Re: [Idr] Regd BGP-LS code points early allocation for WG adopted drafts

[Jeff Tantsura <[e-mail]>]

Hi,

 

Great to see we are all on the same page.

There’s IPR that has been disclosed - https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/3023/

 

Thanks,

Jeff

From: Susan Hares <[e-mail]>
Date: Thursday, September 28, 2017 at 11:47
To: "'Ketan Talaulikar (ketant)'" <[e-mail]>, 'Jeff Tantsura' <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>
Cc: 'idr wg' <[e-mail]>, 'Stefano Previdi' <[e-mail]>, "'Acee Lindem (acee)'" <[e-mail]>, "'Les Ginsberg (ginsberg)'" <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: [Idr] Regd BGP-LS code points early allocation for WG adopted drafts

 

Ketan:

 

No.  The working group would encourage you to get early allocations.  The chair was simply confused.  I thought you wanted to establish the registry first.  

 

I’m awaiting a response from Les and then I will start the early allocation call today. 

 

Sue    

 

From: Ketan Talaulikar (ketant) [mailto:[e-mail]] 
Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2017 11:00 AM
To: Susan Hares; 'Jeff Tantsura'; [e-mail]
Cc: 'idr wg'; 'Stefano Previdi'; Acee Lindem (acee); Les Ginsberg (ginsberg)
Subject: RE: [Idr] Regd BGP-LS code points early allocation for WG adopted drafts

 

Hi Susan,

 

Thanks for sharing this and I do remember this discussion. But I thought this proposed registry was about MSD sub-types which we wanted to share across the protocols.

 

The early allocation in question on this thread is the BGP-LS code points for the Node and Link MSD attributes. These come from within BGP-LS registry. The corresponding code-points in OSPF and ISIS have already got through the early allocation process after those drafts became WG items.

 

While we do want to close on the common registry for the MSD sub-types at the earliest, does the WG want to gate the BGP-LS code points early allocation for this?

 

Thanks,

Ketan

 

From: Susan Hares [mailto:[e-mail]] 
Sent: 28 September 2017 20:21
To: Ketan Talaulikar (ketant) <[e-mail]>; 'Jeff Tantsura' <[e-mail]>; [e-mail]
Cc: 'idr wg' <[e-mail]>; 'Stefano Previdi' <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: [Idr] Regd BGP-LS code points early allocation for WG adopted drafts

 

Ketan and Jeff: 

 

After looking at my email and notes on this, I found that I had put this on pause because of Acee’s note with the following information on September 3rd (I’ve reformatted Acce’s 9/3 note for consumption).  The following email chain left me awaiting a draft describing the registry.  

 

Is there a document I should review or put before the IDR WG in addition to draft-ietf-idr-bgp-ls-segment-routing-msd? 

 

Susan Hares 

 

 

PS - Normally, I do not do WG calls on Early adoptions during August because for 8 years the response has been terrible and then the AD (Alvaro) or the IESG asks me if there is support.   Getting this response on the 3rd of September slowed down the progress.  I apologize for the delay.  I should have actively pushed to get a resolution of the msd registry. 

 

 

 

=============

 (This has been informally discussed in the past with some of the folks on this thread – but wanted to present this more formally as the set of drafts matures.)

IS-IS/OSPF/IDR WG Chairs –

The authors of:

draft-ietf-isis-segment-routing-msd

draft-ietf-ospf-segment-routing-msd

draft-ietf-idr-bgp-ls-segment-routing-msd

would like to highlight the point that we wish to create a shared protocol independent registry for defining the MSD types which will be advertised as described in the three drafts mentioned above. We think having a single common registry will make it easier to maintain the consistency of additional MSD types when/if they are added in the future.

The description of the new registry is most accurately described in the IANA section of draft-ietf-isis-segment-routing-msd:

<snip>

  This document requests the creation of a new IANA managed registry to  identify MSD types as proposed in Section 3, Section 4.  The  registration procedure is "Expert Review" as defined in [RFC5226]. Suggested registry name is "MSD Sub-types".  Types are an unsigned 8    bit number.  The following values are defined by this document

       Value     Name                             Reference

      0         Reserved                            This document

      1         Base MSD                           This document

      2-250     Unassigned                    This document

      251-254   Experimental              This document

      255       Reserved                         This document

                Figure 4: MSD Sub-type Codepoints Registry

<end snip>

If any of you have concerns or suggestions regarding this plan we (the set of authors) welcome your input.

Les (on behalf of all the authors)

 

 

From: Idr [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of Susan Hares
Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2017 12:10 AM
To: 'Ketan Talaulikar (ketant)'; 'Jeff Tantsura'; [e-mail]
Cc: 'idr wg'; 'Stefano Previdi'
Subject: Re: [Idr] Regd BGP-LS code points early allocation for WG adopted drafts

 

Ketan:

 

I will work on expediting this in the morning (ET (eastern US)). 

