Re: [Isis-wg] [Bier] BAR field length in draft-ietf-bier-isis-extensions and draft-ietf-bier-ospf-extensions

"Jeffrey (Zhaohui) Zhang" <zzhang@juniper.net> Wed, 21 February 2018 13:20 UTC

Return-Path: <zzhang@juniper.net>
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 DCAE312025C; Wed, 21 Feb 2018 05:20:31 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.7
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, 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=juniper.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 NDiBDR6zu_Xx; Wed, 21 Feb 2018 05:20:30 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mx0b-00273201.pphosted.com (mx0b-00273201.pphosted.com [67.231.152.164]) (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 146741200FC; Wed, 21 Feb 2018 05:20:30 -0800 (PST)
Received: from pps.filterd (m0108160.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-00273201.pphosted.com (8.16.0.22/8.16.0.22) with SMTP id w1LDEwZ7032442; Wed, 21 Feb 2018 05:20:28 -0800
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=juniper.net; h=from : to : cc : subject : date : message-id : references : in-reply-to : content-type : mime-version; s=PPS1017; bh=KeXq1midSH+OV+wxP/OvSonFfn/ok8+xF29+4lC4ltA=; b=e0gdCR6IyjAPMlutwtj8M0TX3Vd3SO5jf3xRQjyz/AzjUSh5EKCSA/OaR6CW4KEGtAe4 6rmsVqXP/cvDKt+b//ID7DoxS70vZ5TCj0kLhfXsDeHy0RMCwc6TdXO8sQ1ACtA+xvNO Y4UPL8n8J8/W2NSdJwQKXIV2uR/AlC2lNG+10MJLTIR9P2Og0kY4Zv98yuwTNVQgtULD 4wgHg4GYghg6Zolrteu8HOPbWtOq4zPy/9DrTcBYZTHzo5Zq0Xb7bfefKSpF8Gf2j6rE oRWZx+bIPb6dAoFAIaYELpr512ucNAT88CL7J6LL1POtE7/9ioc/uuE2b1qQJY2wDxjc Tg==
Received: from nam03-by2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-by2nam03lp0049.outbound.protection.outlook.com [216.32.180.49]) by mx0b-00273201.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2g99cer0h2-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 21 Feb 2018 05:20:27 -0800
Received: from BN3PR0501MB1331.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.160.183.20) by BN3PR0501MB1411.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.160.117.145) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.527.6; Wed, 21 Feb 2018 13:20:24 +0000
Received: from BN3PR0501MB1331.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::7509:f083:9ff5:c01c]) by BN3PR0501MB1331.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::7509:f083:9ff5:c01c%9]) with mapi id 15.20.0548.005; Wed, 21 Feb 2018 13:20:24 +0000
From: "Jeffrey (Zhaohui) Zhang" <zzhang@juniper.net>
To: "IJsbrand Wijnands (iwijnand)" <iwijnand@cisco.com>, Tony Przygienda <tonysietf@gmail.com>
CC: IJsbrand Wijnands <ice@cisco.com>, "EXT-arkadiy.gulko@thomsonreuters.com" <arkadiy.gulko@thomsonreuters.com>, "bier@ietf.org" <bier@ietf.org>, "isis-wg@ietf.org" <isis-wg@ietf.org>, Eric Rosen <erosen@juniper.net>
Thread-Topic: [Bier] BAR field length in draft-ietf-bier-isis-extensions and draft-ietf-bier-ospf-extensions
Thread-Index: AQHTqcvDpgRf7bSxH0OHscLI1QV+WqOsufoAgAAGCQCAAK3NAIAAF8uAgAAPAgCAAB3TgIAANeXwgAAXV4CAAAWbgIAA00UAgAAA2/A=
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2018 13:20:24 +0000
Message-ID: <BN3PR0501MB13319C71FEDC239B98A7AF5BD4CE0@BN3PR0501MB1331.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
References: <CAG4d1remdUKutEdc2DU6Gaan3z63CAZVo1D-L0GXg_=eHJxffw@mail.gmail.com> <9778B23E32FB2745BEA3BE037F185DC4A5BA61A3@BLREML503-MBX.china.huawei.com> <CAG4d1rc8=2gnEj4vTjjAja5SPfezBT+hBKRg219uLgndvA78Kg@mail.gmail.com> <CA+wi2hPoTA0u2rx0f5eoBsoOAH+m1uN0ggr=P7sSYFcX=1qQxw@mail.gmail.com> <CAG4d1rf_mphexVqMv20HQbd=px5koH5c_+VW_5TTfgjWq4EtSA@mail.gmail.com> <B94D11DC-F46A-4F8C-873F-6F4A21BC4071@thomsonreuters.com> <14dca8e9-9afd-b5ff-c753-3554b911d753@juniper.net> <CY1PR0501MB1340543164C052E207A44D9DD4CF0@CY1PR0501MB1340.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> <DD0F774D-E132-488E-B75A-A8FFA3B771F6@cisco.com>, <CA+wi2hPgGGAmon=4HYofOGA899eb-eZyQ5F1hV1Rf-S6q5rdhQ@mail.gmail.com> <3D8AD227-D32A-4534-83B8-73D1C06FD635@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <3D8AD227-D32A-4534-83B8-73D1C06FD635@cisco.