Re: [Idr] I-D Action: draft-ietf-idr-performance-routing-02.txt

Ondrej Zajicek <santiago@crfreenet.org> Wed, 16 October 2019 09:37 UTC

Return-Path: <santiago@crfreenet.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 7B58812089E; Wed, 16 Oct 2019 02:37:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.897
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 RXeKD5JFPkP3; Wed, 16 Oct 2019 02:37:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.crfreenet.org (varda.crfreenet.org [81.92.145.160]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A6B78120125; Wed, 16 Oct 2019 02:37:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from feanor (feanor-poda.crfreenet.org [164.215.121.182]) by mail.crfreenet.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 03B765FB83; Wed, 16 Oct 2019 11:37:20 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2019 11:37:20 +0200
From: Ondrej Zajicek <santiago@crfreenet.org>
To: =?utf-8?B?5b6Q5bCP6JmOKOS5ieWFiCk=?= <xiaohu.xxh@alibaba-inc.com>
Cc: SPRING WG List <spring@ietf.org>, idr <idr@ietf.org>
Message-ID: <20191016093720.GA2427@feanor.crfreenet.org>
References: <157102976688.20872.8891510157374456894@ietfa.amsl.com> <eaac2838-0c1d-400f-9913-b30ac9cfdbf0.> <cfdb4bb4-cd42-4717-af35-a70447a8ac79.xiaohu.xxh@alibaba-inc.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <cfdb4bb4-cd42-4717-af35-a70447a8ac79.xiaohu.xxh@alibaba-inc.com>
X-Operating-System: Debian GNU/Linux
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/wi2sgNTdhV2_8ebyRF6lHX-c44c>
Subject: Re: [Idr] I-D Action: draft-ietf-idr-performance-routing-02.txt
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, 16 Oct 2019 09:37:26 -0000

Hi

My main objection to the draft is it uses separate SAFI to signal that
latency based routing is used. I don't think that is a good idea. Latency
based routing is a general concept, which makes sense to use with several
existing SAFIs (at least 1, 4 and 128). Whether or not announce and
use NETWORK_LATENCY TLV should be an independent session property, like
using AIGP TLV or e.g. ADD-PATH extension.

This is an issue that was underspecified in RFC 7311, just kept by
configuration of both sides. Perhaps we need a new capability to specify
which AIGP TLVs (if any) are supposed to be used on the session, so it
can be negotiated automatically like ADD-PATH.

-- 
Ondrej 'Santiago' Zajicek (email: santiago@crfreenet.org)