Re: [Idr] Opsdir early review of draft-ietf-idr-bgp-ct-srv6-03
Kaliraj Vairavakkalai <kaliraj@juniper.net> Tue, 09 April 2024 02:35 UTC
Return-Path: <kaliraj@juniper.net>
X-Original-To: idr@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: idr@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4E1C9C14F5FE; Mon, 8 Apr 2024 19:35:47 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.874
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.874 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.08, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=juniper.net header.b="EpnMKcFE"; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=juniper.net header.b="HLo1NkWV"
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id TTuCWke0-CCu; Mon, 8 Apr 2024 19:35:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx0b-00273201.pphosted.com (mx0b-00273201.pphosted.com [67.231.152.164]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1D0A0C14F60B; Mon, 8 Apr 2024 19:35:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pps.filterd (m0108162.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-00273201.pphosted.com (8.17.1.24/8.17.1.24) with ESMTP id 438L5Ep3012248; Mon, 8 Apr 2024 19:35:39 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=juniper.net; h= from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references:in-reply-to :content-type:mime-version; s=PPS1017; bh=OIe1LEI8jl7gv/wPiOomhk 07/qep3MU5/PqGh9sCdOc=; b=EpnMKcFEvyAxM4U24TVO+1vRNsX01tiY1oNWc8 4JGVIJKAmlaCyxhSjXn0pQ3Wsa72CRQeIpOkK8o2dZX36ZWxiNa30VJuMF5sCnzo 7wbstXfqlOf4HLMZIJZFIjptBjMtn/tJOAi6xvj2B+N1FLOZ8qI+qnV5lmVOKhZz FG3T7nY9N3fBdWaVHvj8NLhdRghSOZcO+ovZj1UAgCPheZ8PX75q6xHp9/ZSYif0 p2P9uT7F0cx0wBxLJ5xnxGOIznvxgXC/GzEIZJ+hvRQ7yh7kPOTUzufH/mipc1ME VvFiOxiKhpt3orBgfAqTyJLwvK7gYWcT7WCKkuCcA7H9zeFA==
Received: from co1pr03cu002.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-westus2azlp17014040.outbound.protection.outlook.com [40.93.10.40]) by mx0b-00273201.pphosted.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 3xb4n5vnx0-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Mon, 08 Apr 2024 19:35:38 -0700 (PDT)
ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=Oj+WndI1Nhrz4wLykLJ3lw2sn7Nzm93YXlKsoBUPFMzLpQjrQxk87tRamAHL1elnrkT61TVXujTqxTPBWzNXurBXtYq+G1MQVbTokpMldEZllWuO5TYEfBPfbN1WXNwXBX0tdQBJ9MoXVtHHk5fFqyfl2QkZE64Z3Z06QLtDqoM98pptve+4F+1Y0RGTCjrS2Jn37l6YbfU/uEzFR3y4172qiNAk/+9EsTMUkY+QWuNQ5JG3cq426syj7cX/wjEjJT5396ZxwBGV2Yu6LVgvKkOR0r9GTkPSvYFp/NuuHrU52bjv7AAzTnPC4gE5IJSUcrFoF21iTeq0vldkR1d62A==
ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-ChunkCount:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-0:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-1; bh=OIe1LEI8jl7gv/wPiOomhk07/qep3MU5/PqGh9sCdOc=; b=k6+4rFStmpXEjmqN61c9QQrRJCkQf+zTegBk5V8NXZvPjNxbi6FhSNfpsDRdiAbkpnhucR/iONxy4AG22fUt7ldGAu0AZD+ig4UV2Gsz/bV4uSxBNr650KjnrBanF7ix+Gs7C+e1M3Cigfxiri/MYpXUZg0jSGTb0pyHNOKbnMMTOvUsBFscpxiHhJfE9LsI5Ycvqz/MCXLLRrirnjpcv8pSIT3EhE5XW2kBec0JWUOK8ODALyctxui++1qHhLmsm5Ac19YQRyFIKz5nztzUawC3Qtf94rIV3Qi9WpTl+Rqv3WzOTN+WyOFivU1eRPk5iy+pODohNcogkUioRr+z7Q==
ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=juniper.net; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=juniper.net; dkim=pass header.d=juniper.net; arc=none
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=juniper.net; s=selector1; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=OIe1LEI8jl7gv/wPiOomhk07/qep3MU5/PqGh9sCdOc=; b=HLo1NkWVKQjbXRDqnSEbNfK4ln8tAQA23UVw83E9Y209Cl7MzRevpgwdXZ+CVJO9hJOuRa+pitKY3Gioj6ji+zwcV1lBK5qnHDztbT+qYBjIdHBKrP0/Z/YZS4/dJz3kLx/XQ8JLhyyrhKRyKSxJBZ406uAWBPmW2swHojFFD/o=
Received: from SJ0PR05MB8632.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:a03:394::12) by DS0PR05MB9966.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:8:de::11) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.7409.53; Tue, 9 Apr 2024 02:35:33 +0000
