Re: [Idr] IPR call and WG LC for draft-ietf-idr-bgpls-srv6-ext-04.txt (11/1/2020 to 11/16/2020)

"Ketan Talaulikar (ketant)" <ketant@cisco.com> Fri, 06 November 2020 03:54 UTC

Return-Path: <ketant@cisco.com>
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 1A8AC3A0995 for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 5 Nov 2020 19:54:49 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -9.597
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.597 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, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 header.b=RTwJXpgj; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.onmicrosoft.com header.b=YhaqCtB3
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 Dvw3MAzkgkLs for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 5 Nov 2020 19:54:46 -0800 (PST)
Received: from alln-iport-7.cisco.com (alln-iport-7.cisco.com [173.37.142.94]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B093E3A0991 for <idr@ietf.org>; Thu, 5 Nov 2020 19:54:46 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=20445; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1604634886; x=1605844486; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:references:in-reply-to: mime-version; bh=DRh1H/il1lhC2yo+SUVR1XcoJSs6rB4obXkoaxGZe8c=; b=RTwJXpgjFL9M+TErN7SfCqhnqJa3woLhfhbZJIgbksloCYsFSSn0tIqv Bh2n/4EVHgW/HxlDbNBEWFID/sz3MGZlJKn13QeMGU0l/9bJf/cskRJgj ZrkZWmgNWzTlKmkRQj10jw7WPtB1TmX9lXXvR9XqADAzRP55QXa73u78U Q=;
X-IPAS-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0C5BwD+x6RffYMNJK1iHQEBAQEJARIBBQUBQIFPgSMvU?= =?us-ascii?q?XdZLy4Kh3wDjVOBBJd7gUKBEQNUCwEBAQ0BASUIAgQBAYNLfwKCDgIlOBMCA?= =?us-ascii?q?wEBAQMCAwEBAQEFAQEBAgEGBBQBAYY8DIVyAQEBBBIbEwEBOA8CAQgRBAEBI?= =?us-ascii?q?QcHMhQJCAEBBAESCBqDBYF+TQMuAQIMpT0CgTuIaHSBNIMEAQEFgUdBgwQYg?= =?us-ascii?q?hADBoE4gnKGNYQTG4FBP4ERAUKCGgcuPoEEgVkCAgEBgSYBEgEjKwmDFIIsm?= =?us-ascii?q?n6MDJEbCoJtiQqSIYMYihKSEIIzh1mLdIp4kmSCaAIEAgQFAg4BAQWBayEsP?= =?us-ascii?q?XBwFYMkUBcCDY4fDBcUgzqFFIVEdDgCBgoBAQMJfIw7AYEQAQE?=
IronPort-PHdr: =?us-ascii?q?9a23=3Ajz+XwhUIBD53Q630eLHuMbIhPp3V8LGuZFwc94?= =?us-ascii?q?YnhrRSc6+q45XlOgnF6O5wiEPSBNyFufJZgvXbsubrXmlTqZqCsXVXdptKWl?= =?us-ascii?q?dFjMgNhAUvDYaDDlGzN//laSE2XaEgHF9o9n22Kw5ZTcD5YVCBomC78jMTXB?= =?us-ascii?q?74MFk9KuH8AIWHicOx2qi78IHSZAMdgj27bPtyIRy6oB+XuNMRhN5pK706zV?= =?us-ascii?q?3CpX4bdg=3D=3D?=
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.77,455,1596499200"; d="scan'208,217";a="582186206"
Received: from alln-core-1.cisco.com ([173.36.13.131]) by alln-iport-7.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA; 06 Nov 2020 03:54:45 +0000
Received: from XCH-ALN-002.cisco.com (xch-aln-002.cisco.com [173.36.7.12]) by alln-core-1.cisco.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id 0A63sjnY003009 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Fri, 6 Nov 2020 03:54:45 GMT
Received: from xhs-rcd-001.cisco.com (173.37.227.246) by XCH-ALN-002.cisco.com (173.36.7.12) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1497.2; Thu, 5 Nov 2020 21:54:45 -0600
Received: from xhs-aln-001.cisco.com (173.37.135.118) by xhs-rcd-001.cisco.com (173.37.227.246) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1497.2; Thu, 5 Nov 2020 21:54:44 -0600
Received: from NAM02-CY1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (173.37.151.57) by xhs-aln-001.cisco.com (173.37.135.118) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1497.2 via Frontend Transport; Thu, 5 Nov 2020 21:54:44 -0600
ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=a44kgtxi/ZoUpVXdNLajvQINonsVFID41y9VxHLdX912GJm5aRXnXIzyelrffsRSOd+1/IMUpl9UWHKMOAWWeSr2fQeTaz7Co5wAv/sjzGGk3/9ZFzXv8xQiiWZhw8uYVp+3vnEt7ua1zjEXO7F0hbcsDX23kPfJWbfeMDL7lVkzTOCNzK6hREXLdxev5C8dgPxmCbFlCF3Fi4SrdPjmV7SrK0kHJdCz2Qk1OrbACafZHiotrYw8gvE6TX1bRlD3SJTQTN8QUod5kaSANgByOPgA1OR0KhRmaaZINjbIOJOBAvAZs3/jCPnRf1fcrTepvkGCUSiWz+C/dskAr0PlPA==
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-SenderADCheck; bh=mf/g4QYQDIoXML2ijsr81LwlYrpV53DZtTDPTextLug=; b=jwqnYCqs8djLjKQbvRy9N7jlcXnp1ClT/GUIUF8/5xal5/ikmX0sezNysY9SbTEgCXqJZtg2x5SCMwRv0ZvF37U3xSSfO+ZZXpBdQJD34W+b5PRrQe+A2+TEksKQgUi8DVMubkh6c+AV5OS6+7DNQhSGMyF0fJF4s3fuYFeMFEtIXyd0MFkCGmvxp5WZxikFsJWFCUgqRpvbIoMf1EuviBFFB6wNrS0FeUNyf+QKJk/TyPPTGh5W29uJTfIKN3A8RdPfxWvqU33GPUn0/g7JTZYtWd+hhHJv3yD3ERyh2LBhOVXSqnokza8r2PaixmmMK7mYpheMQI01YgtBeQhpGw==
ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=cisco.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=cisco.com; dkim=pass header.d=cisco.com; arc=none