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [66.129.241.10]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; BN3PR0501MB1411; 6:g2PC6TLfGVM43qUxKEk2/OKNj7sIPbgZkczsCsm6RMxe3pdSCP2X6iQXcDdFuk2aXEtSXSWu5hVEKBUPVA8ykJxvxSasOOYK7fjBuyI3A9u2PY5B0Kr5dQ+dDd1NxjVYVCQOkG1JOvEw6YfkxT0xiGEi/TkT8WjapCsLHK2kO8XzShd5BKDbdZQNCBSpLGNmGEpWQTrulyupzCxZLPFLWUxhM4jEC5N4mQFON9zM0MSvEwkeiqYaVpEc3ii8hxEKre8vVZ4Lzdlakcnd57Q9M9WM+yGTHekk1JHpt/BWqEqCNw/89VTY0tqXpQjCmMLIKvcp0q2GISRpd/U1zpTH2/BrDRblomC2ViA6vNwQCoif8+J0O1/ke3TeypXlglxT; 5:tIvDhZ+I/KDonu9cDi+0A4eBz98x/C9/dUaZTTn8bgcZBIVJeEc/quJ+l2YVspBBUifUHGwU1D9iHxiTtZCaThIJ+ruLfFm9UHIbBC8phXGawUYdmiHCXpXqJmpbCHViynsXNe8xSo3A+Kd2NPC3iMkfyh0Ue7TazbTI+MfKep0=; 24:mOFOUPnrm+BC2cB69uC2GS37BXJCCXHBQOb793khpbqt+pL8hhmi8dbKnfEmLqdgDioY6GpRT4OuABmBhz3/IatuAzNOsKyadF+bYmDquKQ=; 7:ST51Ty65nhfQpiPr7yxAKsKYDDHnS5/tpso59aDdvjJcQA3Wdp2ebO9hduWQTlFd9DVBYal4mMGMmeNUoq3oZfsVVsXDKyfO6QsHbNSNhtttJUND41WXzrvI1X1JRL9ChxzEWgafYWtlJTOM4ulDIFg7oEla5PGnoIrgamI8Bb5oH5wEYSfDDvLVkXXnhtmEnVWV8kdeCbtFSvcTz21s/+qJvVtuLF6czJ6LbJksIrY9G4FCHqUTN5Hb9jikkeVj
x-ms-exchange-antispam-srfa-diagnostics: SSOS;
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: ef44455b-be00-4957-1b87-08d5792dddd6
x-ms-office365-filtering-ht: Tenant
x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(7020095)(4652020)(5600026)(4604075)(3008032)(48565401081)(4534165)(4627221)(201703031133081)(201702281549075)(2017052603307)(7153060)(7193020); SRVR:BN3PR0501MB1411;
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: BN3PR0501MB1411:
x-ld-processed: bea78b3c-4cdb-4130-854a-1d193232e5f4,ExtAddr
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <BN3PR0501MB14118FAB6ECEC96722D4D10CD4CE0@BN3PR0501MB1411.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:(28532068793085)(138986009662008)(85827821059158)(100405760836317)(95692535739014)(21748063052155);
x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(6040501)(2401047)(8121501046)(5005006)(3002001)(10201501046)(93006095)(93001095)(3231101)(944501161)(6055026)(6041288)(20161123560045)(20161123564045)(201703131423095)(201702281528075)(20161123555045)(201703061421075)(201703061406153)(20161123558120)(20161123562045)(6072148)(201708071742011); SRVR:BN3PR0501MB1411; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:BN3PR0501MB1411;
x-forefront-prvs: 0590BBCCBC
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(39380400002)(376002)(346002)(396003)(366004)(39860400002)(199004)(189003)(3660700001)(790700001)(25786009)(14454004)(6116002)(3846002)(86362001)(5660300001)(8656006)(4326008)(105586002)(54906003)(110136005)(2906002)(74316002)(316002)(99286004)(186003)(7736002)(39060400002)(3280700002)(33656002)(68736007)(2950100002)(8936002)(2900100001)(107886003)(66066001)(53946003)(106356001)(81166006)(26005)(81156014)(8676002)(102836004)(9326002)(6436002)(561944003)(97736004)(6506007)(53546011)(55016002)(6246003)(229853002)(6306002)(76176011)(9686003)(54896002)(53936002)(93886005)(59450400001)(7696005)(5250100002)(478600001)(579004); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:BN3PR0501MB1411; H:BN3PR0501MB1331.namprd05.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; A:1; MX:1; LANG:en;
received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: juniper.net does not designate permitted sender hosts)
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: TE4gjS/d5UMXxc9/vrLRq1cvZli1WaQDVZMIYMuLwhk6wFuQACueCTFAhmTi3IRxN/GwU2deuEUaLF5ajIpXtTt59z3RTcwo7/QGDw33NHSk8+BNY5QdzFtZXU27dQveZ6SoPVSuGIQDbaE7w1o6TFluphvoj7vmtGTk/bOEQBw=
spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:99
spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_BN3PR0501MB13319C71FEDC239B98A7AF5BD4CE0BN3PR0501MB1331_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: juniper.net
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: ef44455b-be00-4957-1b87-08d5792dddd6
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 21 Feb 2018 13:20:24.3757 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: bea78b3c-4cdb-4130-854a-1d193232e5f4
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BN3PR0501MB1411
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:, , definitions=2018-02-21_04:, , signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_spam_notspam policy=outbound_spam score=0 suspectscore=0 malwarescore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 mlxscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1711220000 definitions=main-1802210160
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/isis-wg/g-RoRqctXa_FfAhgzCMFbQ8BS8I>
Subject: Re: [Isis-wg] [Bier] BAR field length in draft-ietf-bier-isis-extensions and draft-ietf-bier-ospf-extensions
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: Wed, 21 Feb 2018 13:20:32 -0000

