RE: draft-dong-6man-enhanced-vpn-vtn-id-01

"Dongjie (Jimmy)" <jie.dong@huawei.com> Wed, 29 July 2020 07:43 UTC

Return-Path: <jie.dong@huawei.com>
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 C77A83A1092 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 29 Jul 2020 00:43:20 -0700 (PDT)
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, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-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 IAxswb5zH32q for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 29 Jul 2020 00:43:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [185.176.76.210]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 239613A108F for <6man@ietf.org>; Wed, 29 Jul 2020 00:43:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lhreml744-chm.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.18.7.107]) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTP id C8875794EBBDEA524BC0 for <6man@ietf.org>; Wed, 29 Jul 2020 08:43:16 +0100 (IST)
Received: from dggeme753-chm.china.huawei.com (10.3.19.99) by lhreml744-chm.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.194) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256) id 15.1.1913.5; Wed, 29 Jul 2020 08:43:16 +0100
Received: from dggeme754-chm.china.huawei.com (10.3.19.100) by dggeme753-chm.china.huawei.com (10.3.19.99) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.1913.5; Wed, 29 Jul 2020 15:43:13 +0800
Received: from dggeme754-chm.china.huawei.com ([10.6.80.77]) by dggeme754-chm.china.huawei.com ([10.6.80.77]) with mapi id 15.01.1913.007; Wed, 29 Jul 2020 15:43:13 +0800
From: "Dongjie (Jimmy)" <jie.dong@huawei.com>
To: Ron Bonica <rbonica=40juniper.net@dmarc.ietf.org>, "6man@ietf.org" <6man@ietf.org>
Subject: RE: draft-dong-6man-enhanced-vpn-vtn-id-01
Thread-Topic: draft-dong-6man-enhanced-vpn-vtn-id-01
Thread-Index: AdZlBQlO9JhlnyNeQUaR/K2vKekKjAAb4TWQ
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2020 07:43:13 +0000
Message-ID: <d579687dd60141b3902706539292a0c4@huawei.com>
References: <DM6PR05MB6348F564EE4A9470553B0A8AAE730@DM6PR05MB6348.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
In-Reply-To: <DM6PR05MB6348F564EE4A9470553B0A8AAE730@DM6PR05MB6348.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
Accept-Language: en-US, zh-CN
Content-Language: zh-CN
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.108.243.143]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_d579687dd60141b3902706539292a0c4huaweicom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/p2PyLfizaDkQP8rvmgIgsVZ2Vmw>
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: Wed, 29 Jul 2020 07:43:21 -0000

Hi Ron,

Thanks for your review and comment.

Your interpretation is in the right direction, while the relationship between VTN-ID and DSCP could be considered as in a hierarchical manner, and each is for different purpose. VTN-ID is used to consistently identify a virtual network with a group of network resources allocated from the network, there is no priority difference between VTNs. DSCP is used to provide class (priority) based traffic differentiation, which can be used within VTN.

Hope this helps.

Best regards,
Jie

From: ipv6 [mailto:ipv6-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Ron Bonica
Sent: Wednesday, July 29, 2020 1:45 AM
To: 6man@ietf.org
Subject: draft-dong-6man-enhanced-vpn-vtn-id-01

Co-authors,

In Section 4.2, you say:

"There can be different implementations of reserving local network
   resources to the VTNs.  On each interface, the resources allocated to
   a particular VTN can be seen as a virtual sub-interface with
   dedicated bandwidth and other associated resources.  In packet
   forwarding, the IPv6 destination address of the received packet is
   used to identify the next-hop and the outgoing interface, and the VTN
   ID is used to further identify the virtual sub-interface which is
   associated with the VTN on the outgoing interface."

I interpret this as meaning:

-          The IPv6 destination address is solely responsible for identifying the IP next hop
-          The VTNI, along with the DSCP bits, determine how the packet is forwarded to the next-hop

So, I can think of the VTNI as "more DSCP bits".

Do I have that right?

                                                                  Ron




Juniper Business Use Only