IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Idr] Comments on draft-ietf-idr-flowspec-path-redirect

guntervandeveldecc@icloud.com Sat, 16 March 2019 23:17 UTC

Return-Path: <guntervandeveldecc@icloud.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 E8B17130DF6 for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 16 Mar 2019 16:17:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.449
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.449 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, KHOP_DYNAMIC=0.85, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=icloud.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 wwXC6duvvLdL for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 16 Mar 2019 16:17:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mr85p00im-hyfv06021301.me.com (mr85p00im-hyfv06021301.me.com [17.58.23.188]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D5BF1124B0C for <idr@ietf.org>; Sat, 16 Mar 2019 16:17:23 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=icloud.com; s=04042017; t=1552778242; bh=R37yKhu7QIbsRhzzUO4fyCDWk65pJWsFtP7dEZSnmzo=; h=Date:From:To:Message-ID:Subject:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=tHXR81ckJv3lG9D2zsYTJEebL9UAPLmiE5lDTluFOGKLJO71appaXxQrFkGHEaICk 41BJB+05g3CVBJyn0V9CLDBIGEUyxOoPVOnjH+pQQo2wQsty2SDyZGeZ29epPE17Pc SIk3e+v1aYjop2xfuyp7T7yLIhyhaR5bElyMfOZylM96/xUhuHLszrWdnzZGLPRvTL vzh1LByczfowGWi5oDGep5b8DuYjROROMn1j20yoe0cqLMFsEwlO3WAQuhfQzGb+2C ZdF7Wwym7oAXdXmzyFpKwKxVyPS/vYAa919TFWaKNY4cT0EJz9XC6RD+/z0Tqx97qA xSUKWHjNiFTAw==
Received: from mail.outlook.com (unknown [52.125.138.126]) by mr85p00im-hyfv06021301.me.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 58F2540115; Sat, 16 Mar 2019 23:17:22 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2019 23:17:20 +0000
From: guntervandeveldecc@icloud.com
To: gunter.van_de_velde@nokia.com, Yu Tianpeng <yutianpeng.ietf@gmail.com>
Cc: idr@ietf.org
Message-ID: <246E99BEEE5D0AE6.813b6476-4de5-4ee3-a02f-5ad85cba589f@mail.outlook.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAKFJ8epSMnPoWBD865M4OowgZVKfj6RRGFdgW-dYdMNVBzXRsQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAKFJ8epSMnPoWBD865M4OowgZVKfj6RRGFdgW-dYdMNVBzXRsQ@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_9504_1717573128.1552778240086"
X-Mailer: Outlook for iOS and Android
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:, , definitions=2019-03-16_18:, , signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 suspectscore=0 malwarescore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1011 mlxscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1812120000 definitions=main-1903160176
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/Ke-CfY1TMuHy9ugQSqgGGoMct_U>
Subject: Re: [Idr] Comments on draft-ietf-idr-flowspec-path-redirect
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: Sat, 16 Mar 2019 23:17:26 -0000

Hi Tim, 




Thanks for reading the draft. Interresting observation.




To my understanding flex algo is orthogonal with flowspec path redirect. The current flowspec draft already support redirect to mpls label or index. Not sure what else is missing. If you plan to redirect to a remote IP address and add a collor then i think we talk about extending https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-idr-flowspec-redirect-ip-02. 




The flowspec redirect to path has no capability to match upon bsid or mpls label and is primarily scoped to use rfc5575 type address matching.




If comments refer to the ietf0-srv6 draft, then Huaimo Chen authored that draft and can comment better.




Kind regards,


G/






On Sat, Mar 16, 2019 at 1:32 PM -0700, "Yu Tianpeng" <yutianpeng.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:










Hi Van de Velde,When I was reading this draft, I found this draft miss the consideration on the concept of "color".Color now has been defined in a couple of drafts and becoming an important concept.There can be at least two usages along with flowspec so far I have found:
1. redirect to a color of a SR policy (refer to draft-ietf-spring-segment-routing-policy).This draft defines the concept of SR policy which can install a list of segments allowing per-flow based source routing.To allow usage of SR-policy along with draft (redirect to a SR-policy), we can simply use BSID which has been defined in the current draft.But there is also a scenario defined called "color only steering in section 8.8.1" I would suggest taking into consideration.
2. Flex-Algo By redirecting to color, we are able to redirect traffic to another alogo topology/slice.. 
By the way, I didn't see the resilence consideration in this draft as the redirected path is always a BSID, and there is no place to pre-install the backup path.Did I miss something here? 
What is your idea about this? 
Comments above apply to your ietf0-srv6 one :)
Thanks in advance.Regards,Tim

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email