Hi Ice,

From: IJsbrand Wijnands (iwijnand) [mailto:iwijnand@cisco.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2018 8:16 AM
To: Tony Przygienda <tonysietf@gmail.com>;
Cc: IJsbrand Wijnands <ice@cisco.com>;; Jeffrey (Zhaohui) Zhang <zzhang@juniper.net>;; EXT-arkadiy.gulko@thomsonreuters.com <arkadiy.gulko@thomsonreuters.com>;; bier@ietf.org; isis-wg@ietf.org; Eric Rosen <erosen@juniper.net>;
Subject: Re: [Bier] BAR field length in draft-ietf-bier-isis-extensions and draft-ietf-bier-ospf-extensions

Inline.


Future specifications may specify BART values that change the
interpretation of the BARM octet. Those specifications must handle backwards

ICE: This creates a potential dependency which I think we should avoid. I think there are possible use-cases where the combination of the two values could be valuable. But since we don’t yet know what that is, lets not speculate on it. Let keep both values as equal importance without interdependency.

And I happen to think that if this proposal has any merit this is precisely the paragraph we have to keep to make sure that not every possible BART value is being slaved to IGP

Ice: No, BART is not being slaved here. If BARM is 0, BART is all yours.

Zzh> BART is BIER’s no matter what BARM is; not only when BARM is 0.

Jeffrey


Registry Algorithm a.k.a as BARM then ... Without this section we would be mandating that BARM is always an IGP algorithm or FA so basically it would mandate IGP

Ice: Yes, BARM will be the IGP algorithm. That is to accommodate the people on the list who are of the opinion that aligning with IGP is important.


Algorithm registry as the only option to perform a calculation making BART possibly pretty much useless ... Having a registry being mapped 1:1 into  another registry known

Ice: I don't understand why you are saying this. If BARM is 0, BART is all yours. Its unfortunate that a large part of the discussion is dominated by perceived functionality in the form of BIER Algorithm, while there is no architecture draft that describes how it should work and no discussion has happen in any IETF meeting, which leaves us all guessing. I think Alia asked a very good question on the list regarding "constraints". It is not at all clear if BART is a Algorithm or a Constraint. I think from your response you're saying its both, which seems wrong IMO.. To me Alia's question is still open, but that that may be because I could not decipher the rest of your response.


as identity makes them both them the same thing by another name.
So, to get anywhere close to consensus let's get bit less creative maybe and stick to the four letters of the alphabet that the AD extended as a wide playing field and the WG seems to converge around ... Or otherwise stick to option F) unmodified and see who's
interested in it unless you insist on creating an option G) ...

Ice: Jeffrey brought option F to the list in order to discuss it, that is what we are doing, and that is how you can converge on a solution and reach consensus. That is better compared to a vote on an option and everybody walks away with a different interpretation of it.

Thx,

Ice.