[Idr] Question on IETF 105 presentation on draft-zhu-idr-bgp-ls-path-mtu

Jeffrey Haas <jhaas@pfrc.org> Fri, 26 July 2019 14:44 UTC

Return-Path: <jhaas@slice.pfrc.org>
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 2087E120059 for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 26 Jul 2019 07:44:41 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 bX6gm-dgvHZK for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 26 Jul 2019 07:44:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from slice.pfrc.org (slice.pfrc.org [67.207.130.108]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE16C120089 for <idr@ietf.org>; Fri, 26 Jul 2019 07:44:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by slice.pfrc.org (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 4300E1E2F3; Fri, 26 Jul 2019 10:46:26 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2019 10:46:25 -0400
From: Jeffrey Haas <jhaas@pfrc.org>
To: idr@ietf.org
Message-ID: <20190726144625.GP28302@pfrc.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/tzCotO_zGx4SZM1NoztoZzInoiM>
Subject: [Idr] Question on IETF 105 presentation on draft-zhu-idr-bgp-ls-path-mtu
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: Fri, 26 Jul 2019 14:44:41 -0000

Here are my two questions for clarification:

1. A common problem in networks is Link Aggregate Group (LAG) component
links that have MTU mis-matches.  Is there a way to use this mechanism to
help detect this condition?

2. There is a draft in BFD, draft-ietf-bfd-large-packets, that provides a
mechanism to test MTU.  Are you aware of this draft?  If so, have you
considered how you might expose detected path MTU in your feature?

-- Jeff