Received: from SJ0PR05MB8632.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::6443:5fe8:4bff:5b2a]) by SJ0PR05MB8632.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::6443:5fe8:4bff:5b2a%3]) with mapi id 15.20.7409.053; Tue, 9 Apr 2024 02:35:33 +0000
From: Kaliraj Vairavakkalai <kaliraj@juniper.net>
To: Nagendra Nainar <nagendrakumar.nainar@gmail.com>, "ops-dir@ietf.org" <ops-dir@ietf.org>
CC: "draft-ietf-idr-bgp-ct-srv6.all@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-idr-bgp-ct-srv6.all@ietf.org>, "idr@ietf.org" <idr@ietf.org>, Natrajan Venkataraman <natv@juniper.net>, Reshma Das <dreshma@juniper.net>
Thread-Topic: [Idr] Opsdir early review of draft-ietf-idr-bgp-ct-srv6-03
Thread-Index: AQHagJ+AmNc5vPG3nESP3Oso5Whqq7Fda+8w
Date: Tue, 09 Apr 2024 02:35:33 +0000
Message-ID: <SJ0PR05MB863220FCAF0F45B8A3C0999FA2012@SJ0PR05MB8632.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
References: <171158253355.10551.11339415605432403015@ietfa.amsl.com>
In-Reply-To: <171158253355.10551.11339415605432403015@ietfa.amsl.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
msip_labels: MSIP_Label_0633b888-ae0d-4341-a75f-06e04137d755_Enabled=True; MSIP_Label_0633b888-ae0d-4341-a75f-06e04137d755_SiteId=bea78b3c-4cdb-4130-854a-1d193232e5f4; MSIP_Label_0633b888-ae0d-4341-a75f-06e04137d755_SetDate=2024-04-07T21:57:31.7180245Z; MSIP_Label_0633b888-ae0d-4341-a75f-06e04137d755_ContentBits=0; MSIP_Label_0633b888-ae0d-4341-a75f-06e04137d755_Method=Standard
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: SJ0PR05MB8632:EE_|DS0PR05MB9966:EE_
x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1
x-ms-exchange-antispam-relay: 0
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0;
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: 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
x-forefront-antispam-report: CIP:255.255.255.255; CTRY:; LANG:en; SCL:1; SRV:; IPV:NLI; SFV:NSPM; H:SJ0PR05MB8632.namprd05.prod.outlook.com; PTR:; CAT:NONE; SFS:(13230031)(366007)(1800799015)(376005); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102;
x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata-chunkcount: 1
x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata-0: 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
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_SJ0PR05MB863220FCAF0F45B8A3C0999FA2012SJ0PR05MB8632namp_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: juniper.net
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthAs: Internal
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthSource: SJ0PR05MB8632.namprd05.prod.outlook.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 58907fe4-03d3-4dce-a33c-08dc583dbadb
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 09 Apr 2024 02:35:33.0792 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: bea78b3c-4cdb-4130-854a-1d193232e5f4
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: 4x3rjNfl2VOW9gPGSfuba+0r/M6NYzH4/jbnWgABvvQ8491Ge0N3N83SaETiatF+kOc8ovy6NpTBChyF7L8ePw==
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: DS0PR05MB9966
X-Proofpoint-GUID: DLx-FHqmHDhavtJ36Z17dgz_po30FTnz
X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: DLx-FHqmHDhavtJ36Z17dgz_po30FTnz
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=baseguard engine=ICAP:2.0.272,Aquarius:18.0.1011,Hydra:6.0.619,FMLib:17.11.176.26 definitions=2024-04-08_19,2024-04-05_02,2023-05-22_02
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_spam_notspam policy=outbound_spam score=0 adultscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 clxscore=1011 bulkscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 impostorscore=0 phishscore=0 spamscore=0 priorityscore=1501 suspectscore=0 malwarescore=0 mlxscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.19.0-2404010003 definitions=main-2404090014
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/4oXU8OJrVtHg7x9iMPI8jplHG0s>
Subject: Re: [Idr] Opsdir early review of draft-ietf-idr-bgp-ct-srv6-03
X-BeenThere: idr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: Inter-Domain Routing <idr.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/idr>, <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/idr/>
