Re: Size of CR in CRH
Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net> Thu, 21 May 2020 14:35 UTC
Return-Path: <robert@raszuk.net>
X-Original-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ECA313A0DDE for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 21 May 2020 07:35:49 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.098
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=raszuk.net
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 jkRobDDzSiEr for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 21 May 2020 07:35:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ej1-x62a.google.com (mail-ej1-x62a.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::62a]) (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 7824D3A0D63 for <6man@ietf.org>; Thu, 21 May 2020 07:35:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ej1-x62a.google.com with SMTP id x20so9040893ejb.11 for <6man@ietf.org>; Thu, 21 May 2020 07:35:37 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=raszuk.net; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=tw1vZpqUcJrpLc2uRgOY7Eb7O/+ObWNorS0NP3BOfAw=; b=SUzbuhMiJm9T/O48h093uAjc/YoPf9Qovm/3KfA6B2bzmykXBzOHdzlhGUm+v9uNPQ 3XuwluLaxckT94985oPusAOQWnOVM7GJmpg8Q5xSudRAZYdBE/unipzTnvq6B2FV85q+ tN3681VmtWYOEy8a5CSGPdlqRVQQ4z1KXj/CNWWIIKRyCJ2ApsKzpD4C3AJRMak2jHei l6/UxkRIpLHp5hgq3fZPs5SVJJYAoN8jHpWVVkcgkVM7+a6jDRlLBUk0pMZMGer84VRw 5S3pOynccXdxma5H22T1e5yt0SXTBJ6Nn3j+6j+6Q4dbYU0ou/txyERqjXf3xg7eZTQu 5w9w==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=tw1vZpqUcJrpLc2uRgOY7Eb7O/+ObWNorS0NP3BOfAw=; b=OJ+9RAvfxjlN4Ggrj0Px9+bIRuoOvyvy8aaOmCPW/olsB/mk2oCC24ibRgGlYxPEku j7N1IzgPFZ/vOGPJdePuoGlR5sKTABXe1DFO605WNUluDyrXnq/tRtm9qZtb4/hLqc4o q6honmtJE+JNweFX2KWAaqK2ytx12SXZMsmv6cYp+Fx2ocfCsnNU26GPQsE34kIw1tHC z4SOsHG0Z8HRRtZHX4LZVmA+Mt6rnjnz1gZkul6s+lM5V1Z6Fn+ZN4eMaLMQcrRJXW8S 8SqLLicBLZ7mr7LCx5IDOL0WkNuvTibSOWGYcmXK1VM1DBoFq+oPbX08E9imXPryQr0B ZiDw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM53011M8ibxGQBgy46WNKqjbKDnHCSZ+K/0uSR9UKPfVFOq/Xty3v Rp8TDiXllehuV5CEd0l/9Ft1jVwtefvdxQHjjCPfP4BO
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxz+0KICz9IY8x4tm4dkmtUrlwmOBuZCXweNOaTf6Z/R1BxRHfHKrOj0ysQesQpvwyn3EM7CpoI+/D2UPOtedo=
X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:d86:: with SMTP id m6mr3964572eji.470.1590071735657; Thu, 21 May 2020 07:35:35 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAOj+MMFsy=dDciY=TMwSf75CZCr_i1Mfv6oUiPs5U6hT2Bq94w@mail.gmail.com> <DM6PR05MB6348D0DB381145F1A4C53450AEB70@DM6PR05MB6348.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> <CAOj+MMHT=TWqf=A71PhvCcrFggCQ=okRrP=sGaO4hrcbmsCvGw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAOj+MMHT=TWqf=A71PhvCcrFggCQ=okRrP=sGaO4hrcbmsCvGw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net>
Date: Thu, 21 May 2020 16:35:23 +0200
Message-ID: <CAOj+MMGYbw83c-T9GWCs_cLDWWbGi1dZ_Xfc8tS6TV6EfvWsDw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Size of CR in CRH
To: Ron Bonica <rbonica@juniper.net>
Cc: 6man <6man@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000f8c29c05a6296ccc"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/ddWz5zNuk6whSqIn11LwmtXX3Wk>
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "IPv6 Maintenance Working Group \(6man\)" <ipv6.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ipv6/>
List-Post: <mailto:ipv6@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 21 May 2020 14:35:57 -0000
Ron, While we are at the local vs global significance of SIDs can you please elaborate how do you resolve the conflict where given SID value is advertised by more then one node ? In fact imagine that all nodes in a domain choose to advertise the same SID value "15" to forward the traffic to their respective peers. So packet arrives at segment endpoint node A with CRH consisting of SID list 15, 15, 15, 15 ... where each value 15 means different behaviour on different node. How do you even know which way to forward the packet ? See in this case your mapping plane will contain different functions on different nodes signalled with the same SID. I understand that you are trying to silently borrow set of procedures from SR-MPLS here as documented in RFC8660. But if you just open this RFC you will see section 2.5 or 2.6 without which you just can not simply propose to treat SID as locally significant in any form of segment routing. Of course unless you would consume two SIDs per node. Thx, Robert. On Thu, May 21, 2020 at 10:34 AM Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net> wrote: > Ron, > > > Now recall that identifiers have node local significance. > > I was talking about case described in yr draft section 7: > > "Applications can: > > > o Allocate SIDs so that they have *domain-wide significance*." > > While not a must - it is an option. So I believe my observation stays > valid till draft either removes that option or describes scaling properties > differences between both domain wide and local significance of the SIDs. > > Thx, > R. > > > On Thu, May 21, 2020 at 4:01 AM Ron Bonica <rbonica@juniper.net> wrote: > >> Robert, >> >> >> >> Consider the following network: >> >> >> >> - Contains 65,000 routers >> - Each router has 500 directly connected neighbors or fewer >> - Uses 16-bit CRH >> >> >> >> In this network, each node might have 65,499 CRH-FIB entries: >> >> >> >> - 64,999 CRH-FIB entries cause packets to follow the least-cost path >> to another node in the domain >> - 500 CRH-FIB entries cause packets to traverse a specific link to a >> specific neighbor. >> >> >> >> As a mnemonic device, an operator might assign identifiers as follows: >> >> >> >> - 0-65,000 identify CRH-FIB entries that cause packets to follow the >> least-cost path to another node in the domain >> - 65,001 – 65,565 identify CRH-FIB entries that that cause packets to >> traverse a specific link to a specific