Re: [Idr] [ALU] will draft-ietf-idr-flowspec-redirect-ip-02 be revived?

Susan Hares <shares@ndzh.com> Tue, 29 June 2021 19:30 UTC

Return-Path: <shares@ndzh.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 5B44E3A3E68 for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 29 Jun 2021 12:30:35 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 1.447
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.447 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DOS_OUTLOOK_TO_MX=2.845, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, HTTPS_HTTP_MISMATCH=0.1, KHOP_HELO_FCRDNS=0.398, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
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 DhghswbGjnlG for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 29 Jun 2021 12:30:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from hickoryhill-consulting.com (50-245-122-97-static.hfc.comcastbusiness.net [50.245.122.97]) (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 72DFE3A0783 for <idr@ietf.org>; Tue, 29 Jun 2021 12:30:30 -0700 (PDT)
X-Default-Received-SPF: pass (skip=loggedin (res=PASS)) x-ip-name=50.107.119.54;
From: "Susan Hares" <shares@ndzh.com>
To: "'Linda Dunbar'" <linda.dunbar@futurewei.com>, "'Simpson, Adam 1. \(Nokia - US/Mountain View\)'" <adam.1.simpson@nokia.com>, "'UTTARO, JAMES'" <ju1738@att.com>, "'Jeffrey Haas'" <jhaas@pfrc.org>, <akarch@cisco.com>, <sairay@cisco.com>, <pmohapat@cumulusnetworks.com>, <mtexier@arbor.net>
Cc: <idr@ietf.org>
References: <CO1PR13MB49208A4216C9C21FC026218285029@CO1PR13MB4920.namprd13.prod.outlook.com> <BYAPR08MB4229C8B08CE234667C98E3359A029@BYAPR08MB4229.namprd08.prod.outlook.com> <CO1PR13MB4920AD4A5C4E81B916E0FF6185029@CO1PR13MB4920.namprd13.prod.outlook.com>
In-Reply-To: <CO1PR13MB4920AD4A5C4E81B916E0FF6185029@CO1PR13MB4920.namprd13.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2021 15:30:11 -0400
Message-ID: <014001d76d1d$2dfc5630$89f50290$@ndzh.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0141_01D76CFB.A6ED2730"
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0
Thread-Index: AQFl5Cb0wj+wPQMyJanHSQ1PvinuLgLJ6U4qAa3oFByr6rJYwA==
Content-Language: en-us
X-Authenticated-User: skh@ndzh.com
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/hXUfhZAjxSzLDZSLuxlAnQ9X-DU>
Subject: Re: [Idr] [ALU] will draft-ietf-idr-flowspec-redirect-ip-02 be revived?
X-BeenThere: idr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Tue, 29 Jun 2021 19:30:35 -0000

Linda and Adam: 

 

The understanding of the IDR chairs from IDR members at the
flow-specification interim is that all new IDR flow specification drafts
will need to be done in flow specification v2.  

 

The flow specification v2 work will be expedited during the next IDR cycle.
Our anticipation is to select an single Editor and let the WG rapidly
suggest additions. 

 

Sue 

 

From: Idr [mailto:idr-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Linda Dunbar
Sent: Tuesday, June 29, 2021 3:01 PM
To: Simpson, Adam 1. (Nokia - US/Mountain View); UTTARO, JAMES; Jeffrey
Haas; akarch@cisco.com; sairay@cisco.com; pmohapat@cumulusnetworks.com;
mtexier@arbor.net
Cc: idr@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Idr] [ALU] will draft-ietf-idr-flowspec-redirect-ip-02 be
revived?

 

Adam, 

 

Great to hear the draft will be refreshed. Then we can reference the
approach for our TN-AWARE flowspec. 

 

Thank you

Linda

 

From: Simpson, Adam 1. (Nokia - US/Mountain View) <adam.1.simpson@nokia.com>

Sent: Tuesday, June 29, 2021 1:49 PM
To: Linda Dunbar <linda.dunbar@futurewei.com>om>; UTTARO, JAMES
<ju1738@att.com>om>; Jeffrey Haas <jhaas@pfrc.org>rg>; akarch@cisco.com;
sairay@cisco.com; pmohapat@cumulusnetworks.com; mtexier@arbor.net
Cc: idr@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [ALU] will draft-ietf-idr-flowspec-redirect-ip-02 be revived? 

 

Hi Linda,

 

I don't think there is any great reason why we didn't continue to refresh
this draft and take it to RFC. At the time of the last update there was a
lot of churn in the flowspec area with respect to work on the bis draft,
flowpsec-v2 and the best way to specify interaction between multiple
actions. So I guess you could say that we wanted the dust to settle a bit.

 

This draft can and should be revived. It would be good to understand from my
co-authors the current status of implementations. I can say that Nokia has
implemented this draft for both IPv4 and IPv6, but only the redirect
functionality, not the copy functionality.

 

-Adam 

 

From: Linda Dunbar <linda.dunbar@futurewei.com>
Date: Tuesday, June 29, 2021 at 10:29 AM
To: UTTARO, JAMES <ju1738@att.com>om>, Jeffrey Haas <jhaas@pfrc.org>rg>,
akarch@cisco.com <akarch@cisco.com>om>, sairay@cisco.com <sairay@cisco.com>om>,
pmohapat@cumulusnetworks.com <pmohapat@cumulusnetworks.com>om>, Simpson, Adam
1. (Nokia - US/Mountain View) <adam.1.simpson@nokia.com>om>, mtexier@arbor.net
<mtexier@arbor.net>
Cc: idr@ietf.org <idr@ietf.org>
Subject: [ALU] will draft-ietf-idr-flowspec-redirect-ip-02 be revived? 

Jim, Jeff, et al, 

 

Our
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-mcd-rtgwg-extension-tn-aware-mobility
/
<https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdatatrack
er.ietf.org%2Fdoc%2Fdraft-mcd-rtgwg-extension-tn-aware-mobility%2F&data=04%7
C01%7Clinda.dunbar%40futurewei.com%7C1078269790194e1cdc0508d93b2e8bd7%7C0fee
8ff2a3b240189c753a1d5591fedc%7C1%7C1%7C637605893374698969%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbG
Zsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3
000&sdata=PUDjhqA3Mqgd2krioVNCB1xXVDRbrgLOQ21EygjKvVI%3D&reserved=0>  needs
to use Flowspec to influence the node (either on 5G UPF or directly
connected to the 5GUPF) to steer a flow from 5G's UPF to a specific underlay
path based on the  5G services characteristics. 

 

The approach described in  draft-ietf-idr-flowspec-redirect-ip-02 are useful
for our purpose.   But the draft has been expired. 

 

Just curious if the  draft-ietf-idr-flowspec-redirect-ip-02 be revived? Were
there any reasons the draft didn't move forward? 

 

Thank you very much 

Linda Dunbar