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cisco.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector2-cisco-onmicrosoft-com; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=mf/g4QYQDIoXML2ijsr81LwlYrpV53DZtTDPTextLug=; b=YhaqCtB3BGvrY/IB37lcSAEgo3pj8bLTkejBbF25hAnG63kavQLFjB7xTXscbQR4NcwMyyQVXei1StFg0Yj274uXoAqyEcyLyh8yAKsFeh//dL6T9LBpJqfzfdKVQRVZJdoaG5NGsoUO+UHwwmOzcwaH+xGT9bKryMynhtJL/8g=
Received: from MW3PR11MB4570.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (20.181.55.214) by MW3PR11MB4745.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (20.181.55.137) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.3499.19; Fri, 6 Nov 2020 03:54:44 +0000
Received: from MW3PR11MB4570.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::d4d5:97f0:17b5:2f77]) by MW3PR11MB4570.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::d4d5:97f0:17b5:2f77%6]) with mapi id 15.20.3499.032; Fri, 6 Nov 2020 03:54:43 +0000
From: "Ketan Talaulikar (ketant)" <ketant@cisco.com>
To: "Dongjie (Jimmy)" <jie.dong@huawei.com>, Susan Hares <shares@ndzh.com>, "idr@ietf.org" <idr@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [Idr] IPR call and WG LC for draft-ietf-idr-bgpls-srv6-ext-04.txt (11/1/2020 to 11/16/2020)
Thread-Index: AdawxZFiqE7+Vp6ETxeuJxQP7/0gpQDHG6AAAANP3ZA=
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2020 03:54:43 +0000
Message-ID: <MW3PR11MB457004537F251A4E20B2FCBEC1ED0@MW3PR11MB4570.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
References: <045d01d6b0c7$c5eb4900$51c1db00$@ndzh.com> <90afe1f6a6ae4a8dbe35ae03b6549f2f@huawei.com>
In-Reply-To: <90afe1f6a6ae4a8dbe35ae03b6549f2f@huawei.com>
Accept-Language: en-GB, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
authentication-results: huawei.com; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;huawei.com; dmarc=none action=none header.from=cisco.com;
x-originating-ip: [72.163.220.25]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 8acb9ec7-b954-43c7-1aad-08d88207b235
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: MW3PR11MB4745:
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <MW3PR11MB4745244292DDF052A6A8BCD5C1ED0@MW3PR11MB4745.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:7691;
x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0;
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: QJiV/BfHck3CE/DWj+whwIqRWI1wxvYo7lszO5PCoMygsJcN3dsVubPbaIjd6JR/8CzeY47qUU0RXk1a0/HcZmFZxXJMRm3LidKxqVta0e3k8VQWvG1CotF/crGUNF7rm9Ak8FcoohGb17NbAQGgITIyUbNrHkjExizJ+PPWPAv45PlyF39iSPgpc94XQFXNVJVRFh5MaL/X+detPbkPvsSLY7nTDS/57xvsYUl4pudsn8Q4sVhBzELqk2xttCd5XFlgA3Vsm5wotlaFGHXrOUfp6JyrnYzd558jQfX0dCa1GTJX/cMRdQrV9k9R6mJ1JJ5YP5YYX01I1mK0VfU/ZeyRrjsCE/qgRGa1y+6XjVKfBbPW8f0ccyqtC6bTw3GkmhiZg7M34JYNhkBpXsMLfQ==
x-forefront-antispam-report: CIP:255.255.255.255; CTRY:; LANG:en; SCL:1; SRV:; IPV:NLI; SFV:NSPM; H:MW3PR11MB4570.namprd11.prod.outlook.com; PTR:; CAT:NONE; SFS:(376002)(346002)(136003)(39860400002)(396003)(366004)(166002)(8936002)(9326002)(8676002)(966005)(71200400001)(83380400001)(2906002)(86362001)(6506007)(53546011)(478600001)(7696005)(76116006)(52536014)(9686003)(66946007)(26005)(55016002)(186003)(316002)(66556008)(33656002)(5660300002)(66446008)(66476007)(110136005)(64756008); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101;
x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata: 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
x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_MW3PR11MB457004537F251A4E20B2FCBEC1ED0MW3PR11MB4570namp_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthAs: Internal
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthSource: MW3PR11MB4570.namprd11.prod.outlook.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 8acb9ec7-b954-43c7-1aad-08d88207b235
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 06 Nov 2020 03:54:43.5338 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 5ae1af62-9505-4097-a69a-c1553ef7840e
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: O4JkJvC5T0nzPtggqFT2TMxZNARD2B0BcF6GQJcoP8RzRfriYg3VN/z5gCsIcGSs8O4uIOn8tJfvzvLq3F13wA==
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: MW3PR11MB4745
X-OriginatorOrg: cisco.com
X-Outbound-SMTP-Client: 173.36.7.12, xch-aln-002.cisco.com
X-Outbound-Node: alln-core-1.cisco.com
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/JMy_fpXh-tFRRqPnNaBl687isgw>
Subject: Re: [Idr] IPR call and WG LC for draft-ietf-idr-bgpls-srv6-ext-04.txt (11/1/2020 to 11/16/2020)
X-BeenThere: idr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Fri, 06 Nov 2020 03:54:49 -0000

