Re: [Idr] WG LC on draft-ietf-idr-bgp-ls-segment-routing-msd-05.txt - WG consensus pending

"Ketan Talaulikar (ketant)" <ketant@cisco.com> Thu, 08 August 2019 11:06 UTC

Return-Path: <ketant@cisco.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 4706E12014A; Thu, 8 Aug 2019 04:06:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.499
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.499 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.com header.b=XnYNOSNx; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.onmicrosoft.com header.b=uKcy+qMx
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 3VscfF_UB5tX; Thu, 8 Aug 2019 04:06:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from alln-iport-1.cisco.com (alln-iport-1.cisco.com [173.37.142.88]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C7AF8120046; Thu, 8 Aug 2019 04:06:53 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=16417; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1565262413; x=1566472013; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:mime-version; bh=A8O2WUEy5gdmfkiZjYdbkGJHXdjyetgsWQ39KJKLFbI=; b=XnYNOSNxFnFUL3pfpRJ/n1sj+lx2NqLymZN3IIneZoNrSljGygtl6PUi bDuY+smGqZgmXpO62LGW7TISSAJpGAlewO91FZ/7/XEzVq8hkUMlPRi5/ kuVlgixHUJRanosL/SdiVJuMBAuhB4w37XrZWMvjswMNqUc5T5xvK8jgX Q=;
IronPort-PHdr: =?us-ascii?q?9a23=3APWJzOBUEjGIKab+0YeZ/8Hcma8HV8LGuZFwc94?= =?us-ascii?q?YnhrRSc6+q45XlOgnF6O5wiEPSANSJ8OpK3uzRta2oGXcN55qMqjgjSNRNTF?= =?us-ascii?q?dE7KdehAk8GIiAAEz/IuTtank5EdhLUkNN9HCgOk8TE8H7NBXf?=
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0AGAABTAUxd/51dJa1mGQEBAQEBAQE?= =?us-ascii?q?BAQEBAQcBAQEBAQGBUwQBAQEBAQsBgRUvUANtVSAECyqHZQOEUoZgglt+kgi?= =?us-ascii?q?EWoEugSQDVAkBAQEMAQElCAIBAYQ/AoJWIzQJDgEEAQEEAQEEAQpthScMhUo?= =?us-ascii?q?BAQEEEhsTAQE3AQ8CAQgOAwQBAS8yHQgBAQQBDQUIGoMBgR1NAx0BAgygZwK?= =?us-ascii?q?BOIhggiOCegEBBYUXGIIUAwaBNAGLYxeBQD+BEUaCFzU+gQQBgVwCAoFhK4M?= =?us-ascii?q?QgiaMJhIwAocslyUJAoIchl2NZIIwhy+OVSSDdYk1gTWGKJAcAgQCBAUCDgE?= =?us-ascii?q?BBYFQOIFYcBU7gmyCQjeDOoUUhT9ygSmNfQEB?=
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.64,360,1559520000"; d="scan'208,217";a="303359817"
Received: from rcdn-core-6.cisco.com ([173.37.93.157]) by alln-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA; 08 Aug 2019 11:06:51 +0000
Received: from XCH-ALN-003.cisco.com (xch-aln-003.cisco.com [173.36.7.13]) by rcdn-core-6.cisco.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id x78B6pWR013095 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Thu, 8 Aug 2019 11:06:51 GMT
Received: from xhs-rtp-003.cisco.com (64.101.210.230) by XCH-ALN-003.cisco.com (173.36.7.13) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3; Thu, 8 Aug 2019 06:06:50 -0500
Received: from xhs-rcd-002.cisco.com (173.37.227.247) by xhs-rtp-003.cisco.com (64.101.210.230) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3; Thu, 8 Aug 2019 07:06:49 -0400
Received: from NAM05-DM3-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (72.163.14.9) by xhs-rcd-002.cisco.com (173.37.227.247) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3 via Frontend Transport; Thu, 8 Aug 2019 06:06:49 -0500
ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=SzQeugm818PS3glLBt1xCrFOWzufXcF6r3Qe0ELin44L7m8rTTLZmz+EOJsw+Gm+Na3lS7BMU0DIBVNnNkALWh8cNiN4lQGmpkLT952fJYBQn4aeDdSHlRJLFM53Hqxxx9QNJrIyUGunncAHQqdh5+hqLINx6V+Jwqe37hRTNPEJjXL5trrJiKmNRAHBZ+5H5U5zUkVagi6DelJ7idkhpfpwuJrvi6BrcI920YTcx0sADBYs2R0b5NQU75wvYDPGQh4G5hZuMSlyDC3UfsgS9F7GzpP/vm+G/EYHXwuL2rltcq74QFDF4ywVoeEkXdEUNmtmqD8i2Wi+lLOjC+L05Q==
ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=/NPv0BZqsXrn3Pr3I4SIyjcIUc/xbCQdl3N2g9dCqqc=; b=WCR5hwdmJvkXpFncXpSlC+8MpHcj2Q+IGZ/UDS2BCMbouADPb3dNLk2j2ZN3iM902hCW68CxMaqog+Lb6VeVzc8iGHgj1RNTW7GH14Jb6gRc1T8op8yZkuiw0q1ctnk97iuMuLHwYReRd2OzslF+aVqzhFLLBo54sZroYz2t7DkQ6k5fOZVSALx8anl6yNY/A38B262JjyVenBBSYXpkq3yk9ojN+MzhhtLOgG18ILb4JNDcSuwl7n5sfufvFGSRJol/rJTj2xA7ZFC0cjbORZJbX8Oqytm+cAX8LHAQZPo5/vgtRHOVfTNHbeSyykYhBA49ekCjS9PfkM3/sxHcsQ==
ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=cisco.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=cisco.com; dkim=pass header.d=cisco.com; arc=none
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cisco.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector2-cisco-onmicrosoft-com; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=/NPv0BZqsXrn3Pr3I4SIyjcIUc/xbCQdl3N2g9dCqqc=; b=uKcy+qMx6sjwDpgdH75KmxYnDg2nu1h/mcPbjbxMp+YNfAcxpFRrMco0aPW9hu7eJjFj3irLBOB4U+9Fd9LiiTPDa1UUt+OtfUU39O3e3Zp0B30qzd9jR/7/iHD9/LHLLtt7uihw8yWOVU0H7f8W/PKDqkubjZMkCXyfPF7cnR4=
