IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Reference based Routing (RbR)

Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net> Sun, 24 May 2020 21:06 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 0B7FC3A0BE0 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 24 May 2020 14:06:36 -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 1er7xiVBJlwl for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 24 May 2020 14:06:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ej1-x630.google.com (mail-ej1-x630.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::630]) (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 5203A3A08C5 for <6man@ietf.org>; Sun, 24 May 2020 14:06:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ej1-x630.google.com with SMTP id h21so18636953ejq.5 for <6man@ietf.org>; Sun, 24 May 2020 14:06:34 -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=BbvQ2sbLe6dTPIbucxZ8stjEw+YX6KsOqU35gqU8kPs=; b=SMj+xJuxDR9/g/B72sr/kmmInReqMrcXwv0/TqKNo7dBMu6d7+J1IqG6IM0/WKdb/8 QJkfgkAw0UgE+mE5PL/znJ1k8JknoAaJhauVd4o6rdDCP59FmKnwiKE9VZuHdVHtJKtd SLeud+K8lkhvXP6PbmPmBVgtPcwqpDhptBrEUkVOGNoRz2zJsvSzx4OgH+Vb6B6d0peq KoHTBuFibd8Yn7/1M2/o1ZEXTfec6w/UbcgifGQ6ca/NzPwBTQS7q9RhCuwG5dwk3stB ksuFzKgmfX4c0D2WFE4z2DYlQfaNRx2+kOdfnkqVzojV9pj5AUeAqHEpp+hSwECmVp6Q NI3g==
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=BbvQ2sbLe6dTPIbucxZ8stjEw+YX6KsOqU35gqU8kPs=; b=IM4uJg5zfslGVOKL0Lz3Wt51Q7hkwv5dGJJlSe3T94k2+xJ7p4KnViLTQItiO8wOcR iKDvJaMaYtstU0JDrxcliHKzi7IDOcob3sSxszLVedF4sxDVNRIh16jwNKekQ90ADyId U0Pl1BmQGBZbLng7nRxEjtLb3AnjBYsUyc2YrNW0MIafrmwPkn+r+rgs3k8Esb2QaAH6 TEK3GRu7H/Itx+SNijDMdWDESXV1WFy/L4qe/wZyHANz6H2Znx7Zyn8p3izWBxI+Q9el W9PyxGvm6JEzgIADX3NtkfX2k84zEkpNSNrUBDvCwmHEXGb940uhzJiT1QhrbAVvHzz6 HaAQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5308isvE89Obt8u2gXwk01o4UtKhh39KIrx0OU2I63bDyPGAHtOp TyUxXs4LfPUfl/R+nbYbDkO4rTfjNNBddsjt1tPX0gM1mLs=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyZse3uAfK/6cpW2HKqVnJRU17sqjq2oUxbBO3agGRrjxalBLLKrHULFTiXktpwcs//pS8jtai61dhgihJixvw=
X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:17d1:: with SMTP id u17mr16217647eje.242.1590354392806; Sun, 24 May 2020 14:06:32 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <82165E20-884F-467B-B364-1B0A8B84A38A@tony.li> <05B3C66C-5CB2-4871-8AF9-52517C56866C@employees.org> <32ca2b0e-3fdd-9c27-736c-7033a3e7a37b@foobar.org>
In-Reply-To: <32ca2b0e-3fdd-9c27-736c-7033a3e7a37b@foobar.org>
From: Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net>
Date: Sun, 24 May 2020 23:06:23 +0200
Message-ID: <CAOj+MMH_jnK8U3vPszZfn-Hdm-q0v=OKEbaHF4nAwTQabioaKQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Reference based Routing (RbR)
To: Nick Hilliard <nick@foobar.org>
Cc: Ole Troan <otroan@employees.org>, 6man <6man@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000a68dc105a66b3cc5"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/pTgO2sF7CUMGr_LJRfj2wQoPsB4>
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: Sun, 24 May 2020 21:06:36 -0000

Hi Nick,

FYI
https://blog.apnic.net/2018/01/11/ipv6-flow-label-misuse-hashing/

Thx,
R.

On Sun, May 24, 2020 at 11:04 PM Nick Hilliard <nick@foobar.org> wrote:

> Ole Troan wrote on 24/05/2020 21:50:
> > Inside a limited domain using encapsulation, which is what all these
> > solutions cover, you could likely use the flow label as a “path
> > tag”.
>
> this is not a safe assumption.  The target deployment scenarios appear
> to be own-tenancy networks with an emphasis on large-scale datacentre
> implementations.  In this sort of situation it would be normal for the
> network fabric to use multiple links between routing nodes, thereby
> creating a requirement for load balancing.  Removing one of the entropy
> sources for bucket management would be unwise in these circumstances,
> particularly given the likelihood of elephant flows.
>
> Nick
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
> ipv6@ietf.org
> Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email