[LOOPS] Narrowing the scope: (1) Encapsulation

Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> Mon, 25 May 2020 22:35 UTC

Return-Path: <cabo@tzi.org>
X-Original-To: loops@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: loops@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D794D3A0AF1 for <loops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 25 May 2020 15:35:21 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.898
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 W_6mhRe_G-Ir for <loops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 25 May 2020 15:35:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de [134.102.50.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2879F3A0AF3 for <loops@ietf.org>; Mon, 25 May 2020 15:35:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [172.16.42.112] (p548dc699.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [84.141.198.153]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 49WBkB6dTWzyrT; Tue, 26 May 2020 00:35:14 +0200 (CEST)
From: Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Mao-Original-Outgoing-Id: 612138914.1969841-0e3c1a8276c3d671091b304120f1beb3
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.80.23.2.2\))
Date: Tue, 26 May 2020 00:35:14 +0200
Message-Id: <44E6CA25-5D9F-47CF-8447-667E88E5493A@tzi.org>
To: loops@ietf.org
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.80.23.2.2)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/loops/ejCbV5-R9whTNnAf-LdXyJXEahw>
Subject: [LOOPS] Narrowing the scope: (1) Encapsulation
X-BeenThere: loops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Local Optimizations on Path Segments <loops.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/loops>, <mailto:loops-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/loops/>
List-Post: <mailto:loops@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:loops-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/loops>, <mailto:loops-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 May 2020 22:35:22 -0000

In tomorrow’s LOOPS side meeting, we want to discuss whether we can narrow the initial scope of the WG sufficiently that the resulting charter looks more tractable (we can then recharter after delivering on the initial scope).

One source of complexity of the current charter is that we want to embrace different encapsulation techniques.  But maybe one is enough for the beginning?

Some objectives of this choice would be:
– encapsulation should have good consensus and be active in products (at least by 2021)
– easy deployment (e.g., UDP-based)
– reasonable overhead (but it seems current schemes don’t differ that much here)

Geneve (draft-ietf-nvo3-geneve-16, approved 2020-04-28, now in RFC editor queue), seems to fulfill these objectives.

Runner-ups:
– SRv6: This is lower in the stack and might get stuck in the IPv6 header wars
– GRE: Great established workhorse, but also a separate protocol lower in the stack:  Harder to deploy

The decision would not be to give up encapsulation-agnosticity, but to focus on one of them for now.

Comments are welcome on the list and/or in the meeting in ~16.5 hours.

Grüße, Carsten