 

Sue Hares 

IDR WG Chair 

 

From: Idr [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of Ketan Talaulikar (ketant)
Sent: Wednesday, September 27, 2017 10:21 PM
To: Jeff Tantsura; [e-mail]
Cc: idr wg; Stefano Previdi; Susan Hares
Subject: Re: [Idr] Regd BGP-LS code points early allocation for WG adopted drafts

 

Hi Jeff/Authors,

 

Can we know the status of the IANA allocation process for early allocation of the code points for draft-ietf-idr-bgp-ls-segment-routing-msd? Can we please expedite this?

 

The other two drafts mentioned in this email thread have got the code points allocated already.

 

Also, the latest versions have removed the code point “suggestions” based on the discussions on this matter on the WG email list here AND at the past IETF. It would be great though if we could get the same code points as below from IANA, if they are still available.

https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-tantsura-idr-bgp-ls-segment-routing-msd-02

Node MSD : 1050

Link MSD : 1110

 

Thanks,

Ketan

 

From: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) 
Sent: 14 August 2017 10:34
To: Ketan Talaulikar (ketant) <[e-mail]>; Jeff Tantsura <[e-mail]>; Job Snijders <[e-mail]>; John G. Scudder <[e-mail]>
Cc: Stefano Previdi <[e-mail]>; Susan Hares <[e-mail]>; [e-mail]; [e-mail]; idr wg <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: [Idr] Regd BGP-LS code points early allocation for WG adopted drafts

 

WG Chairs –

 

If you have not already done so please initiate early allocation of code points for https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-idr-te-pm-bgp/

Thanx.

 

   Les

 

 

From: Ketan Talaulikar (ketant) 
Sent: Friday, August 04, 2017 10:24 PM
To: Jeff Tantsura; Job Snijders; John G. Scudder; Les Ginsberg (ginsberg)
Cc: Stefano Previdi; Susan Hares; [e-mail]; [e-mail]; idr wg
Subject: RE: [Idr] Regd BGP-LS code points early allocation for WG adopted drafts

 

Hi All,

 

The IANA early allocation has been done for the BGP-LS SR extension drafts now, but the other two drafts related to MSD and draft-idr-te-pm are still pending early allocations. May I request the authors to please request for the same at the earliest? 

 

We have a collision right now between these drafts with their previously “suggested” code point values so would appreciate if this was resolved ASAP to aid implementations.

 

For the record, the previously suggested values were:

 

      TLV Type                   Value

   --------------------------------------------------------

    1104 (Suggested)  Unidirectional Link Delay

 

    1105 (Suggested)  Min/Max Unidirectional Link Delay

 

    1106 (Suggested)  Unidirectional Delay Variation

 

    1107 (Suggested)  Unidirectional Packet Loss

 

    1108 (Suggested)  Unidirectional Residual Bandwidth

 

    1109 (Suggested)  Unidirectional Available Bandwidth

 

    1110 (Suggested)  Unidirectional Bandwidth Utilization

 

Then from the MSD draft, we have collision

 
   Code-point: 1110 (Suggested value - to be assigned by IANA) from BGP-
   LS Node Descriptor, Link Descriptor, Prefix Descriptor, and Attribute
   TLVs registry
 

Thanks,

Ketan

 

From: Jeff Tantsura [mailto:[e-mail]] 
Sent: 15 July 2017 19:48
To: Job Snijders <[e-mail]>; John G. Scudder <[e-mail]>; Ketan Talaulikar (ketant) <[e-mail]>
Cc: Stefano Previdi <[e-mail]>; Susan Hares <[e-mail]>; [e-mail]; [e-mail]; idr wg <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [Idr] Regd BGP-LS code points early allocation for WG adopted drafts

 

That’s the plan!

 

Cheers,

Jeff

 

 

From: Job Snijders <[e-mail]>
Date: Saturday, July 15, 2017 at 16:15
To: Jeff Tantsura <[e-mail]>, "John G. Scudder" <[e-mail]>, "Ketan Talaulikar (ketant)" <[e-mail]>
Cc: Stefano Previdi <[e-mail]>, Susan Hares <[e-mail]>, "[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>, "[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>, idr wg <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [Idr] Regd BGP-LS code points early allocation for WG adopted drafts

 

 

On Sat, 15 Jul 2017 at 15:35, Jeff Tantsura <[e-mail]> wrote:

Would  you want the authors of draft-tantsura-idr-bgp-ls-segment-routing-msd  to remove suggested values or wait for early allocation and replace?

 

 

The outcome of the IANA Early Allocation process is not directly connected to self-assigning (squatting) in the current document. I would suggest the squatted codepoint should be removed at the earliest opportunity (Monday morning). Uploading new drafts is cheap and easy after all. 

 

Kind regards,

 

Job