Re: [Idr] Mail regarding draft-ietf-idr-segment-routing-te-policy

"Ketan Talaulikar (ketant)" <ketant@cisco.com> Wed, 01 May 2019 14:04 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 F026212016B for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 1 May 2019 07:04:02 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.5
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.5 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, 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=JQXa0HGx; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.onmicrosoft.com header.b=cQBfI6j2
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 Ui8WEaRYtKwF for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 1 May 2019 07:04:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rcdn-iport-8.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-8.cisco.com [173.37.86.79]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5CBB91200CE for <idr@ietf.org>; Wed, 1 May 2019 07:04:00 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=10694; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1556719440; x=1557929040; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:mime-version; bh=xD//+fL/ftp5QOJvKPnJswoIwxeFPxbjFaiBCaLtgdg=; b=JQXa0HGxI5CqEHcrQedS1ysUyo+Ms077kjMix1S0dWG4CqPS8cGGMt29 2PU1Uq7FR4kEn1+j8zathsd8XFhM6Kqs9P56SkOSx1VjZvuC3gq66mrxA 8vMfIPmHRkOWxaMJwvPNUEI30VpDscVdr6EbbP5oXIQQaiBg7D0MRwagl c=;
IronPort-PHdr: =?us-ascii?q?9a23=3AcduVNxAjRxuXtd25RP63UyQJPHJ1sqjoPgMT9p?= =?us-ascii?q?ssgq5PdaLm5Zn5IUjD/qg83kTRU9Dd7PRJw6rNvqbsVHZIwK7JsWtKMfkuHw?= =?us-ascii?q?QAld1QmgUhBMCfDkiuL/P2ZiomNM9DT1RiuXq8NBsdFQ=3D=3D?=
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0AIAADppclc/4MNJK1mGgEBAQEBAgE?= =?us-ascii?q?BAQEHAgEBAQGBUQUBAQEBCwGBDi9QA2lVIAQLKIQQg0cDhFKKPIJXfpFYhEy?= =?us-ascii?q?BLoEkA1QOAQEjCoRAAheGGyM0CQ4BAwEBBAEBAgECbRwMhUoBAQEBAxIRChM?= =?us-ascii?q?BATcBDwIBCBEEAQErAgICMB0IAQEEAQ0FCBqDAYEdTQMdAQIMoioCgTWIX3G?= =?us-ascii?q?BL4J5AQEFgTYCg0wYgg4DBoEyAYtLF4FAP4ERRoIXNT6CYQEBA4E+AQEgK4J?= =?us-ascii?q?dMoImjUiESod9jQgJAoIJhheMQ4INhjeLL4FCjBGBH4UnjhYCBAIEBQIOAQE?= =?us-ascii?q?FgU84KIEucBWDJ4IPg2+FFIU/coEpkACCQwEB?=
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.60,417,1549929600"; d="scan'208,217";a="551836790"
Received: from alln-core-1.cisco.com ([173.36.13.131]) by rcdn-iport-8.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA; 01 May 2019 14:03:58 +0000
Received: from XCH-RCD-001.cisco.com (xch-rcd-001.cisco.com [173.37.102.11]) by alln-core-1.cisco.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id x41E3wX9010010 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Wed, 1 May 2019 14:03:58 GMT
Received: from xhs-rcd-003.cisco.com (173.37.227.248) by XCH-RCD-001.cisco.com (173.37.102.11) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3; Wed, 1 May 2019 09:03:57 -0500
Received: from xhs-aln-002.cisco.com (173.37.135.119) by xhs-rcd-003.cisco.com (173.37.227.248) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3; Wed, 1 May 2019 09:03:56 -0500
Received: from NAM05-CO1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (173.37.151.57) by xhs-aln-002.cisco.com (173.37.135.119) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3 via Frontend Transport; Wed, 1 May 2019 09:03:56 -0500
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cisco.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector1-cisco-com; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=xD//+fL/ftp5QOJvKPnJswoIwxeFPxbjFaiBCaLtgdg=; b=cQBfI6j2+JlsXBNEH3A5+yea8ISEEtbk1GjDtk6GXPUTtjpwmufDqMGERKi54uqjVjzjQebqAFE977lhKBiIEOtXfv5b8RmAUV2Jw+RnsB4NwH1oT//CNxwQljPKGS1qkpTE1YUP5Z7P1W6/ATcxS7dIPNeHkLRTsi7WjNaKCQQ=
Received: from SN6PR11MB2845.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (52.135.93.24) by SN6PR11MB2944.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (52.135.124.79) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.1856.11; Wed, 1 May 2019 14:03:55 +0000
Received: from SN6PR11MB2845.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::5c42:5f15:d194:98f]) by SN6PR11MB2845.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::5c42:5f15:d194:98f%5]) with mapi id 15.20.1835.018; Wed, 1 May 2019 14:03:55 +0000
From: "Ketan Talaulikar (ketant)" <ketant@cisco.com>
To: Chaitanya Varma <chaitanya.varma@ipinfusion.com>, "idr@ietf.org" <idr@ietf.org>
CC: Gurusiddesh Nidasesi <gurusiddesh.nidasesi@ipinfusion.com>
Thread-Topic: [Idr] Mail regarding draft-ietf-idr-segment-routing-te-policy
Thread-Index: AdT/KtjPP6BADXj+R+K+v5ydxRQvuQA+pdWg
Date: Wed, 1 May 2019 14:03:55 +0000
Message-ID: <SN6PR11MB284516BC1430BFFA5E494C0EC13B0@SN6PR11MB2845.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
References: <993db9e45983acc9769af61bf786a6d6@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <993db9e45983acc9769af61bf786a6d6@mail.gmail.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: [2001:420:c0e0:1002::364]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: dbdae33c-0076-4c2f-d3b6-08d6ce3dd93c
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(2390118)(7020095)(4652040)(8989299)(4534185)(4627221)(201703031133081)(201702281549075)(8990200)(5600141)(711020)(4605104)(2017052603328)(7193020); SRVR:SN6PR11MB2944;
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: SN6PR11MB2944:
x-ms-exchange-purlcount: 3
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <SN6PR11MB294453FD7A78C00701322C19C13B0@SN6PR11MB2944.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:8882;
x-forefront-prvs: 00246AB517
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10009020)(346002)(396003)(376002)(136003)(366004)(39860400002)(189003)(199004)(33656002)(476003)(8936002)(4326008)(606006)(64756008)(66946007)(66556008)(486006)(446003)(68736007)(52536014)(66446008)(73956011)(76176011)(110136005)(66476007)(76116006)(5660300002)(71200400001)(71190400001)(256004)(14444005)(5024004)(9326002)(6436002)(8676002)(81166006)(81156014)(6506007)(102836004)(53546011)(2906002)(316002)(86362001)(46003)(14454004)(7696005)(478600001)(966005)(6116002)(790700001)(6246003)(7736002)(229853002)(74316002)(11346002)(99286004)(25786009)(53936002)(186003)(236005)(2501003)(55016002)(6306002)(54896002)(9686003); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; SCL:1; SRVR:SN6PR11MB2944; H:SN6PR11MB2845.namprd11.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; LANG:en; PTR:InfoNoRecords; MX:1; A: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: T1Wezak64/k+U/aRNiz+NbAOWWAgvsdXhwfb7QBf+/N+sxiYZLA9dCAGypB8sREz6OJRqiDZz7ewrs06kW9twFg1qztX6WJUaWXsiPhAq/CRml1knwgFMre8KpKlCAvaS+l/3UDdwTlAq9fYX20PsxKLfuaeeCqCAkWkS4xqpntz8PRg8RnUnQu0EKF+cHbJaazkSaw0yedzzV2LfiV2HB38pniPUlTRJ3rgh0k00GRR7El1rBSbkAPzI4I0oAOyEoiW+76XqiAHlwe78NTc7y3ckCyJcojJVCZbYFS4iChXBg0WTtZloWUiI6NTIUuxUds9mVjxzcNfH1vC+LB7gm65h71XMW6CgQdy1W1WDKd/hz6HBTXPNmttjr2pv1mqAusdSvpzuTmJh2MjKFuFJQ6qizcsbTCWfM2ltiHSvw4=
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_SN6PR11MB284516BC1430BFFA5E494C0EC13B0SN6PR11MB2845namp_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: dbdae33c-0076-4c2f-d3b6-08d6ce3dd93c
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 01 May 2019 14:03:55.0931 (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-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: SN6PR11MB2944
X-OriginatorOrg: cisco.com
X-Outbound-SMTP-Client: 173.37.102.11, xch-rcd-001.cisco.com
X-Outbound-Node: alln-core-1.cisco.com
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/qjqyKIur5DA_8XAO7pvT0ZHjW5k>
Subject: Re: [Idr] Mail regarding draft-ietf-idr-segment-routing-te-policy
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: Wed, 01 May 2019 14:04:03 -0000

