[Idr] [idr] Comments Summary about [draft-lin-idr-sr-policy-seglist-id]
linchangwang <linchangwang.04414@h3c.com> Mon, 03 April 2023 12:22 UTC
Return-Path: <linchangwang.04414@h3c.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 2179CC151B32 for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 3 Apr 2023 05:22:53 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.896
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.896 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 Dg9rk_WTXjB0 for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 3 Apr 2023 05:22:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from h3cspam02-ex.h3c.com (smtp.h3c.com [60.191.123.50]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 45520C14CE22 for <idr@ietf.org>; Mon, 3 Apr 2023 05:22:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.maildlp.com ([172.25.15.154]) by h3cspam02-ex.h3c.com with ESMTP id 333CMJXf088416 for <idr@ietf.org>; Mon, 3 Apr 2023 20:22:19 +0800 (GMT-8) (envelope-from linchangwang.04414@h3c.com)
Received: from DAG2EX06-IDC.srv.huawei-3com.com (unknown [172.20.54.129]) by mail.maildlp.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0748E223C8E8 for <idr@ietf.org>; Mon, 3 Apr 2023 20:26:23 +0800 (CST)
Received: from DAG2EX07-IDC.srv.huawei-3com.com (172.20.54.130) by DAG2EX06-IDC.srv.huawei-3com.com (172.20.54.129) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2507.21; Mon, 3 Apr 2023 20:22:21 +0800
Received: from DAG2EX07-IDC.srv.huawei-3com.com ([::1]) by DAG2EX07-IDC.srv.huawei-3com.com ([fe80::fd0a:6e94:67d9:5ce8%10]) with mapi id 15.01.2507.006; Mon, 3 Apr 2023 20:22:21 +0800
From: linchangwang <linchangwang.04414@h3c.com>
To: "idr@ietf.org" <idr@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [idr] Comments Summary about [draft-lin-idr-sr-policy-seglist-id]
Thread-Index: AdlmJqcunlg5oQPeQkqCx8Do2AJ4ag==
Date: Mon, 03 Apr 2023 12:22:21 +0000
Message-ID: <63e8609ad1ae438aaf61c50049d93e79@h3c.com>
Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US
Content-Language: zh-CN
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.114.76.67]
x-sender-location: DAG2
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-DNSRBL:
X-SPAM-SOURCE-CHECK: pass
X-MAIL: h3cspam02-ex.h3c.com 333CMJXf088416
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/VcAaIy0GGn6eGVIlcwILTyRvoSo>
Subject: [Idr] [idr] Comments Summary about [draft-lin-idr-sr-policy-seglist-id]
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: Mon, 03 Apr 2023 12:22:53 -0000
Hi wg, We received several comments on the 116 IDR meeting about the following draft:https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-lin-idr-sr-policy-seglist-id/ A new version of the draft https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-lin-idr-sr-policy-seglist-id-03.txt is published. According to Jeffrey’s request, we make a summary here so that discussions can be continued: 1. Path-Segment (https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-idr-sr-policy-path-segment/) provides similar functionality. (By Aijun & Cheng) The path-segment is used to identify on the forwarding plane, not the management plane. In the case that both PCE and YANG are identified by ID and name, it is suggested that the segment-list should also have the identification of the management plane. The application scenarios are also different. Path-segment is used for performance measurement, path correlation, and end-2-end path protection. But our use cases are statistics reporting and configuration delivery. 2. Segment-List-Protection (https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-lp-idr-sr-path-protection/) also defines List Identifier Sub-TLV. (By Yao) draft-lp-idr-sr-path-protection describes a protection mechanism for segment list, and defines a 4-octet List Identifier which is used to describe the correlation between protected segment list and backup segment list.The segment list protection might also be an application scenario of segment-list id. But we think it’s better to have an independent draft for segment-list id. On the other hand, we also defines the segment-list name sub-TLV in our draft, which are more operationally friendly. 3. ID conflictions between Segment List configured in the headnode and Segment List ceated by controller. (By Ka) There are several possible solutions: A. ID is unique per candidate path, not unique globally at a headend. (The path-ID in PCEP works in this way) B. The headend organizes segment lists by originator in the top-level, and then by ID in the second-level. 4. Discussions about the name/id of the sr-policy template (https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-zhang-idr-sr-policy-template/) Those discussions are about another draft, but we think the segment list identifier can have the same issue. Names are more operationally friendly. IDs are easier for implementation. Both the segment-list name sub-TLV and segment-list ID sub-TLV are defined in our draft to achieve better flexibility. Any comments would be helpful. Please don’t hesitate to let us know. Thanks, Changwang lin -----Original Message----- From: I-D-Announce [mailto:i-d-announce-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of internet-drafts@ietf.org Sent: Monday, April 03, 2023 7:14 PM To: i-d-announce@ietf.org Subject: I-D Action: draft-lin-idr-sr-policy-seglist-id-03.txt A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. Title : BGP SR Policy Extensions for Segment List Identifier Authors : Changwang Lin Weiqiang Cheng Yao Liu Ketan Talaulikar Mengxiao Chen Filename : draft-lin-idr-sr-policy-seglist-id-03.txt Pages : 8 Date : 2023-04-03 Abstract: Segment Routing is a source routing paradigm that explicitly indicates the forwarding path for packets at the ingress node. An SR Policy is a set of candidate paths, each consisting of one or more segment lists. This document defines extensions to BGP SR Policy to specify the identifier of segment list. The IETF datatracker status page for this Internet-Draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-lin-idr-sr-policy-seglist-id/ There is also an htmlized version available at: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-lin-idr-sr-policy-seglist-id-03 A diff from the previous version is available at: https://author-tools.ietf.org/iddiff?url2=draft-lin-idr-sr-policy-seglist-id-03 Internet-Drafts are also available by rsync at rsync.ietf.org::internet-drafts _______________________________________________ I-D-Announce mailing list I-D-Announce@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce Internet-Draft directories: http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 本邮件及其附件含有新华三集团的保密信息,仅限于发送给上面地址中列出 的个人或群组。禁止任何其他人以任何形式使用(包括但不限于全部或部分地泄露、复制、 或散发)本邮件中的信息。如果您错收了本邮件,请您立即电话或邮件通知发件人并删除本 邮件! This e-mail and its attachments contain confidential information from New H3C, which is intended only for the person or entity whose address is listed above. Any use of the information contained herein in any way (including, but not limited to, total or partial disclosure, reproduction, or dissemination) by persons other than the intended recipient(s) is prohibited. If you receive this e-mail in error, please notify the sender by phone or email immediately and delete it!