List-Post: <mailto:idr@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr>, <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 09 Apr 2024 02:35:47 -0000
Hi Narendra, Thanks for the review and comments. Sorry for the delay in response. Please see inline. KV> Thanks Kaliraj Juniper Business Use Only From: Idr <idr-bounces@ietf.org> on behalf of Nagendra Nainar via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> Date: Wednesday, March 27, 2024 at 4:35 PM To: ops-dir@ietf.org <ops-dir@ietf.org> Cc: draft-ietf-idr-bgp-ct-srv6.all@ietf.org <draft-ietf-idr-bgp-ct-srv6.all@ietf.org>, idr@ietf.org <idr@ietf.org> Subject: [Idr] Opsdir early review of draft-ietf-idr-bgp-ct-srv6-03 [External Email. Be cautious of content] Reviewer: Nagendra Nainar Review result: Has Issues Hi, I have reviewed this document as part of the Operational directorate's ongoing effort to review all IETF documents being processed by the IESG. These comments were written with the intent of improving the operational aspects of the IETF drafts per guidelines in RFC5706. Comments that are not addressed in last call may be included in AD reviews during the IESG review. Document editors and WG chairs should treat these comments just like any other last call comments. Overall Summary: This draft is a experimental track proposing the relevant mechanisms to apply "Intent Driven Service Mapping" for SRv6 dataplane along with the relevant extensions. Based on my reading (version-03), there are a few gaps that needs to be clarified or addressed from the operational aspects. I am marking it as "Has issues" to get some clarification on the below: A BGP CT node that does not support MPLS forwarding advertises the special label 3 (Implicit NULL) in the [RFC8277] MPLS Label field. The Implicit NULL label carried in BGP CT route indicates to receiving node that it should not impose any BGP CT label for this route. Thus a pure SRv6 node carries Implicit NULL in the MPLS Label field in RFC8277 BGP CT NLRI. <Nagendra> The above appears to be a bit misleading. What if a node supports MPLS forwarding but is not enabled or if the node is connected to MPLS domain and SRv6 domain?. KV> A BGP-CT route can include multiple encapsulations (e.g. MPLS, SRv6, UDP-tunneling) based on what the KV> advertiser supports, and is enabled for from perspective of tunnel egress functionality of the CT route being advertised. KV> So, it is perfectly OK for a CT route to have both MPLS and SRv6 encap info. Sender is not restricting the receiver KV> to chose any specific encap. The receiving BGP speaker can use either of these based on what receiver KV> supports and its order of preference. This helps with migration and interop scenarios, as explained in the drafts KV> (Section 6.3 and Section 11.3.2 of draft-bgp-ct], which is referred to in Sec 3 of draft-bgp-ct-srv6). I think that the intention of the above statement is to instruct the receiver to use SRv6 encap. KV> As explained above, that is not the intent. The intent of above para is to just say that if an advertising BGP speaker KV> does not support MPLS (or is not enabled for MPLS forwarding), and it supports SRv6, thus advertises only SRv6 encap info, KV> such a node puts the Implicit NULL special label in RFC8277 NLRI label field of the BGP CT route. So I think it is better to rephrase the above based on the encapsulation intent (SRv6 vs MPLS vs etc) instead of mentioning it based on the protocol support. The BGP Classful Transport route update for SRv6 MUST include an attribute containing SRv6 SID information, with Transposition scheme disabled. <Nagendra> The being a normative MUST statement, I think it is better to clarify more about what "attribute" are we referring here. KV> It is the Prefix-SID attribute or it can be MNH<https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-idr-multinexthop-attribute-00.html#section-5.4.3.3> in future. Currently we mention