Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang-lsr-isis-mfi-00.txt

wangyali <wangyali11@huawei.com> Thu, 04 March 2021 10:42 UTC

Return-Path: <wangyali11@huawei.com>
X-Original-To: lsr@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: lsr@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D7FE23A18C5 for <lsr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 4 Mar 2021 02:42:31 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 gJoS1g-ZyuGs for <lsr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 4 Mar 2021 02:42:29 -0800 (PST)
Received: from frasgout.his.huawei.com (frasgout.his.huawei.com [185.176.79.56]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E20973A1896 for <lsr@ietf.org>; Thu, 4 Mar 2021 02:42:28 -0800 (PST)
Received: from fraeml712-chm.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.18.147.206]) by frasgout.his.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4DrnLB3NFwz67vpb; Thu, 4 Mar 2021 18:34:42 +0800 (CST)
Received: from fraeml792-chm.china.huawei.com (10.206.15.13) by fraeml712-chm.china.huawei.com (10.206.15.61) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2106.2; Thu, 4 Mar 2021 11:42:26 +0100
Received: from fraeml792-chm.china.huawei.com (10.206.15.13) by fraeml792-chm.china.huawei.com (10.206.15.13) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2106.2; Thu, 4 Mar 2021 11:42:26 +0100
Received: from DGGEML402-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.3.17.38) by fraeml792-chm.china.huawei.com (10.206.15.13) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_0, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA) id 15.1.2106.2 via Frontend Transport; Thu, 4 Mar 2021 11:42:25 +0100
Received: from DGGEML504-MBS.china.huawei.com ([169.254.11.115]) by DGGEML402-HUB.china.huawei.com ([fe80::fca6:7568:4ee3:c776%31]) with mapi id 14.03.0513.000; Thu, 4 Mar 2021 18:42:14 +0800
From: wangyali <wangyali11@huawei.com>
To: Peter Psenak <ppsenak@cisco.com>, Gyan Mishra <hayabusagsm@gmail.com>, Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net>
CC: Huzhibo <huzhibo@huawei.com>, Aijun Wang <wangaj3@chinatelecom.cn>, "Tony Li" <tony.li@tony.li>, lsr <lsr@ietf.org>, Tianran Zhou <zhoutianran@huawei.com>
Thread-Topic: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang-lsr-isis-mfi-00.txt
Thread-Index: AQHXCjBTvOSvDlAmT0KIo+Iqe5eLAapoLAHQgABk14CAAYtOcP//pmeAgAAMXwCAAAciAIAARbMAgALiyACAAevFYIABA3UAgAGtLPD//+wnAIAAn3pg
Date: Thu, 4 Mar 2021 10:42:13 +0000
Message-ID: <1520992FC97B944A9979C2FC1D7DB0F40525E441@DGGEML504-MBS.china.huawei.com>
References: <CAOj+MMHsDgfD8avbRtvthhd0=c-X25L9HBc0yQTby4vFQKECLQ@mail.gmail.com> <7D53A65F-7375-43BC-9C4E-2EDCF8E138C8@chinatelecom.cn> <CAOj+MMEAJdqvmhfpVEc+M+v_GJ92hmjggbDWr3=gSAM4y3HkYg@mail.gmail.com> <CABNhwV1EBsej6b-++Ne2OpwMb6DMb9dubjf=M1LrOEHjn4MWmA@mail.gmail.com> <57f50a96-4476-2dc7-ad11-93d5e418f774@cisco.com> <1520992FC97B944A9979C2FC1D7DB0F405242279@dggeml524-mbx.china.huawei.com> <26f29385-eedd-444b-ce02-17facf029bd2@cisco.com> <1520992FC97B944A9979C2FC1D7DB0F4052483BC@dggeml524-mbx.china.huawei.com> <9013a79f-0db9-5ec3-5bfd-8f1ab32644d3@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <9013a79f-0db9-5ec3-5bfd-8f1ab32644d3@cisco.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.108.243.136]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lsr/0FEDgogC7Q0A6gYFRl5ajCQVPOE>
Subject: Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang-lsr-isis-mfi-00.txt
X-BeenThere: lsr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Link State Routing Working Group <lsr.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/lsr>, <mailto:lsr-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/lsr/>
List-Post: <mailto:lsr@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:lsr-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr>, <mailto:lsr-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 04 Mar 2021 10:42:32 -0000

Hi Peter,

Please review follows tagged by [Yali].


-----Original Message-----
From: Peter Psenak [mailto:ppsenak@cisco.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, March 3, 2021 5:37 PM
To: wangyali <wangyali11@huawei.com>om>; Gyan Mishra <hayabusagsm@gmail.com>om>; Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net>
Cc: Huzhibo <huzhibo@huawei.com>om>; Aijun Wang <wangaj3@chinatelecom.cn>cn>; Tony Li <tony.li@tony.li>li>; lsr <lsr@ietf.org>rg>; Tianran Zhou <zhoutianran@huawei.com>
Subject: Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang-lsr-isis-mfi-00.txt

Yali,

On 03/03/2021 06:02, wangyali wrote:
> Hi Peter,
> 
> Thanks for your comments. Yes. I am improving this sentence. Please review the following update.
> 
> OLD: " And Level 1/Level 2 PSNP and Level 1/Level 2 CSNP containing information about LSPs that transmitted in a specific MFI are generated to synchronize the LSDB corresponding to the specific MFI."
> 
> NEW: "And Level 1/Level 2 PSNP and Level 1/Level 2 CSNP containing information about LSPs that transmitted in a specific MFI are generated to synchronize the MFI-specific sub-LSDB. Each MFI-specific sub-LSDB is subdivided from a single LSDB."

