8nxMZM>
Subject: [i2rs] Question on opstate/ephemeral update
X-BeenThere: i2rs@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Interface to The Internet Routing System \(IRS\)" <i2rs.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/i2rs>, <mailto:i2rs-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/i2rs/>
List-Post: <mailto:i2rs@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:i2rs-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs>, <mailto:i2rs-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2016 06:56:38 -0000

Given the tight timing of the meeting, I don't want to derail things. 
If we have time, I'll raise this at the mic.

But I do have a question on slide 2 of 
https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/97/slides/slides-97-i2rs-i2rs-opstate-and-ephemeral-00.pdf 
.  I see DHCP along side the [I2RS] control plane DSes.  I understand 
that the I2RS agent will handle the resolution of multiple client writes 
using priorities.

But how does that play with DHCP or local config?  In our ephemeral 
requirements draft we say that local config (<intended> in this drawing) 
would have a priority.  And that in the <applied> state the device would 
have to resolve the local priorities with the "winning" config from the 
I2RS agent.  But then DHCP writes a route.  How will that be handled?

I would like some clarity with respect to our priority requirements in 
the ephemeral state draft.

Joe