only Prefix-SID KV> attribute, because MNH is still in the works. KV> We see there is some repetition in text. We will rephrase it as: The BGP Classful Transport route update for SRv6 MUST include an attribute containing SRv6 SID information with Transposition scheme disabled. The BGP Prefix-SID attribute as specified in [RFC9252<https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-idr-bgp-ct-srv6-03.html#RFC9252>] is used for this purpose today. If the [RFC9252<https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-idr-bgp-ct-srv6-03.html#RFC9252>] Prefix-SID attribute contains a "SRv6 SID Structure Sub-Sub-TLV", the Transposition Length MUST be set to 0 and Transposition Offset MUST be set to 0. This indicates nothing is transposed and that the entire SRv6 SID value is encoded in the "SRv6 SID Information Sub-TLV". KV> Hope that works The MUST is for including "an attribute" or to to "disable the transposition scheme" or both?. KV> Both. I think it is better to clarify the same - Something like "...SRv6 MUST include BGP Prefix-SID attribute with SRv6 Service SUb-TLV and MUST disable the transposition scheme". KV> pls see above text. The BGP Prefix-SID attribute as specified in [RFC9252] is used to carry this information correctly. <Nagendra> I think RFC8669 defines BGP prefix-SID attribute and RFC9252 introduces SRv6 Service TLVs for Prefix-SID attribute. KV> Yes. And this draft needs the variant with ‘SRv6 SID information’ support, hence the reference is to RFC-9252. If the [RFC9252] Prefix-SID attribute also contains a "SRv6 SID Structure Sub-Sub-TLV", <Nagendra> The above comment is applicable for this one as well. KV> by ‘above comment’ do you mean the comment about RFC8669? KV> Since ‘SRv6 SID Structure Sub-Sub-TLV’ is defined in 9252 only, KV> I think we need to refer to 9252 and not 8669. Pls let me know KV> if I am missing something. If the [RFC9252] Prefix-SID attribute also contains a "SRv6 SID Structure Sub-Sub-TLV", the Transposition Length is set to 0 and Transposition Offset is set to 0. <Nagendra> Based on the normative MUST statement defined in Section 4, I believe the above should be "MUST set the Transposition Length to 0"?. Or is it not mandatory here? KV> Pls see text suggestion above. It is mandatory, so we have added MUST. A Next hop Resolution Scheme similar to that of BGP CT [BGP-CT] is used on IPv6 Unicast family to resolve “Colorful Prefix” locator routes that carry a mapping community to intent-aware paths in each domain. <Nagendra> By "mapping community", are you referring to the "color extended community" defined in draft-ietf-idr-cpr or the mapping community in Section 5.1 of draft-ietf-idr-bgp-ct? KV> It is the mapping community. But as explained in bgp-ct sec 5.1<https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-idr-bgp-ct-30.html#section-5.1>, Color-extended-community IS-A Mapping-community. KV> the Mapping-Community is not an IANA-type, it is a ‘role’ that any BGP community can play. KV> In this text, we can put (Sec 5.1, [BGP-CT] after the mapping community. If a BGP speaker considers a received BGP CT route invalid for some reason, but is able to successfully parse the NLRI and attributes, Treat-as-withdraw approach from [RFC7606] is used <Nagendra> I think section 6 should refer section 7 of RFC9252 for additional error handling related to SRv6 service SUb-TLVs included in the BGP-Prefix SID attribute. KV> Ack!. We will put additional text referring to RFC9252 sec 7. Thanks, Nagendra _______________________________________________ Idr mailing list Idr@ietf.org https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!HqgTNcsPmk5O-t-Ed-VopxVGIMfnGtNaf0BsL0LIsBDERQh8G6tQKJWuclEOuz7ZCdplf2-TKissxZU$<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!HqgTNcsPmk5O-t-Ed-VopxVGIMfnGtNaf0BsL0LIsBDERQh8G6tQKJWuclEOuz7ZCdplf2-TKissxZU$>
- [Idr] Opsdir early review of draft-ietf-idr-bgp-c… Nagendra Nainar via Datatracker
- Re: [Idr] Opsdir early review of draft-ietf-idr-b… Kaliraj Vairavakkalai