please specify sub-LSDB.
[Yali] Thanks for your comment. But to avoid introducing a new term, I change to use "MFI-specific LSDB" instead of " MFI-specific sub-LSDB ".  And we give the explanation that "Each MFI-specific LSDB is subdivided from a single LSDB."

thanks,
Peter


> 
> Best,
> Yali
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Peter Psenak [mailto:ppsenak@cisco.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 2, 2021 5:12 PM
> To: wangyali <wangyali11@huawei.com>om>; Gyan Mishra 
> <hayabusagsm@gmail.com>om>; Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net>
> Cc: Huzhibo <huzhibo@huawei.com>om>; Aijun Wang 
> <wangaj3@chinatelecom.cn>cn>; Tony Li <tony.li@tony.li>li>; lsr 
> <lsr@ietf.org>rg>; Tianran Zhou <zhoutianran@huawei.com>
> Subject: Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for 
> draft-wang-lsr-isis-mfi-00.txt
> 
> Yali,
> 
> On 01/03/2021 10:49, wangyali wrote:
>> Hi Peter,
>>
>> Many thanks for your feedback. First of all, I'm sorry for the confusion I had caused you from my previous misunderstanding.
>>
>> And I want to clarify that a single and common LSDB is shared by all MFIs.
> 
> well, the draft says:
> 
> "information about LSPs that transmitted in a
>    specific MFI are generated to synchronize the LSDB corresponding to
>    the specific MFI."
> 
> If the above has changed, then please update the draft accordingly.
> 
> thanks,
> Peter
> 
> 
> 
>>
>> Best,
>> Yali
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Peter Psenak [mailto:ppsenak@cisco.com]
>> Sent: Sunday, February 28, 2021 8:23 PM
>> To: Gyan Mishra <hayabusagsm@gmail.com>om>; Robert Raszuk 
>> <robert@raszuk.net>
>> Cc: Huzhibo <huzhibo@huawei.com>om>; Aijun Wang 
>> <wangaj3@chinatelecom.cn>cn>; Tony Li <tony.li@tony.li>li>; lsr 
>> <lsr@ietf.org>rg>; Tianran Zhou <zhoutianran@huawei.com>om>; wangyali 
>> <wangyali11@huawei.com>
>> Subject: Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for 
>> draft-wang-lsr-isis-mfi-00.txt
>>
>> Gyan,
>>
>> On 26/02/2021 17:19, Gyan Mishra wrote:
>>>
>>> MFI seems more like flex algo with multiple sub topologies sharing a 
>>> common links in a  topology where RFC 8202 MI is separated at the 
>>> process level separate LSDB.  So completely different and of course 
>>> different goals and use cases for MI versus MFI.
>>
>> I would not use the fle-algo analogy - all flex-algos operate on top of a single LSDB, contrary to what is being proposed in MFI draft.
>>
>>>
>>>     MFI also seems to be a flood reduction mechanism by creating 
>>> multiple sub topology instances within a common LSDB.  There are a 
>>> number of flood reduction drafts and this seems to be another method 
>>> of achieving the same.
>>
>> MFI draft proposes to keep the separate LSDB per MFI, so the above analogy is not correct either.
>>
>> thanks,
>> Peter
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Gyan
>>>
>>> On Fri, Feb 26, 2021 at 7:10 AM Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net 
>>> <mailto:robert@raszuk.net>> wrote:
>>>
>>>       Aijun,
>>>
>>>       How multi instance is implemented is at the discretion of a vendor.
>>>       It can be one process N threads or N processes. It can be both and
>>>       operator may choose.
>>>
>>>       MFI is just one process - by the spec - so it is inferior.
>>>
>>>       Cheers,
>>>       R.
>>>
>>>
>>>       On Fri, Feb 26, 2021 at 12:44 PM Aijun Wang <wangaj3@chinatelecom.cn
>>>       <mailto:wangaj3@chinatelecom.cn>> wrote:
>>>
>>>           Hi, Robert:
>>>
>>>           Separate into different protocol instances can accomplish the
>>>           similar task, but it has some deployment overhead.
>>>           MFIs within one instance can avoid such cumbersome work, and
>>>           doesn’t affect the basic routing calculation process.
>>>
>>>           Aijun Wang
>>>           China Telecom
>>>
>>>>           On Feb 26, 2021, at 19:00, Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net
>>>>           <mailto:robert@raszuk.net>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>           Hi Yali,
>>>>
>>>>               If this was precise, then the existing multi-instance
>>>>               mechanism would be sufficient.
>>>>               [Yali]: MFI is a different solution we recommend to solve
>>>>               this same and valuable issue.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>           Well the way I understand this proposal MFI is much weaker
>>>>           solution in terms of required separation.
>>>>
>>>>           In contrast RFC8202 allows to separate ISIS instances at the
>>>>           process level, but here MFIs as defined must be handled by the
>>>>           same ISIS process
>>>>
>>>>               This document defines an extension to
>>>>               IS-IS to allow*one standard instance*  of
>>>>               the protocol to support multiple update
>>>>               process operations.
>>>>
>>>>           Thx,
>>>>           R.
>>>>
>>>>           _______________________________________________
>>>>           Lsr mailing list
>>>>           Lsr@ietf.org <mailto:Lsr@ietf.org>
>>>>           https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr
>>>
>>>       _______________________________________________
>>>       Lsr mailing list
>>>       Lsr@ietf.org <mailto:Lsr@ietf.org>
>>>       https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> <http://www.verizon.com/>
>>>
>>> *Gyan Mishra*
>>>
>>> /Network Solutions A//rchitect /
>>>
>>> /M 301 502-1347
>>> 13101 Columbia Pike
>>> /Silver Spring, MD
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
> 
> 
>