Re: [Isis-wg] Proposed Liaison response on Ethernet Jumbo Frames
Alia Atlas <akatlas@gmail.com> Fri, 02 June 2017 19:59 UTC
Return-Path: <akatlas@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: isis-wg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: isis-wg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 11CC01279E5 for <isis-wg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 2 Jun 2017 12:59:27 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.699
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.699 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.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 5kaYURPRn7yx for <isis-wg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 2 Jun 2017 12:59:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wm0-x22e.google.com (mail-wm0-x22e.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c09::22e]) (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 AAAD9127337 for <isis-wg@ietf.org>; Fri, 2 Jun 2017 12:59:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wm0-x22e.google.com with SMTP id 7so33208662wmo.1 for <isis-wg@ietf.org>; Fri, 02 Jun 2017 12:59:24 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=YzkdfPwG/ulti9JnRwJ2Z0dH43ZD+b7iuHngk2FiVcs=; b=vYP9VmwF7NnK6qRit/d7J+FfJeqqmgLJYNMyRyvjyzNZTrWFZAo8XRXyZiNhaqEV2J +IJl9ftW8/AmAchwA6OdqbUu7kZAEalC69Yp1Sauh72gRJh4EBgZddC9nwYdtEKqf0VK WfBajIqsmOXsLcuwnR3XZ2hCYUDirc3ifg18m7qXKxwYEvIbxljj5zgGHJYtJjc7piNU suQTFCP5QA97RJmkbZXwwRMBAGLEMXDeJxvr4FLUtWQkHggNXSMllJ1huvbXnS5C6PwP N5fZgLmNJCxdZ9f31ovnlKy2sY5Y75H2sl5gKoQY0AVRBQb9oFIIwvK2RU/lcp2K8G15 Ma0w==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=YzkdfPwG/ulti9JnRwJ2Z0dH43ZD+b7iuHngk2FiVcs=; b=tbw/GZcmLNbFakgw24auSCQBEhby2x2Qn6P/3ZGhON1vdu/QlHfzabWoEr1pe1W0Fo 6NmH/TXIHFEhwa6f1XgjqfzP95p7MN129MyGD9iUDiuZBvZMM0WbHK4jGW9/9W9s7e2n hMiTDkER1jJtcPiCaarWiwn4ZTcbKZrRs4jFyQNddld+m7ikCNwgbkiBPEKdvswACz1V yiKqLfB8b+Sesw/k2xoIt/+MJkcp0buuSKgpq0SGIZeddLi3skoXGjZoeu6yk/p1KNf6 RPNeph3nYFXcffhi7NnRyYDhi6p6/5UNJlIyPjT5eXFHaY+psyBAeS+GcNDbVLwGj+AW uonQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AODbwcABFqr4vQWkG0IanHk3HKi4BOc2HOYKiVV0h4wG1C/JVFw04jk+ Iev3RBanC2se4RC/BrT2JPNhZIg6uEwD
X-Received: by 10.28.84.67 with SMTP id p3mr633449wmi.40.1496433563147; Fri, 02 Jun 2017 12:59:23 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.223.135.16 with HTTP; Fri, 2 Jun 2017 12:59:22 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <16f9a396d9b548fba23ca570b6580394@XCH-ALN-001.cisco.com>
References: <CAG4d1rdVmdAarEa=twh0YWoYhLf7v5m_-Qr0QKQ9BHqUV9Ym4w@mail.gmail.com> <16f9a396d9b548fba23ca570b6580394@XCH-ALN-001.cisco.com>
From: Alia Atlas <akatlas@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 02 Jun 2017 15:59:22 -0400
Message-ID: <CAG4d1rfhit8Sh94TLKZ+6eWw9TY1Hw-qAWNuMrzw0eTeu9CK7A@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Les Ginsberg (ginsberg)" <ginsberg@cisco.com>
Cc: "isis-wg@ietf.org" <isis-wg@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="94eb2c1cd712f627eb0550ff96b8"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/isis-wg/L4nus9oPMXPbnI9_UCdLBH_VleI>
Subject: Re: [Isis-wg] Proposed Liaison response on Ethernet Jumbo Frames
X-BeenThere: isis-wg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: Fri, 02 Jun 2017 19:59:27 -0000
Hi Les, On Fri, Jun 2, 2017 at 3:04 PM, Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) <ginsberg@cisco.com> wrote: > Alia – > > > > First, I want to thank you for all the work you did in clearing the > issues. You have cleared the way for the outcome which I think we want – > and done so very expeditiously – which hopefully will minimize any > deployment of the unwanted alternate Ethertype defined by IEEE. > > > > I am fine with the text below. However, I am not sure what you are > concerned about regarding: > > > > *“Please also discuss whether there is additional ISIS work to be done. > I'm specifically thinking about sending hello packets at the MTU.”