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

["Ketan Talaulikar (ketant)" <[e-mail]>]

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]<mailto:[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]<mailto:[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]<mailto:[e-mail]>>; Jeff Tantsura <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>; Job Snijders <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>; John G. Scudder <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>
Cc: Stefano Previdi <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>; Susan Hares <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>; [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>; [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>; idr wg <[e-mail]<mailto:[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]<mailto:[e-mail]>; [e-mail]<mailto:[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]<mailto:[e-mail]>>; John G. Scudder <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>; Ketan Talaulikar (ketant) <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>
Cc: Stefano Previdi <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>; Susan Hares <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>; [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>; [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>; idr wg <[e-mail]<mailto:[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]<mailto:[e-mail]>>
Date: Saturday, July 15, 2017 at 16:15
To: Jeff Tantsura <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>, "John G. Scudder" <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>, "Ketan Talaulikar (ketant)" <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>
Cc: Stefano Previdi <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>, Susan Hares <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>, "[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>" <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>, "[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>" <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>, idr wg <[e-mail]<mailto:[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]<mailto:[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