Re: [Idr] Early allocation request for draft-ietf-idr-segment-routing-te-policy

"Gaurav Dawra (gdawra)" <gdawra@cisco.com> Fri, 06 October 2017 20:17 UTC

Return-Path: <gdawra@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 31814134C98 for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 6 Oct 2017 13:17:37 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.52
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.52 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, 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 VaFrBAs943P0 for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 6 Oct 2017 13:17:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rcdn-iport-8.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-8.cisco.com [173.37.86.79]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B44B3134C9B for <idr@ietf.org>; Fri, 6 Oct 2017 13:17:30 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=12774; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1507321050; x=1508530650; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:mime-version; bh=n/MlAMsr/4MEyqdmevH7Qp61F5jEmcQdeflkU3UTeok=; b=JjBuBGJ9AR/Wh5P9dS5StoMazZwFlfDVG8f7+k0bxDPicYJ0jmLMvWV6 1mV2fqMbtPcHkqmAo8VGRQMSaNlSFBYg84O8bUx2HN4XTFMtYtUmtiXG4 oQ34YJCfLkP4lUjjW2O8LGmS4Mmjb8AuPcyoazQfsKQUeWtu9VlJ7Md54 4=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0CkAAAV5NdZ/51dJa1cGQEBAQEBAQEBA?= =?us-ascii?q?QEBBwEBAQEBgm9uZG4nB4Nzih+PaoF2kHCFP4ISCoU7AhqEBj8YAQIBAQEBAQE?= =?us-ascii?q?BayiFGAEBAQEDI1YQAgEIEQMBAigDAgICMBQJCAIEDgWJTGSkeYInJ4sNAQEBA?= =?us-ascii?q?QEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBHYMtggKBUYIVgkk1gSSEABaCXS+CMgWhMwKUY5M?= =?us-ascii?q?KlSwCERkBgTgBHziBDngVSRIBhQccgWd2iC2BEAEBAQ?=
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.42,484,1500940800"; d="scan'208,217";a="302716902"
Received: from rcdn-core-6.cisco.com ([173.37.93.157]) by rcdn-iport-8.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 06 Oct 2017 20:17:29 +0000
Received: from XCH-RTP-009.cisco.com (xch-rtp-009.cisco.com [64.101.220.149]) by rcdn-core-6.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id v96KHTF2007569 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Fri, 6 Oct 2017 20:17:29 GMT
Received: from xch-rtp-012.cisco.com (64.101.220.152) by XCH-RTP-009.cisco.com (64.101.220.149) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1320.4; Fri, 6 Oct 2017 16:17:28 -0400
Received: from xch-rtp-012.cisco.com ([64.101.220.152]) by XCH-RTP-012.cisco.com ([64.101.220.152]) with mapi id 15.00.1320.000; Fri, 6 Oct 2017 16:17:28 -0400
From: "Gaurav Dawra (gdawra)" <gdawra@cisco.com>
To: "John G. Scudder" <jgs@juniper.net>
CC: "idr@ietf.org" <idr@ietf.org>, "shares@ndzh.com" <shares@ndzh.com>, "Gaurav Dawra (gdawra)" <gdawra@cisco.com>, "Les Ginsberg (ginsberg)" <ginsberg@cisco.com>, "Jose Liste (jliste)" <jliste@cisco.com>, "Arjun Sreekantiah (asreekan)" <asreekan@cisco.com>, "Dhanendra Jain (dhjain)" <dhjain@cisco.com>
Thread-Topic: [Idr] Early allocation request for draft-ietf-idr-segment-routing-te-policy
Thread-Index: AQHTPuAhPuzOyPOTY0+MI0YZZ0Zy+Q==
Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2017 20:17:28 +0000
Message-ID: <39C033F2-AE72-4FAE-BA6E-6586F3F0AE0B@cisco.com>
References: <D52C5D5F-3161-450E-A9E8-F03BBA46DD9E@juniper.net> <5021b09f13dd48468385583e31b0dd3e@XCH-ALN-001.cisco.com> <A57ADB73-A265-4300-AC6F-DDBEE7FFE7D0@juniper.net>
In-Reply-To: <A57ADB73-A265-4300-AC6F-DDBEE7FFE7D0@juniper.net>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/f.25.0.170815
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [10.154.160.246]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_39C033F2AE724FAEBA6E6586F3F0AE0Bciscocom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/N5OuJZtWRdAZircvBuDF0nuoWu4>
Subject: Re: [Idr] Early allocation request for draft-ietf-idr-segment-routing-te-policy
X-BeenThere: idr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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 Oct 2017 20:17:37 -0000

John,

+1

We would like to request for allocation for following Sub-TLV to be. Pls let us know when the allocation is done.

Preference sub-TLV

6

Binding SID sub-TLV

7

Segment List sub-TLV

128



Cheers,

Gaurav

From: Idr <idr-bounces@ietf.org>; on behalf of "John G. Scudder" <jgs@juniper.net>;
Date: Friday, October 6, 2017 at 5:50 AM
To: "Les Ginsberg (ginsberg)" <ginsberg@cisco.com>;
Cc: "idr@ietf.org"; <idr@ietf.org>;, "shares@ndzh.com"; <shares@ndzh.com>;
Subject: Re: [Idr] Early allocation request for draft-ietf-idr-segment-routing-te-policy

On Oct 6, 2017, at 1:53 AM, Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) <ginsberg@cisco.com<mailto:ginsberg@cisco.com>> wrote:
[Les:] It is quite useful I think to point out this fact - but I fail to see how it is relevant to the early allocation decision.  Given that we know that these early codepoints are not available, I do not see that delaying early allocation helps in any way. If there are implementations that used these unassigned codepoints, the sooner we assign values the sooner these implementations can be updated to use values which will be interoperable - so if anything the facts argue that we should accelerate early allocation - not delay it.

That is a fine position to take and consistent with what I tried to express (whether it came through clearly or not).

Thanks,

--John