* > > > > It is padded hellos which are the most common use case for Jumbo frames as > that is the default behavior for the protocol. > > It is also possible to send Jumbo LSPs – but this can only be done if all > routers are configured to support a larger lsp-mtu setting and all links in > the network on which IS-IS operates have an MTU large enough to accommodate > the larger LSPs. > > > > In any case I don’t believe there is any work to be done here. > Implementations which support draft-ietf-isis-ext-eth-01 already do this. > Right - my question is, given that draft-ietf-isis-ext-eth-01 isn't an RFC and that there is now (hopefully with Ethertype 88-70) an IEEE standard, is there a benefit to being explicit about the related IS-IS padded hellos? This is someplace where I believe there are slightly different implementations & defaults. That's the only work I was picturing. Regards, Alia > The only work would be if we are required to support the IEEE specified > Ethertype (C9-D1) as a transition mechanism or – perish the thought – as a > permanent alternate. What we hope to achieve by this liason is to kill the > new ethertype before it gets deployed. > > > > Les > > > > *From:* Isis-wg [mailto:isis-wg-bounces@ietf.org] *On Behalf Of *Alia > Atlas > *Sent:* Friday, June 02, 2017 9:16 AM > *To:* isis-wg@ietf.org > *Subject:* [Isis-wg] Proposed Liaison response on Ethernet Jumbo Frames > > > > Hi, > > > > At the end of the ISIS WG meeting at IETF 98, I called attention to the > recent liaison from IEEE - https://datatracker.ietf.org/liaison/1509/ > <https://datatracker.ietf.org/liaison/1509/>. There was significant > concern expressed about the decision to use a new EtherType instead of > EtherType 88-70, which is widely deployed. > > > > Here is a proposed liaison response, which should also update you on > progress that has been made in this area. I would prefer to get this > liaison, with any improvements, agreed to by June 15. > > > > ========= > > Colleagues, > > > > Thank you very much for your liaison on March 25. We are happy to learn > that IEEE now has a standard, IEEE Std 802.1AC-2016, for encoding LLC > frames and that its use appears to be exactly as described in > draft-ietf-isis-ext-eth-01. There are a large number of pre-standard > implementations and deployments of this functionality. > > > > With informal discussion, we were able to determine the current owner of > EtherType 88-70 and have what we believe is the necessary statement so that > this EtherType is now available for this functionality. I would like to > thank both Yaakov Stein, CTO RAD, for making this happen and David Aviv, > CTO Radware. As these types of challenges come up and have large impact, > we would prefer to learn of them earlier so that we can try and assist > sooner in the process. > > > > We are quite concerned about the allocation of a new EtherType given the > extremely large deployment of this pre-standard common feature. We would > encourage the IEEE 802.1 Working Group to strongly consider updating IEEE > Std 802.1AC to use the deployed EtherType 88-70 that is now available for > this purpose. > > > > The ISIS Working Group will discuss whether there is additional work to do > now that IEEE Std 802.1AC-2016 is available. > > > > Warmest regards, > > Alia Atlas, IETF Routing Area Director > > Chris Hopps, ISIS Working Group Chair > > Hannes Gredler, ISIS Working Group Chair > > > > ========= > > > > Please also discuss whether there is additional ISIS work to be done. I'm > specifically thinking about sending hello packets at the MTU. > > > > Regards, > > Alia > > > > >
- [Isis-wg] Proposed Liaison response on Ethernet J… Alia Atlas
- Re: [Isis-wg] Proposed Liaison response on Ethern… Les Ginsberg (ginsberg)
- Re: [Isis-wg] Proposed Liaison response on Ethern… Alia Atlas
- Re: [Isis-wg] Proposed Liaison response on Ethern… Les Ginsberg (ginsberg)
- Re: [Isis-wg] Proposed Liaison response on Ethern… Alia Atlas
- Re: [Isis-wg] Proposed Liaison response on Ethern… Les Ginsberg (ginsberg)
- Re: [Isis-wg] Proposed Liaison response on Ethern… Alia Atlas