Re: [Isis-wg] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-isis-segment-routing-msd-07
"Les Ginsberg (ginsberg)" <ginsberg@cisco.com> Mon, 08 January 2018 08:13 UTC
Return-Path: <ginsberg@cisco.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 C84D81252BA; Mon, 8 Jan 2018 00:13:11 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.531
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.531 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.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 eofAe1JlBiFw; Mon, 8 Jan 2018 00:13:09 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rcdn-iport-8.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-8.cisco.com [173.37.86.79]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 38189124234; Mon, 8 Jan 2018 00:13:09 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=7632; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1515399189; x=1516608789; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=b//NHFbNC7OG/j3wrP8mQXltjTRQssb8TStSdsfDZVk=; b=H+elubPG+imETowM6qvOOj4+qzjiWu9AjD+pN1s8vipmLpBaQw4qkzzR 4cmRadj4Esmzhtiz0jLcJrohbowtJzSwkjjfUpsr6UGXWQLOVpoOQDv/1 kt47MZ4Z4fvwBcMrj8wqWPspJa8xApk9qDMWM/LjyUiWFOuPHAYMaHBp5 c=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0AAAQBCJ1Na/4YNJK1eGQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQcBAQEBAYM/ZnQnB4QAiiSOWIIClyqCFQoYC4UYAhqEGD8YAQEBAQEBAQEBayiFIwEBAQEDAQEbFzgCCAMMBAIBBgIRBAEBBSMFAgIlCxQJCAIEAQ0FCIopEJN8nWgIgiWKLwEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBARgFgQuDFYIVgVaBaAGDLoMvAQEXgW0Pgm2CaQWZb4lvAogFjS6CIIYZi1mNM4k3AhEZAYE7AR85gVBvFT2CKoJUHIFneIlRgRcBAQE
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.46,330,1511827200"; d="scan'208";a="338543854"
Received: from alln-core-12.cisco.com ([173.36.13.134]) by rcdn-iport-8.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 08 Jan 2018 08:13:07 +0000
Received: from XCH-ALN-010.cisco.com (xch-aln-010.cisco.com [173.36.7.20]) by alln-core-12.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id w088D7ME024355 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Mon, 8 Jan 2018 08:13:07 GMT
Received: from xch-aln-001.cisco.com (173.36.7.11) by XCH-ALN-010.cisco.com (173.36.7.20) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1320.4; Mon, 8 Jan 2018 02:13:06 -0600
Received: from xch-aln-001.cisco.com ([173.36.7.11]) by XCH-ALN-001.cisco.com ([173.36.7.11]) with mapi id 15.00.1320.000; Mon, 8 Jan 2018 02:13:06 -0600
From: "Les Ginsberg (ginsberg)" <ginsberg@cisco.com>
To: Xuxiaohu <xuxiaohu@huawei.com>, "Ketan Talaulikar (ketant)" <ketant@cisco.com>, Christian Hopps <chopps@chopps.org>, "isis-wg@ietf.org" <isis-wg@ietf.org>
CC: "isis-ads@ietf.org" <isis-ads@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-isis-segment-routing-msd@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-isis-segment-routing-msd@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [Isis-wg] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-isis-segment-routing-msd-07
Thread-Index: AQHTeW0yt4SjFYWr8keDb9AE3mXNFKNMYa+AgABFv5CAANRNAIAcP0Aw
Date: Mon, 08 Jan 2018 08:13:06 +0000
Message-ID: <626419ae2ef74f8891e3d22b4bcd115c@XCH-ALN-001.cisco.com>
References: <87ind1pzn8.fsf@chopps.org> <3406a4622ee74862bd7be4477cc0bd5a@XCH-ALN-008.cisco.com> <3f896bcf14014858bbeff810854b627d@XCH-ALN-001.cisco.com> <1FEE3F8F5CCDE64C9A8E8F4AD27C19EE304A6A21@NKGEML515-MBS.china.huawei.com>
In-Reply-To: <1FEE3F8F5CCDE64C9A8E8F4AD27C19EE304A6A21@NKGEML515-MBS.china.huawei.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [10.24.100.185]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="gb2312"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/isis-wg/kSbwGOBJJf0ZEI7r7POapLuN_g4>
Subject: Re: [Isis-wg] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-isis-segment-routing-msd-07
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: Mon, 08 Jan 2018 08:13:12 -0000
Xiaohu - Work on a revision to the MSD draft to make the names and text consistent with the goal that multiple types of "MSD" will be advertised using the same sub-TLV is in progress. Once authors have agreed on the changes you will see a new revision. Can I assume that once this is done you are open to changing the mpls-elc drafts to use the more generic encoding for advertising RLD? I think this is important to make judicious use of sub-TLV code points. As written, https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-isis-mpls-elc-03 requires a distinct sub-TLV from the set of sub-TLVs defined for TLV 242 to advertise RLD. If this model were to be applied for other types of "MSD", I can foresee consumption of a significant number of sub-TLV codepoints just for all the flavors of "MSD". This is one reason we defined the generic MSD sub-TLV format in draft-ietf-isis-segment-routing-msd. A single sub-TLV can be used to advertise as many different MSD types as necessary. There are also other benefits: An IGP agnostic registry is defined to assign MSD types. This means the same type value can be used in OSPF, IS-IS, and in BGP-LS. In IS-IS there is a small efficiency gain in that we do not have to advertise a length for each MSD type. I look forward to feedback from you once the new revision of the MSD draft is published. Thanx. Les > -----Original Message----- > From: Xuxiaohu [mailto:xuxiaohu@huawei.com] > Sent: Wednesday, December 20, 2017 6:40 PM > To: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) <ginsberg@cisco.com>; Ketan Talaulikar (ketant) > <ketant@cisco.com>; Christian