Hi Chaitanya,

Please check inline below.

From: Idr <idr-bounces@ietf.org> On Behalf Of Chaitanya Varma
Sent: 30 April 2019 13:34
To: idr@ietf.org
Cc: Gurusiddesh Nidasesi <gurusiddesh.nidasesi@ipinfusion.com>
Subject: [Idr] Mail regarding draft-ietf-idr-segment-routing-te-policy

Hi,

I have couple of queries from the below draft.

https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-idr-segment-routing-te-policy-05

  “ Typically, a controller defines the set of policies and advertise
   them to policy head-end routers (typically ingress routers).”

How do we communicate SR policies from controller? Is it through BGP-SR session or PCEP session.
[KT] This draft is all about using BGP for signalling SR Policies from a controller to the head-end routers. So yes (b) below.

a. If it is through PCEP session what happens if the PCC is non-headend?
b. If it is through BGP-SR what is the role for PCEP between PCE and PCC?
[KT] PCEP is another flavour for instantiation of SR Policies. Yet another option is using netconf/yang or another method for provisioning. This draft is about using BGP and PCEP is not required.


  “ Moreover, one or more route-target SHOULD be attached to the
   advertisement”

How Route-target should be attached to a SR-NLRI update?
[KT] As Route Target Extended Communities attribute – ref sec 1 of the draft.

Is it done through local configuration or picked up based on some dynamic parameter?
[KT] It is done by the controller and may be done via local config – either along with the SR Policy or route policy or even dynamically based on the head-end address. This would be implementation specific.

Thanks,
Ketan

Appreciate if you can help here.


Regards,
Chaitanya


..