neighbor. >> >> >> >> Now recall that identifiers have node local significance. So, Node A and >> Node B might both have a CRH-FIB entry that is identified by the value >> 65,001. However: >> >> >> >> - The CRH-FIB entry on Node A causes packets to traverse a particular >> link towards Node X >> - The CRH-FIB entry on Node B causes packets to traverse a different >> link towards Node Y. >> >> >> >> I think that this example refutes the premise of your argument, so there >> is not further need to address the conclusion. >> >> >> >> >> Ron >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Juniper Business Use Only >> >> *From:* Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net> >> *Sent:* Wednesday, May 20, 2020 6:20 PM >> *To:* Ron Bonica <rbonica@juniper.net> >> *Cc:* 6man <6man@ietf.org> >> *Subject:* RE: Size of CR in CRH >> >> >> >> *[External Email. Be cautious of content]* >> >> >> >> HI, >> >> >> >> So just to make sure I understand this analogy of 16 bit -- 2^16 = 65536 >> nodes. I think this is only on paper. >> >> >> >> Imagine I have 1000 routers so if I divide the 16 bit space by 1000 I get >> at most 65 local node behaviours if anyone would like to embed such into >> the SID. >> >> >> >> That means that if my router have more then 65 interfaces I am not able >> to steer packets by src route out of my router ... I must always depend on >> the lookup of next SID how to forward the packets. >> >> >> >> That also means that if I want to apply any form of NP in segment >> endpoint I am quite limited to the number of local functions I could use. >> >> >> >> To conclude - Let me restate to what I and others already said - flat SID >> space domain wide in mapping plane is a mistake. Yes this is like MPLS, but >> this does not make it great again due to that legacy. >> >> >> >> Many thx, >> R. >> >
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Brian E Carpenter
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Erik Kline
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Joel M. Halpern
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Brian E Carpenter
- CRH and RH0 Darren Dukes (ddukes)
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ron Bonica
- Re: CRH and RH0 Darren Dukes (ddukes)
- Re: CRH and RH0 Bob Hinden
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ron Bonica
- Re: CRH and RH0 otroan
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ron Bonica
- Re: CRH and RH0 otroan
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ron Bonica
- Re: CRH and RH0 otroan
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ron Bonica
- Re: CRH and RH0 Bob Hinden
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ron Bonica
- RE: CRH and RH0 Pengshuping (Peng Shuping)
- Re: CRH and RH0 Tom Herbert
- Re: CRH and RH0 Robert Raszuk
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ron Bonica
- Re: CRH and RH0 Robert Raszuk
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ron Bonica
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ron Bonica
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ron Bonica
- Re: CRH and RH0 Robert Raszuk
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ron Bonica
- Re: CRH and RH0 Robert Raszuk
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ron Bonica
- Re: CRH and RH0 Stewart Bryant
- Re: CRH and RH0 Bob Hinden
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ron Bonica
- Re: CRH and RH0 Tom Herbert
- Re: CRH and RH0 Ole Troan
- Re: CRH and RH0 Darren Dukes (ddukes)
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ron Bonica
- Re: CRH and RH0 Bob Hinden
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ron Bonica
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ketan Talaulikar (ketant)
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ketan Talaulikar (ketant)
- Re: CRH and RH0 otroan
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ron Bonica
- Re: CRH and RH0 Darren Dukes (ddukes)
- Re: CRH and RH0 Tom Herbert
- Re: CRH and RH0 Erik Kline
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ketan Talaulikar (ketant)
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ron Bonica
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ron Bonica
- Re: CRH and RH0 Darren Dukes (ddukes)
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ketan Talaulikar (ketant)
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ketan Talaulikar (ketant)
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ron Bonica
- Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH and… John Scudder
- Re: CRH and RH0 Mark Smith
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Robert Raszuk
- Re: CRH and RH0 Robert Raszuk
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ron Bonica
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ron Bonica
- Re: CRH and RH0 Gyan Mishra
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… S Moonesamy
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Darren Dukes (ddukes)
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Joel M. Halpern
- Re: CRH and RH0 Darren Dukes (ddukes)
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… John Scudder
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Bob Hinden
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Bob Hinden
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… S Moonesamy
- Re: CRH and RH0 Tom Herbert
- RE: CRH and RH0 Ron Bonica
- RE: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Ketan Talaulikar (ketant)
- RE: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Pengshuping (Peng Shuping)
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Darren Dukes (ddukes)
- RE: CRH and RH0 Chengli (Cheng Li)
- RE: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Chengli (Cheng Li)
- Re: CRH and RH0 Robert Raszuk
- Re: CRH and RH0 Stewart Bryant
- Re: CRH and RH0 Robert Raszuk
- Re: CRH and RH0 Stewart Bryant
