Re: [Idr] Adoption call for draft-dunbar-idr-5g-edge-compute-app-meta-data-09.txt (7/29/2022 to 8/12/2022)

Donald Eastlake <d3e3e3@gmail.com> Sat, 13 August 2022 18:19 UTC

Return-Path: <d3e3e3@gmail.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 95A89C14F72A for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 13 Aug 2022 11:19:57 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.855
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.855 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, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=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=gmail.com
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 BaUCHJ6ZFxsc for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 13 Aug 2022 11:19:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lj1-x230.google.com (mail-lj1-x230.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::230]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2D034C14F729 for <idr@ietf.org>; Sat, 13 Aug 2022 11:19:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-lj1-x230.google.com with SMTP id by6so3803256ljb.11 for <idr@ietf.org>; Sat, 13 Aug 2022 11:19:53 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc; bh=NoqCVEZQLgQowszKPiHPZfSGWnQWmgFHQGvQAFsT/zw=; b=bjtZzWERc3xtWivYuFVZAJDHbKGIwnNRUI7sB3euzsr9e86lAQdZBwsoiybQghmEap 9kdHLxGr3wmumccrfIJ3Pd+7zRRwttXcmIRKKau5o+QOHxSk5Mkgt58V2eJWn7ecJsV6 XhfMAOSzRDNNlslx5FJA/Im8+6gy3K5aciJcMHH8hM45FCArBwwHbXZVMb+tmhlBLQyt sV7HjUaj8OG+yuHjgNSD5KRBNVxVAK8QqNaZHp+cb+ZymmqfAxxhFSMBwSgZw7EgrNMr xkDNRiIAdztPkY3ikg2+iuY0osW6sg8y8S+BujPOhP2c7Ljm61EPG4WJcI5+zygjtbTq ua+A==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc; bh=NoqCVEZQLgQowszKPiHPZfSGWnQWmgFHQGvQAFsT/zw=; b=u6gV3WZV7dPXCkXelFmcELHOaeLyLwM/LPgnDM/0PqDR3OxyUhuQD4QDibtnhhEbSF M6E7d7bEDpeVKOkDHt15wOD9CyIsOUxEnum07zDERE/HckkoprzsFtp9cT4koCXGugFX c+cqfnuJ1rwnKrS4+b7db5iCPvtAAow1vqfTkyluR49123S8IdK7e8/W+r/rXJmnc5TR vVeqhKd0MMDz+NOuMsee+QKz5iRX4BXmZAd+J5jGWSxsqDbNzXDUx10V4Uk+XE2A5icK ujRgVgK1KMK1WKNUC+0a8z+S91bpCPQ4WLjx8VRH2XJjpynb3CQ9rc1udEyu+PO8MmmO WyfQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: ACgBeo24iv0QIqrbPK5mF1ne5PzxBrmDLbBL/+SWcUxsZba1t+BkRbDi YSHXRCpeK3s9AjAjzlbnUeFFZw9O39QQwSSLifOe/sbU6J0=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AA6agR5jOi9m4EOS+wYR/61pYFVJn7KIRe/MyUlh184sPSIa/Yp0WgDnVgPJonLBpFnHrqViHqOgzWd6eRUCo28yXWk=
X-Received: by 2002:a2e:a90f:0:b0:25d:f265:416e with SMTP id j15-20020a2ea90f000000b0025df265416emr3008409ljq.167.1660414790727; Sat, 13 Aug 2022 11:19:50 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <BYAPR08MB4872CFF0336A359D8D1210D0B3999@BYAPR08MB4872.namprd08.prod.outlook.com>
In-Reply-To: <BYAPR08MB4872CFF0336A359D8D1210D0B3999@BYAPR08MB4872.namprd08.prod.outlook.com>
From: Donald Eastlake <d3e3e3@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 13 Aug 2022 14:19:39 -0400
Message-ID: <CAF4+nEEpXpr_DRcvUJ7C8bHniYi6QX-SY8aQfEEkpVjuJKmboQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Susan Hares <shares@ndzh.com>
Cc: "idr@ietf.org" <idr@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000c7fffc05e6237136"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/QV4ud9zi4OzuICps7Db1p2jryzc>
Subject: Re: [Idr] Adoption call for draft-dunbar-idr-5g-edge-compute-app-meta-data-09.txt (7/29/2022 to 8/12/2022)
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: Sat, 13 Aug 2022 18:19:57 -0000

Hi Sue,

I have read this draft and support working group adoption. See answers to
questions below and some editorial comments further below.

On Fri, Jul 29, 2022 at 6:23 AM Susan Hares <shares@ndzh.com> wrote:
> This begins a 3 week WG Adoption call for
> draft-dunbar-idr-5g-edge-compute-app-meta-data-09.txt
>
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-dunbar-idr-5g-edge-compute-app-meta-data/
>
> This draft proposes a new SubTLV (AppMetaData)
> for the BGP Tunnel Encapsulation Attribute [RFC9012]
> that indicates the running status and environment of directly
> attached 5G Edge Computing (EC) instances.
>
> The AppMetaData can be used by routers in the
> 5G Local Data Network to make path selection
> not only based on the routing distance but also the running
> environment of the destinations. The goal is to improve
> latency and performance for 5G EC services.
>
> In your discussion of this adoption call, please consider
> these questions:
>
> 1) The addition of this type of information to tunnels
> is useful for inter-domain routing within 5G networks?

Yes.

> 2) What type of additional load this data to
> Basic Tunnel encapsulation [RFC9012]?

It seems to me to be a reasonably low load.

> For example is the load placed by this draft equal or
> Less than the SR routing additions from
> such as draft-ietf-idr-segment-routing-te-policy?
>
> 3) Will the addition of this information aid
> Routing in 5G networks?

I think so, although I believe it could also be useful in some non-5G
networks.

See editorial comments below.

> Cheers, Sue Hares

*Editorial Comments:*
Section 2: There are entries for A-ER, L-DN, PSA, and SSC that are not used
and could be deleted.
Various: S1:aa08::4450 is used as an IPv6 address but I don't get what this
"S1" means.
Section 3.1.2: There is this illustration before which it says "is not to
be standardized" but I think it would be better to say "is an informational
example". Inside that illustrative example is "[5G-Sticky-Service]" which
does not appear in the references and should perhaps be "[5G-Edge-Sticky]".
In the last paragraph in this section is a reference to "Section 6 Soft
Anchoring" but that doesn't seem to be what Section 6 is about.
Section 3.1.3: In the first line, I think "eNB" should be "gNB".
Section 4.1: I think it would be better if the description of the fields in
Figure 2 appeared between Figure 2 and 3 rather than after Figure 3.
Section 4.2: In the first sentence there is a reference to Soft Anchoring
in Section 5 but that doesn't seem to be what Section 5 is about.
Section 5: In describing the proposed Extended Community, the Usage-Index
field is said to describe what is in the Site Capacity Index field but the
Site Capacity Index field is described as just being a percentage. The
diagram should probably have a Figure number and inside the diagram "Side"
-> "Site". In the description of Site Reference, "identifer" ->"identifier".
References: There are a number of references not used in the draft
including RFCs 4363, 8200, and 5521.

Thanks,
Donald
=============================
 Donald E. Eastlake 3rd   +1-508-333-2270 (cell)
 2386 Panoramic Circle, Apopka, FL 32703 USA
 d3e3e3@gmail.com