Re: [IPFIX] [GROW] [OPSAWG] WG adoption poll fordraft-li-opsawg-ipfix-bgp-community-02

Job Snijders <job@instituut.net> Thu, 16 February 2017 17:43 UTC

Return-Path: <job@instituut.net>
X-Original-To: ipfix@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipfix@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 149541295A6 for <ipfix@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 16 Feb 2017 09:43:15 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=instituut-net.20150623.gappssmtp.com
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 KwW32kdRT8zt for <ipfix@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 16 Feb 2017 09:43:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-wr0-x231.google.com (mail-wr0-x231.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c0c::231]) (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 1B101129483 for <ipfix@ietf.org>; Thu, 16 Feb 2017 09:43:12 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-wr0-x231.google.com with SMTP id z61so16744215wrc.1 for <ipfix@ietf.org>; Thu, 16 Feb 2017 09:43:11 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=instituut-net.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to :user-agent; bh=i38Bqohl4JqpJIzKPMNceTc/lylplcieeTNuM6uw8l8=; b=a+N0ytT0nuX/VgU8URCZ7pbgQkQpEcP5Ve+a2TF717WVnSsmU8LffyjckxXsSY9gcn 5nW9kX2Pt/fY4aideZ+9CX1l6Y5fj47+QAAcQ47PYJIDs27ZU4Et4cwsIupVhIPN6vWm FTSVJXpNkpFxfzvvFN8TTxzlNoS8stRtoNotEtUlMIhXXygkdTnY/s2zZ9m56RYm3Bm8 +L6nE/Hn7aAeZ0CfsRxpsO8VCet4lFPDtmCR0bm3t2LspMn6LkdhCfWnNThuk+V0yiS1 jj7Cnex6km81avf0ij98NV+aTEUSvnvRdOFBldzuMe6eZSAxAsxVeQRyUa/w9EEgCv3e Qp7Q==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:content-transfer-encoding :in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=i38Bqohl4JqpJIzKPMNceTc/lylplcieeTNuM6uw8l8=; b=XETNnMAqkwsf208AAXx5pYYQddzXSmc57+JE5ZRt5vEElAbmzfauRLH9nAd6bYCvWb cINUuWlPPswMmHIkQ9ZuLSL8Vc2A8dEQSufdbz4eG4/Hv4rinrk0HKalEAeV8ZHTL6Un lSHe5bxLIDaEBCh6bI7Iq+4rVRW2Dnl7m6zxA+Xb8bjf5fcrK/RuTM952jSlgo/hHuHm 3mmX7Z0dHfBubVSf7Etx4CXdwjP/RE+7aglfzty7ArEOdOKcxsIPTmwM/3i8zwO1RzTF 182kcREqGkKtzYZEwvebe9J9U42dUCdLlxAoAA7Dyo0zrfh0IwIM5TgNl7tQTiTwkWMK G0yw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AMke39k7qSFTKdOYJU5iB39+9a8CnMTYGarjFEsws/+IHrVLzvCF7kqjtpiwoiw+a81bSQ==
X-Received: by 10.223.135.184 with SMTP id b53mr3388198wrb.169.1487266990367; Thu, 16 Feb 2017 09:43:10 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost ([2001:67c:208c:10:a51d:3d60:b612:cbf5]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id n18sm9663070wra.64.2017.02.16.09.43.08 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 16 Feb 2017 09:43:09 -0800 (PST)
Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2017 18:43:08 +0100
From: Job Snijders <job@instituut.net>
To: Jared Mauch <jared@puck.Nether.net>
Message-ID: <20170216174308.GO1115@hanna.meerval.net>
References: <5c1874b1-e7cd-4d6f-869f-b4d2f334f94d@Tims-iPhone> <20170216170823.GA30571@puck.nether.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <20170216170823.GA30571@puck.nether.net>
X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett
User-Agent: Mutt/1.7.2 (2016-11-26)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipfix/D73427Mo7o7dtCi1aRx7qVW4YW4>
Cc: "ipfix@ietf.org" <ipfix@ietf.org>, grow <grow@ietf.org>, =?utf-8?B?5p2O5oyv5by6?= <13911635816@139.com>, opsawg <opsawg@ietf.org>, opsawg-chairs <opsawg-chairs@ietf.org>, PJ Aitken <pjaitken@brocade.com>, grow-bounces <grow-bounces@ietf.org>, "lizhenqiang@chinamobile.com" <lizhenqiang@chinamobile.com>
Subject: Re: [IPFIX] [GROW] [OPSAWG] WG adoption poll fordraft-li-opsawg-ipfix-bgp-community-02
X-BeenThere: ipfix@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: IPFIX WG discussion list <ipfix.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ipfix>, <mailto:ipfix-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ipfix/>
List-Post: <mailto:ipfix@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ipfix-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipfix>, <mailto:ipfix-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2017 17:43:15 -0000

On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 12:08:23PM -0500, Jared Mauch wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 07:53:23PM +0800, 李振强 wrote:
> > The length of IPFIX message is sufficient for BGP standard
> > communities, since the length of standard community is 4 octets. But
> > the sizes of extended community, large community and wide community
> > are bigger than the size of standard community. If the working group
> > agrees to cover the above all kinds of communities in this draft, do
> > you think we should open the discussion for IPFIX
> > 
> 
> I believe there should be coverage for 1997 as well as the upcoming
> large communities.

Agreed. There certainly is merit in covering RFC 1997 (32-bit), RFC 4360
(64-bit) and RFC 8092 (96-bit). For each of these one can fit (at least
a few) of such communities in the 16 bits worth of length of the 'outer
enveloppe' that is the IPFIX record. Should be pretty straight forward.

On the other hand, the current version of the Wide communities draft has
a container mechanism, the outer layer at that level also has a 16-bit
field, like IPFIX has. One can't fit a 16-bit thing in a 16-bit + with
space left for leading / trailing IPFIX related data. I don't
immediately have suggestions how to fit this reliably.

Kind regards,

Job