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Behcet Sarikaya
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Voyer, Daniel
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… 刘毅松
- 答复: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… qinfengwei
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Zafar Ali (zali)
- RE: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Andrew Alston
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Tom Herbert
- RE: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Ron Bonica
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Nick Hilliard
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Zafar Ali (zali)
- Re: [spring] Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was… Robert Raszuk
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… John Scudder
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Fernando Gont
- Shorter SIDs in SR over IPv6 (Re: Adoption call c… Greg Mirsky
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Zafar Ali (zali)
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… John Scudder
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Tom Herbert
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Robert Raszuk
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Mark Smith
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Tom Herbert
- Re: Adoption call criteria for CRH? [was: Re: CRH… Robert Raszuk
- Size of CR in CRH Bob Hinden
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Templin (US), Fred L
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Bob Hinden
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Templin (US), Fred L
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Tom Herbert
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Nick Hilliard
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Ron Bonica
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Templin (US), Fred L
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Brian E Carpenter
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Nick Hilliard
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Joel M. Halpern
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Bob Hinden
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Wang, Weibin (NSB - CN/Shanghai)
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Andrew Alston
- Re: Size of CR in CRH otroan
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Ron Bonica
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Bob Hinden
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Uma Chunduri
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Ron Bonica
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Tom Herbert
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Ron Bonica
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Tom Herbert
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Ron Bonica
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Ole Troan
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Mark Smith
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Fred Baker
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Ron Bonica
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Tom Herbert
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Robert Raszuk
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Bob Hinden
- On adddress sizing (was: Re: Size of CR in CRH) Toerless Eckert
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Toerless Eckert
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Ron Bonica
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Chengli (Cheng Li)
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Ron Bonica
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Robert Raszuk
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Nick Hilliard
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Ron Bonica
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Ron Bonica
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Zafar Ali (zali)
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Robert Raszuk
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Tom Herbert
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Ron Bonica
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Ron Bonica
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Robert Raszuk
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Ketan Talaulikar (ketant)
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Ron Bonica
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Robert Raszuk
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Ron Bonica
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Tom Herbert
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Robert Raszuk
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Zafar Ali (zali)
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Ron Bonica
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Joel M. Halpern
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Zafar Ali (zali)
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Bob Hinden
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Ron Bonica
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Ron Bonica
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Robert Raszuk
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Robert Raszuk
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Joel M. Halpern
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Pablo Camarillo (pcamaril)
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Joel M. Halpern
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Brian E Carpenter
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Gyan Mishra
- Re: Size of CR in CRH Gyan Mishra
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Wang, Weibin (NSB - CN/Shanghai)
- RE: Size of CR in CRH Ketan Talaulikar (ketant)