Hopps <chopps@chopps.org>; isis- > wg@ietf.org > Cc: isis-ads@ietf.org; draft-ietf-isis-segment-routing-msd@ietf.org > Subject: 答复: [Isis-wg] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-isis-segment-routing-msd- > 07 > > Hi Les, > > If I understand it correctly, the MSD concept was originated from > (https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-pce-segment-routing-11#page-7) as > described below: > > "The "Maximum SID Depth" (1 > octet) field (MSD) specifies the maximum number of SIDs (MPLS label > stack depth in the context of this document) that a PCC is capable of > imposing on a packet." > > Before considering expanding the semantics of the MSD concept as defined > in the above PCE-SR draft, how about first considering renaming the > capability of imposing the maximum number of labels so as to eliminate > possible confusions, e.g., Writable Label-stack Depth (WLD) as opposed to > the Readable Label-stack Depth (RLD) as defined in > (https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ospf-mpls-elc) and > (https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-isis-mpls-elc) ? > > Best regards, > Xiaohu > > > -----邮件原件----- > > 发件人: Isis-wg [mailto:isis-wg-bounces@ietf.org] 代表 Les Ginsberg > > (ginsberg) > > 发送时间: 2017年12月21日 4:02 > > 收件人: Ketan Talaulikar (ketant); Christian Hopps; isis-wg@ietf.org > > 抄送: isis-ads@ietf.org; draft-ietf-isis-segment-routing-msd@ietf.org > > 主题: Re: [Isis-wg] WG Last Call for > > draft-ietf-isis-segment-routing-msd-07 > > > > Ketan - > > > > Thanx for the comments. > > I think we do want to allow MSD support for values other than > > imposition values. We will revise the text so we are not restricted to only > imposition cases. > > > > Les > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Ketan Talaulikar (ketant) > > > Sent: Wednesday, December 20, 2017 1:51 AM > > > To: Christian Hopps <chopps@chopps.org>; isis-wg@ietf.org > > > Cc: isis-ads@ietf.org; draft-ietf-isis-segment-routing-msd@ietf.org > > > Subject: RE: [Isis-wg] WG Last Call for > > > draft-ietf-isis-segment-routing-msd-07 > > > > > > Hello, > > > > > > I support this document and would like to ask the authors and WG to > > > consider if we can expand the scope of this draft to not just > > > "imposition" of the SID stack but also other similar limits related > > > to other > > actions (e.g. > > > reading, processing, etc.). With Segment Routing, we are coming > > > across various actions that nodes need to do with the SID stack for > > > different purposes and IMHO it would be useful to extend the MSD > > > ability to cover those as they arise. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Ketan > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Isis-wg [mailto:isis-wg-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of > > > Christian Hopps > > > Sent: 20 December 2017 14:03 > > > To: isis-wg@ietf.org > > > Cc: isis-ads@ietf.org; draft-ietf-isis-segment-routing-msd@ietf.org > > > Subject: [Isis-wg] WG Last Call for > > > draft-ietf-isis-segment-routing-msd-07 > > > > > > > > > The authors have asked for and we are starting a WG Last Call on > > > > > > > > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-isis-segment-routing-msd > > > / > > > > > > which will last an extended 4 weeks to allow for year-end PTO patterns. > > > > > > An IPR statement exists: > > > > > > > > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/search/?submit=draft&id=draft-ietf- > > > is > > > is- > > > segment-routing-msd > > > > > > Authors please reply to the list indicating whether you are aware of > > > any > > > *new* IPR. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Chris. > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Isis-wg mailing list > > > Isis-wg@ietf.org > > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/isis-wg > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Isis-wg mailing list > > Isis-wg@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/isis-wg
- [Isis-wg] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-isis-segmen… Christian Hopps
- Re: [Isis-wg] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-isis-se… Ketan Talaulikar (ketant)
- Re: [Isis-wg] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-isis-se… bruno.decraene
- Re: [Isis-wg] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-isis-se… Acee Lindem (acee)
- Re: [Isis-wg] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-isis-se… Jeff Tantsura
- Re: [Isis-wg] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-isis-se… bruno.decraene
- Re: [Isis-wg] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-isis-se… Les Ginsberg (ginsberg)
- [Isis-wg] 答复: WG Last Call for draft-ietf-isis-se… Xuxiaohu
- [Isis-wg] 答复: WG Last Call for draft-ietf-isis-se… Xuxiaohu
- Re: [Isis-wg] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-isis-se… Ketan Talaulikar (ketant)
- Re: [Isis-wg] 答复: WG Last Call for draft-ietf-isi… Paul Mattes
- Re: [Isis-wg] =?UTF-8?B?562U5aSN?=: WG Last Call … Jeff Tantsura
- Re: [Isis-wg] 答复: WG Last Call for draft-ietf-isi… Paul Mattes
- Re: [Isis-wg] =?UTF-8?B?562U5aSN?=: WG Last Call … Jeff Tantsura
- Re: [Isis-wg] 答复: WG Last Call for draft-ietf-isi… Paul Mattes
- Re: [Isis-wg] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-isis-se… Les Ginsberg (ginsberg)
- Re: [Isis-wg] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-isis-se… Les Ginsberg (ginsberg)
- Re: [Isis-wg] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-isis-se… Xiaohu