IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Idr] I-D Action: draft-ietf-idr-rs-bfd-03.txt

Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net> Mon, 03 July 2017 22:22 UTC

Return-Path: <rraszuk@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 CE0C1120454 for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 3 Jul 2017 15:22:58 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.398
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.398 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.199, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id G0e6ZrGXc2OL for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 3 Jul 2017 15:22:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-io0-x235.google.com (mail-io0-x235.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c06::235]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0759F12EB27 for <idr@ietf.org>; Mon, 3 Jul 2017 15:22:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-io0-x235.google.com with SMTP id h64so63092902iod.0 for <idr@ietf.org>; Mon, 03 Jul 2017 15:22:56 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc; bh=2xvELZ4c4hOOAGsv6BtgHSbUsHFg9kt+0xdOBO845I0=; b=jeb2wUNrRMUdKL6llXFtKkVp+O8CXBv5SzTm1ueb7Juq3aIutrJXQy4K+9tvqpVzbB GFiW1S7N9Zs5sVbYO1iCdhg42x4ein/B7fVsZcY6/loBuyoTzUI2ebZZnafE7RKziSCe r1my9/yRaGMLApeiovlTub2t0HBnKn+Qi1vIZM+0IvCF1WUoxKM+5DTztMgNm62ZVHzl Kb6V3WAwnMLUFFjvAZnxInPXoTQU9T4M4q7apcuMRQn5sWr9DeMCGMO69TZTN+gXzn9W XUkDTe14cWqpGIx1GNo2FERp+PfFeG+CzAa5iTDGOq1pi9I9Ugp8DLtulHAAF2K7pE6C Wm5Q==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=2xvELZ4c4hOOAGsv6BtgHSbUsHFg9kt+0xdOBO845I0=; b=SC44DUpPfvMNcuRgXIWIHsEl3n1QyrP3z8Mx7qZEwRAbnUx+tCEiH6sE2BNfvh5t78 L1LLmJBR5/xfVAyp2wKF5T93V4KLtFPAcjdWnXZvHljtnqoD52z0L9bnDWY0u7YUgW66 jhRQec2kW+sPVangNgQDmpi6emvVaG2nkt+gvRHgY9NG1DhkAv1EWF/eLR/SRbDVBabB Z6KlY0eA+eJMyPHQ/KYveaCTuCPOB/is97ShQ4/Y1HQiPbLdkASbIITVCou1axbjm5cy 9Bj856pqOiMsD+8E7QTYKVSCtAlFe935odh3hCr2RMOWigIYsTexUUDVHFaDCGqDN2NJ hmVQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AIVw11040EnCZ6nlwn33U7+vswfATka70SVfmtFNXeGJ4xCbF0Puh0Qb QGapP7QJuLaUlU1nHzrlE0Xou1dHPH4U
X-Received: by 10.107.140.145 with SMTP id o139mr18611545iod.155.1499120576226; Mon, 03 Jul 2017 15:22:56 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: rraszuk@gmail.com
Received: by 10.79.32.15 with HTTP; Mon, 3 Jul 2017 15:22:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.79.32.15 with HTTP; Mon, 3 Jul 2017 15:22:55 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <292534ED-98BC-49A0-82A2-45B6688F851D@juniper.net>
References: <149909741417.22786.4679459342587499122@ietfa.amsl.com> <20170703160800.x6wcym2ma6jceqv7@Vurt.local> <FBD5248C-33C6-436C-8B01-FAE2658B0768@juniper.net> <20170703163846.224w6lxvbt4txqub@Vurt.local> <20170703173810.GA45648@Space.Net> <20170703175308.hembxkplaniz66wb@Vurt.local> <m2van9z3jp.wl-randy@psg.com> <CACWOCC8tPVD20SJ60h-=NGbPMG3Fae2a0TY5rMFb=EnN7H-C6Q@mail.gmail.com> <m2o9t1z1hj.wl-randy@psg.com> <CACWOCC_bQitHeR9tHc5tPsXmoSDDLQH764equTAHrP854fYh-A@mail.gmail.com> <BF65C4DC-D2F5-41AF-8454-D43B403E328B@juniper.net> <CACWOCC9cmz7ARnWNowCCEu3Rt_NiyuWgJMZ3pWfmxZ_BO8Ovjw@mail.gmail.com> <292534ED-98BC-49A0-82A2-45B6688F851D@juniper.net>
From: Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net>
Date: Tue, 04 Jul 2017 00:22:55 +0200
X-Google-Sender-Auth: tg5IaocwZVD24sMJwa6KWxU2NiU
Message-ID: <CA+b+ERkHehpgXS3UaQAW+KQ1ak9j=wx-=wbtQ6ZiW-LQu2Z4fA@mail.gmail.com>
To: "John G. Scudder" <jgs@juniper.net>
Cc: idr wg <idr@ietf.org>, Job Snijders <job@ntt.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="94eb2c05a5446bedf305537135c8"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/fLIXDf38mEDbXQNrwroh08u8pzM>
Subject: Re: [Idr] I-D Action: draft-ietf-idr-rs-bfd-03.txt
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: Mon, 03 Jul 2017 22:22:59 -0000

On Jul 3, 2017 23:40, "John Scudder"

Yes, but I think the part you are overlooking is that the RS asks the
client to track connectivity to all candidate next-hops, whether or not the
RS is currently sending the client a route with that next hop.



And that is precisly the fundamental flow of this proposal.

Clients are to track next hops for bgp paths they do not even have ...

What happens when RS gets 100 paths for policy eligible net for a given
client ?

Client will enable waist of 100 bfd sessions and what is much worse will
report state of those 100 next hops to RS ?

This is so bad ....

Cheers
R.









So #1 can only happen if rs-bfd is implemented,


Yes, but.

and the cadence would be a logical consequence if add-path is not
supported.


That's the error. Numbers 2 and 3 wouldn't happen if rs-bfd were
implemented as written, because in step zero the RS would have said "hey
client, please use BFD towards A and B" and in step 1, the client would say
"hey RS, can't reach A, also can't reach B".

--John


_______________________________________________
Idr mailing list
Idr@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email