Received: from BYAPR11MB3558.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (20.178.206.75) by BYAPR11MB2709.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (52.135.227.151) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.2157.16; Thu, 8 Aug 2019 11:06:48 +0000
Received: from BYAPR11MB3558.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::3d73:9b60:6c26:2d0c]) by BYAPR11MB3558.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::3d73:9b60:6c26:2d0c%6]) with mapi id 15.20.2136.018; Thu, 8 Aug 2019 11:06:48 +0000
From: "Ketan Talaulikar (ketant)" <ketant@cisco.com>
To: Susan Hares <shares@ndzh.com>, "'IDR'" <idr@ietf.org>
CC: "draft-ietf-idr-bgp-ls-segment-routing-msd@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-idr-bgp-ls-segment-routing-msd@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: WG LC on draft-ietf-idr-bgp-ls-segment-routing-msd-05.txt - WG consensus pending
Thread-Index: AdVNQg8h1R/9RzbbQNWIOPyzclLjdQAlreHA
Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2019 11:06:48 +0000
Message-ID: <BYAPR11MB3558E18E1E92C8E6254C8C75C1D70@BYAPR11MB3558.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
References: <01d601d54d44$da468ff0$8ed3afd0$@ndzh.com>
In-Reply-To: <01d601d54d44$da468ff0$8ed3afd0$@ndzh.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=ketant@cisco.com;
x-originating-ip: [2405:201:1800:c766:70eb:a4e4:ed89:e1ee]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 2067a54a-bcf2-4064-f98d-08d71bf08251
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(2390118)(7020095)(4652040)(8989299)(4534185)(4627221)(201703031133081)(201702281549075)(8990200)(5600148)(711020)(4605104)(1401327)(2017052603328)(7193020); SRVR:BYAPR11MB2709;
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: BYAPR11MB2709:
x-ms-exchange-purlcount: 3
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <BYAPR11MB27098AF1A8B1E6EC3ED960C3C1D70@BYAPR11MB2709.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:10000;
x-forefront-prvs: 012349AD1C
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10009020)(4636009)(39860400002)(376002)(366004)(136003)(346002)(396003)(199004)(189003)(6116002)(790700001)(606006)(7736002)(6246003)(86362001)(4326008)(99286004)(74316002)(4743002)(46003)(110136005)(53546011)(53936002)(6506007)(102836004)(25786009)(76176011)(52536014)(2906002)(476003)(446003)(11346002)(486006)(236005)(9686003)(478600001)(256004)(14444005)(316002)(6306002)(54896002)(966005)(55016002)(186003)(71200400001)(71190400001)(81156014)(81166006)(8676002)(14454004)(8936002)(6436002)(66476007)(66946007)(76116006)(64756008)(5660300002)(33656002)(66446008)(66556008)(229853002)(7696005); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; SCL:1; SRVR:BYAPR11MB2709; H:BYAPR11MB3558.namprd11.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; LANG:en; PTR:InfoNoRecords; A:1; MX:1;
received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: cisco.com does not designate permitted sender hosts)
x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: Fp3XbgsqEK19g0ZdNyqLKTj/W5M2Q0OPAwH/atmHR0de99FbdeYJfHJ0HAmqrWxdoQqrTZRUVC6i7VGtKkWAYgCgxRIC7AhabPyaW8+yfY1xsMWGPCIZX//cPjDQNNBQ1BevFBTk92Lmcug1yORfCQf3JJGzGhI5B4Ct8boZGt5UmD8XX/upmnuyMHgjbmlqR0JBPsjjvNUTd7PRtHx91bxXOgG83FLgmw2nSUGB6hJxrNMSx+ibwQupqXXb2FOm2/hZs2/ojosLXIPCz+vBXC9BNDwFZscrQlRyJdb4kzuJrqSDCMgzUTAu9vSfs830ODQuUDEDmLcuzp/Hq+mytXhQS93BjLJ9aTr666Ee9n05SHzwjcb7GEm741wfTaBG7siydX4ZoYP5Aov8rGHsARoxoRnDZjrsCZzEi/v+je8=
x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_BYAPR11MB3558E18E1E92C8E6254C8C75C1D70BYAPR11MB3558namp_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 2067a54a-bcf2-4064-f98d-08d71bf08251
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 08 Aug 2019 11:06:48.6387 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 5ae1af62-9505-4097-a69a-c1553ef7840e
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: ketant@cisco.com
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BYAPR11MB2709
X-OriginatorOrg: cisco.com
X-Outbound-SMTP-Client: 173.36.7.13, xch-aln-003.cisco.com
X-Outbound-Node: rcdn-core-6.cisco.com
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/i5MSLk6gIDa6PZaMqQbYnfsSKA0>
Subject: Re: [Idr] WG LC on draft-ietf-idr-bgp-ls-segment-routing-msd-05.txt - WG consensus pending
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: Thu, 08 Aug 2019 11:06:57 -0000

