Re: [Isis-wg] draft-ginsberg-isis-l2bundles

<stephane.litkowski@orange.com> Tue, 18 August 2015 08:28 UTC

Return-Path: <stephane.litkowski@orange.com>
X-Original-To: isis-wg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: isis-wg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0CE251ACE60 for <isis-wg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 18 Aug 2015 01:28:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.598
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001] autolearn=ham
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 tL9gNe5c06xe for <isis-wg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 18 Aug 2015 01:28:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from relais-inet.francetelecom.com (relais-ias92.francetelecom.com [193.251.215.92]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1F6801ACE32 for <isis-wg@ietf.org>; Tue, 18 Aug 2015 01:28:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from omfedm05.si.francetelecom.fr (unknown [xx.xx.xx.1]) by omfedm12.si.francetelecom.fr (ESMTP service) with ESMTP id 8FE9818C2A4; Tue, 18 Aug 2015 10:28:20 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from Exchangemail-eme2.itn.ftgroup (unknown [10.114.31.58]) by omfedm05.si.francetelecom.fr (ESMTP service) with ESMTP id 687BF35C048; Tue, 18 Aug 2015 10:28:20 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from OPEXCLILMA4.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup ([fe80::65de:2f08:41e6:ebbe]) by OPEXCLILM33.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup ([fe80::3881:fc15:b4b2:9017%19]) with mapi id 14.03.0248.002; Tue, 18 Aug 2015 10:28:20 +0200
From: stephane.litkowski@orange.com
To: "Les Ginsberg (ginsberg)" <ginsberg@cisco.com>, "Ahmed Bashandy (bashandy)" <bashandy@cisco.com>, "Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee@cisco.com>, Ebben Aries <exa@fb.com>, "isis-wg@ietf.org list (isis-wg@ietf.org)" <isis-wg@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [Isis-wg] draft-ginsberg-isis-l2bundles
Thread-Index: AdDN623Y8EVm+rlaS12GE2fzf9VY0wBEoDQAABV7GoAAD7p4gAAhy3xQAAcF9AAABO57MP//5B8A///UAYCAAN0JgP//ZGswgAbkNoD/9eR7UP/rxOZQ/9cmh2D/rkaPAP9ciFtA/rin5QD9cJxUIPrhNMJw
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2015 08:28:19 +0000
Message-ID: <9254_1439886500_55D2ECA4_9254_1473_1_9E32478DFA9976438E7A22F69B08FF92166C0DB7@OPEXCLILMA4.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup>
References: <26030_1438606960_55BF6670_26030_2637_1_9E32478DFA9976438E7A22F69B08FF92166BD55F@OPEXCLILMA4.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup> <55C14D02.3040606@fb.com> <9343_1438762371_55C1C583_9343_425_1_9E32478DFA9976438E7A22F69B08FF92166BE011@OPEXCLILMA4.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup> <D1E7BBD9.2A539%acee@cisco.com> <29791_1438848107_55C3146B_29791_2196_1_9E32478DFA9976438E7A22F69B08FF92166BE386@OPEXCLILMA4.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup> <D1E8CF5E.2A64B%acee@cisco.com> <32556_1438867163_55C35EDB_32556_1906_1_9E32478DFA9976438E7A22F69B08FF92166BE558@OPEXCLILMA4.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup> <D1E8D9DC.2A680%acee@cisco.com> <17887_1438871493_55C36FC4_17887_18571_1_9E32478DFA9976438E7A22F69B08FF92166BE5E4@OPEXCLILMA4.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup> <D1E96BF1.2A765%acee@cisco.com> <26458_1438932511_55C45E1E_26458_1031_1_9E32478DFA9976438E7A22F69B08FF92166BE826@OPEXCLILMA4.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup> <55C93C47.9070909@cisco.com> <23793_1439800879_55D19E2F_23793_781_1_9E32478DFA9976438E7A22F69B08FF92166C0A06@OPEXCLILMA4.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup> <F3ADE4747C9E124B89F0ED2180CC814F5955A239@xmb-aln-x02.cisco.com> <27231_1439824629_55D1FAF5_27231_35_1_9E32478DFA9976438E7A22F69B08FF92166C0C31@OPEXCLILMA4.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup> <F3ADE4747C9E124B89F0ED2180CC814F5955A95A@xmb-aln-x02.cisco.com>
Accept-Language: fr-FR, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.168.234.1]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_9E32478DFA9976438E7A22F69B08FF92166C0DB7OPEXCLILMA4corp_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-PMX-Version: 6.2.1.2478543, Antispam-Engine: 2.7.2.2107409, Antispam-Data: 2015.8.17.61518
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/isis-wg/4NHUxKYMnJCIp0TOpKduu3DLfq0>
Subject: Re: [Isis-wg] draft-ginsberg-isis-l2bundles
X-BeenThere: isis-wg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF IS-IS working group <isis-wg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/isis-wg>, <mailto:isis-wg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/isis-wg/>
List-Post: <mailto:isis-wg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:isis-wg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/isis-wg>, <mailto:isis-wg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2015 08:28:25 -0000

Hi,

I understood from the discussion during the WG meeting about the use case of this proposal, that this is useful for traffic engineering (mostly/only ?) and people wanted to keep hiding the physical topology for other applications (LDP, IGP routing, multicast ?). The criteria is not clearly highlighted in the table.

What I’m saying here, is that with solution #4, we can achieve the same goal without any standardization, just a local feature.
Unnumbered vs not unnumbered is just optimizing IP address space usage, other solution possible : use /31 for p2p, or use IPv6.

Solution#4 is having an IP layer on each interface (unnumbered or not), and creating adjacencies on each link in addition to the LAG (this require some code change as it’s not possible AFAIK today) :
Interface Port-Channel1
Ip address 1.1.1.1/30
Ip router isis
!
Interface Eth0
Ip address 2.2.2.1/30
Ip router isis
Channel-group 1
!
Interface Eth1
Ip address 2.2.3.1/30
Ip router isis
Channel-group 1
!

Based on this each application can choose to use LAG or Layer 3 bundle or individual links.

Moreover having an adjacency on a topological link is IMO better, as it will allow to ensure that the link is almost working properly (MTU OK, two way connectivity OK).
In addition, the solution works with RSVP-TE also while the one you provided is SR only.

Hope it helps,

Stephane

From: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) [mailto:ginsberg@cisco.com]
Sent: Monday, August 17, 2015 23:36
To: LITKOWSKI Stephane SCE/IBNF; Ahmed Bashandy (bashandy); Acee Lindem (acee); Ebben Aries; isis-wg@ietf.org<mailto:isis-wg@ietf.org> list (isis-wg@ietf.org<mailto:isis-wg@ietf.org>)
Subject: RE: [Isis-wg] draft-ginsberg-isis-l2bundles

Stephane –

I guess I don’t understand what you mean when you say:

“With solution #4, you have the choice per protocol/application to use the LAG or individual interfaces.”

Do you mean that it is not necessary to have L3 adjacencies on all interfaces? If so, even with the solution defined in the draft it is a local matter as to what L2 bundle members are advertised. It could be all of them or a subset – that is a matter for local configuration and does not need to be standardized. This is why I said your new column seems no different than Ahmed’s existing column 3 – other than perhaps you are suggesting we should not use unnumbered – in which case I think you have made using L3 adjacencies more onerous.

Please clarify.
Thanx.

   Les

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc
pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler
a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,
Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci.

This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law;
they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.
If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments.
As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified.
Thank you.