IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [lisp] [pim] WGLC draft-ietf-pim-join-attributes-for-lisp-03

"Jesus Arango (jearango)" <jearango@cisco.com> Fri, 03 June 2016 01:26 UTC

Return-Path: <jearango@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: lisp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: lisp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A1D4812D5D7; Thu, 2 Jun 2016 18:26:43 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -15.947
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-15.947 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_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.426, SPF_PASS=-0.001, 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 zhYfwdYmtUzO; Thu, 2 Jun 2016 18:26:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from alln-iport-1.cisco.com (alln-iport-1.cisco.com [173.37.142.88]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ADA2412D5B7; Thu, 2 Jun 2016 18:26:41 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=2269; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1464917201; x=1466126801; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=eqn4O8g/YpieR+wuuTBDUzoBA4OuiaO0dbwUhIxgl+Q=; b=AJ9R5oampgVNHE+N3Pi7jxVKnrVEA/JfQoRDgBhRD5bCcY+sEN4HaHHv C9xrPFXMDIAHuRZtQjIM2RSq2awQ4yYUQK/BccsAGSsJ8Ba2+LzHtlyK3 SUvCMIK5dyT3xY8vSQk9R9HbmIob1oFosGvMZreRXvgrikuXjN2bXYjoE w=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0ABAgCA3FBX/4YNJK1egzqBUwauVolggg+BeYYSAoE2OBQBAQEBAQEBZSeERQEBAQMBOj8FBwQCAQgRBAEBHwkHIREUCQgCBA4FCIgNAw8IvjwNhB8BAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEchieETYJDgWeFcAWYBTMBjCaBcoFwjTOGM4Exh2cBHjaCBxyBS26JfX8BAQE
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.26,409,1459814400"; d="scan'208";a="281175955"
Received: from alln-core-12.cisco.com ([173.36.13.134]) by alln-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA; 03 Jun 2016 01:26:20 +0000
Received: from XCH-ALN-009.cisco.com (xch-aln-009.cisco.com [173.36.7.19]) by alln-core-12.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id u531QKJX010263 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Fri, 3 Jun 2016 01:26:20 GMT
Received: from xch-aln-008.cisco.com (173.36.7.18) by XCH-ALN-009.cisco.com (173.36.7.19) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1104.5; Thu, 2 Jun 2016 20:26:19 -0500
Received: from xch-aln-008.cisco.com ([173.36.7.18]) by XCH-ALN-008.cisco.com ([173.36.7.18]) with mapi id 15.00.1104.009; Thu, 2 Jun 2016 20:26:19 -0500
From: "Jesus Arango (jearango)" <jearango@cisco.com>
To: Dino Farinacci <farinacci@gmail.com>
Thread-Topic: [lisp] [pim] WGLC draft-ietf-pim-join-attributes-for-lisp-03
Thread-Index: AQHRvS/rP5y/rkLukEibTEvdyF5U2p/W6s5w
Date: Fri, 03 Jun 2016 01:26:19 +0000
Message-ID: <e82c19c4ebef4c32adb6752047eb6232@XCH-ALN-008.cisco.com>
References: <ead4d10adfe946f3afaae63b784d301e@XCH-ALN-008.cisco.com> <0FAB6A25-739D-462D-BE0B-7768BCD04753@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <0FAB6A25-739D-462D-BE0B-7768BCD04753@gmail.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: [10.24.25.132]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lisp/RUeWbigIqnJZcvGx2E9zlsXonmI>
Cc: "lisp@ietf.org" <lisp@ietf.org>, "pim@ietf.org" <pim@ietf.org>, "Stig Venaas (svenaas)" <stig@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: [lisp] [pim] WGLC draft-ietf-pim-join-attributes-for-lisp-03
X-BeenThere: lisp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: List for the discussion of the Locator/ID Separation Protocol <lisp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/lisp>, <mailto:lisp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/lisp/>
List-Post: <mailto:lisp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:lisp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp>, <mailto:lisp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 03 Jun 2016 01:26:43 -0000

Hi Dino,

I don't think map-notifies are relevant in the context of this draft. Keep in mind that this draft is written for "pim-signaled" head-end replication. In your "signal-free" draft, map-notifies are the correct message because you are tracking changes in the set of receiver RLOCS and that translates into changes in the merged RLOC set. In this draft, we are tracking changes in source EID location and the proper message for that is an SMR.

The receivers do have map-caches. They have a map-cache entry mapping the source EID to the RLOC of the source XTR. This is the map-cache entry that we want the SMR to refresh. The creation of this map-cache was not triggered by traffic. It was triggered by an RPF lookup by PIM in the receiver XTR.

Jesus

-----Original Message-----
From: Dino Farinacci [mailto:farinacci@gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, June 2, 2016 5:36 PM
To: Jesus Arango (jearango) <jearango@cisco.com>
Cc: pim@ietf.org; lisp@ietf.org; Stig Venaas (svenaas) <stig@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: [lisp] [pim] WGLC draft-ietf-pim-join-attributes-for-lisp-03

> To support mobile multicast sources, the root xTR must keep track of 
> ALL receiver RLOCs even when the corresponding receiver XTRs have not 
> requested unicast

It is better for clarity of the text. Now I will comment on the design. 

> replication.  If the root xTR detects that the root-EID has moved to a 
> new root xTR, it sends an SMR message to all receiver xTRs,

You don't need SMRs. You can use Map-Notify messages from the map-server. It converges better. 

See draft-ietf-lisp-signal-free-multicast for details. The same machinery can be used. And it is simple. 

> prompting them to update their map cache.  

Receiver xTRs are receiving and decapsulating packets. They are ETRs. They don't have map-caches. So this doesn't make sense. 

> This is only possible if  LISP can obtain from PIM the set of all receiver RLOCS that have active Join state for the root-EID.

Well they could register to the mapping system. That is where all receiver xTRs can be tracked (and perhaps not used for forwarding like it is in draft-ietf-lisp-signal-free-multicast). 

So try again. 

Dino

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email