Hi Jie,

Please check inline below.

From: Idr <idr-bounces@ietf.org> On Behalf Of Dongjie (Jimmy)
Sent: 06 November 2020 08:20
To: Susan Hares <shares@ndzh.com>om>; idr@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Idr] IPR call and WG LC for draft-ietf-idr-bgpls-srv6-ext-04.txt (11/1/2020 to 11/16/2020)

Hi,

Yes, support with one question for clarification:

For SRv6 EPE, the Peer adjacency SID is advertised using SRv6 End.X SID TLV with BGP-LS Link NLRI, and this document says:

"The SRv6 End.X SID for the BGP Peer Adjacency indicates the cross-connect to a specific layer-3 link to the specific BGP session peer (neighbor)."

For the SRv6 EPE Peer Node SID, this document says:

"... the similar Peer Node and Peer Set functionality can be realized with SRv6 using the END.X behavior. The SRv6 BGP Peer Node SID TLV is an optional TLV for use in the BGP-LS Attribute for an SRv6 SID NLRI corresponding to BGP protocol."

My question is: for a BGP peer established using direct interface address, does this require both a peer adj-SID with BGP-LS Link NLRI and a peer node SID in SRv6 SID NLRI be advertised?
[KT] Yes.

 While with the mechanism of SR-MPLS EPE, my understanding is in this case advertising only the peer node SID would be enough, the peer adj-SID is optional and may be used for a multi-hop session with multiple underlying layer-3 links.
[KT] The SR-MPLS BGP EPE specification does not mandate the advertisement of any SID. It simply describes how to advertise them. In that sense, all of them are optional and the use-case/application determines which ones are required. It is the same in case of SRv6 BGP EPE. The differences between the two are the following:

  *   In case of SR-MPLS, both Adjacency and Node SIDs are advertised using their own separate/different BGP-LS Link NLRIs - this happens because their link descriptors are different. Please check sec 4.1 and 4.2.
  *   In case of SRv6, it is also advertised via different NLRIs - the Adjacency SID using the Link NLRI since it represents a topological link similar to IGPs. And the Node SID using the SRv6 SID NLRI since it does not represent a topological link but instead a peering session (that may go over one or more topological links or in some cases with multi-hop multiple nodes).
Hope that clarifies.

Thanks,
Ketan

Best regards,
Jie

From: Idr [mailto:idr-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Susan Hares
Sent: Monday, November 2, 2020 11:25 AM
To: idr@ietf.org<mailto:idr@ietf.org>
Subject: [Idr] IPR call and WG LC for draft-ietf-idr-bgpls-srv6-ext-04.txt (11/1/2020 to 11/16/2020)

This begins an IPR call and a 2 week WG LC for
draft-ietf-idr-bgpls-srv6-ext-04.txt (11/1 to 11/16/2020)

You can access the draft at:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-idr-bgp-ls-flex-algo/

This draft focus on the BGP-LS support for SRv6.
Spring has proposed the SRv6 support in RFC8402
(see section 3.1.3 for mechanisms and section 8.2 for
Security considerations).

There are two implementations: Cisco and GoBGP
You can see the implementation report at:
https://trac.ietf.org/trac/idr/wiki/draft-ietf-idr-bgpls-srv6-ext%20implementations

In your responses, please consider the following questions:
a) Is the SRv6 technology ready for deployment or
are there known issues?

b) Will SRv6 provide valuable support for
deployments of BGP-LS in support of source routing
(aka spring)?

c) Is this draft ready for publication?

If you know of additional implementations, please send
a note to the idr chairs with the information or
respond to this email.

Cheers, Susan Hares