Hi Sue/All,

The authors are working on the update and we'll post it once done/ready.

I've updated the implementation report with most of the items that you have suggested for the implementations that I am aware of. For the error handling part, since that text would get added in v06, we can look at that aspect after the posting is done.

I believe there are other implementations and would request WG members to update the same at https://trac.ietf.org/trac/idr/wiki/draft-ietf-idr-bgp-ls-segment-routing-msd%20implementations

Thanks,
Ketan

From: Susan Hares <shares@ndzh.com>
Sent: 07 August 2019 22:54
To: 'IDR' <idr@ietf.org>
Cc: draft-ietf-idr-bgp-ls-segment-routing-msd@ietf.org
Subject: WG LC on draft-ietf-idr-bgp-ls-segment-routing-msd-05.txt - WG consensus pending

The WG LC on draft-ietf-idr-bgp-ls-segment-routing-msd-05.txt concludes on 8/8/2019.

At this point, we have about 12 people who have participated in this last call by making comments.   All comments regarding publication appear to be positive.   If you wish to make additional comments, please make your comments by 8/8/2019.

The implementations come from a single vendor (cisco).  A 1 week query will be made (starting on 8/8/2019)  to determine if the WG will accept 2 implementations from the same vendor to meet IDR requirement for 2 implementations.

The authors of this draft (Jeff,  Uma, Ketan, Greg, Nikos) need to do the following:

  1.  Post an -06.txt  revision that addresses any comments received at IETF 105 or on the WG list,
  2.  Upgrade the interoperability report at
  https://trac.ietf.org/trac/idr/wiki/draft-ietf-idr-bgp-ls-segment-routing-msd%20implementations

With details on the following MUST Clause support

Reference are:  section 3

      *  MSD-Value : a number in the range of 0-255.  For all MSD-Types,
         0 represents the lack of ability to impose an MSD stack of any
         depth; any other value represents that of the node.  This value
         MUST represent the lowest value supported by any link
         configured for use by the advertising protocol instance.]
Reference in section 4: - a similar definition

      *  MSD-Value : a number in the range of 0-255.  For all MSD-Types,

         0 represents the lack of ability to impose an MSD stack of any

         depth; any other value represents that of the link when used as

         an outgoing interface.]


Expected addition to Wiki document is the following information
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Support for zero MSD-value:
    Node MSD TLV:  yes/no
    Link MSD TLV: yes/no

Mechanism for reporting zero-value:

Error handling of MSD TLV  (according to RFC7752):
  Node MSD TLV:  yes/no
  Link MSD TLV :    yes /no


Mechanism for reporting errors on MSD TLV:  (log error in log file)