Re: [Lsr] A new version of I-D, draft-liu-lsr-isis-ifit-node-capability-02

Greg Mirsky <gregimirsky@gmail.com> Thu, 02 April 2020 23:08 UTC

Return-Path: <gregimirsky@gmail.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 0DAB43A127C for <lsr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 2 Apr 2020 16:08:59 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.096
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.096 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.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 lKeYJBnSs81U for <lsr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 2 Apr 2020 16:08:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lf1-x12e.google.com (mail-lf1-x12e.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::12e]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D61993A1279 for <lsr@ietf.org>; Thu, 2 Apr 2020 16:08:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-lf1-x12e.google.com with SMTP id q5so4166449lfb.13 for <lsr@ietf.org>; Thu, 02 Apr 2020 16:08:56 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=5LjGKFTfKOiv8fY2F/JIbHREgsoIzf7Jnt8HvnqalAQ=; b=m0ONKugVCHLKZWl8lh2kZSqfvNfo4dPkHJMj6yBMGxWCNI9XL5BpZXqgty6FDDXU6U 46mMy7DRG40Fe3yw2XxK5fV1htp6SDiY1c5x1ibohj+lQFzp8PiBm16MjkxVDa55t0cq IkGJ6nK/9gyBlnGp6GX2EEwPq0uAqM55VBlJeZLIRXQBi3/SJPXm35YwFg/lEmu7y5R4 0YqHT9UE1aNicwpRkgyaSZYevn2F7sjknM0XexpThtNFTgqrjIV3AMKSAK9IwNUxKidt T0lAV0YAcr4T7VWyZso2XyB9XlVE48F5wkT+L/5wuY/6a0EQROl2nl6aEB42oprl+Slz Lp4g==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=5LjGKFTfKOiv8fY2F/JIbHREgsoIzf7Jnt8HvnqalAQ=; b=DZDgxIWKu+Vx175joDLQeRtwl4A26FFGATHQJVdJSf6NPZA9hVIfs94P3fGyI07lFW jK6Kwe2c7D6ff79i3fhwPexG3y/An1Wpl6JOQl4h+rcWrKASFNZB11Zbs29iDcXHGl+I LIQYQ8ctCIkQRdrgxbuIoyJMYv/qsSPPzS1x6HGBpYUiVQprN5Gbh5LXjRnSK5HjTMl8 q6dC72W1D85no2cWimSk8bfXMaFUHAm+H8zLB9PcyAOu/SnqcvXjgpYecC3OCIKwvIl8 4oko3n3CglGZDuoejxJYlCQa82F0tyCrYjOBHYv0oXlqdVwUzKlCMBMXPDpvL1dfZu+p T7Ww==
X-Gm-Message-State: AGi0PuZPPtvTYfhjHwaWk1FMp49hI6kaARAArpm/wotXNCRmc6Ns6Xe7 9qScbGS6fsxdBOeNVf/ptT02bPgryjwGUmhV37pPo/0v
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APiQypLD+nnpyXsmc+kvtBkczBc5qQ47Ts8XlNP7LylYp+N6q8MmgWNII3C9+0PrH25s/nf3ND4Sv47GNGMQevgYJIg=
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6512:695:: with SMTP id t21mr3572020lfe.158.1585868934971; Thu, 02 Apr 2020 16:08:54 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <1520992FC97B944A9979C2FC1D7DB0F404DB1AD4@dggeml524-mbx.china.huawei.com> <MW3PR11MB4619925BEF83B0C4512DD284C1C90@MW3PR11MB4619.namprd11.prod.outlook.com> <06e8443210924ac788c40fa15972cbdd@huawei.com> <C987B657-64D1-4C70-B471-ED9F1266B990@cisco.com> <3948044C-0CC9-4AE8-8541-4D23A5DF396E@cisco.com> <1520992FC97B944A9979C2FC1D7DB0F404DF089E@dggeml524-mbx.china.huawei.com> <MW3PR11MB46197F8C43B3200B07641838C1C60@MW3PR11MB4619.namprd11.prod.outlook.com> <CAOj+MMGsVkws0sTw4RRdb_SdWvsuh+2Dxc-upXqT2_pmpO_+Lg@mail.gmail.com> <6930807B-2FF0-4A5C-AD39-D05345C37A5E@chopps.org> <MW3PR11MB461955420610E933ACC44BC4C1C60@MW3PR11MB4619.namprd11.prod.outlook.com> <CAOj+MMHoTbDzZrA1ttPsdD5Tk7TADaR=ex5WGF=6+X3X1utoHg@mail.gmail.com> <bd193457-956c-47b0-a50b-8d1778e8349a@Spark> <CAOj+MMGuRHVoJ3ez4nQ3O87J4U+-+yabYWeA1AEfj1UGAbPp7w@mail.gmail.com> <DD4DAC78-3A51-4E8D-802B-9FB515F86AF1@chopps.org> <CAOj+MMHa4J-619P6TWjSohB4yP3O5VPaq42VuAzNUmzbXsFcfA@mail.gmail.com> <4dcafca3-9211-e185-cd69-609cc6cb606f@joelhalpern.com> <CAOj+MMGSjb2Medd_wkV314pYrm_96GD5urxw5Qs34hMZt5BXMw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAOj+MMGSjb2Medd_wkV314pYrm_96GD5urxw5Qs34hMZt5BXMw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Greg Mirsky <gregimirsky@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 02 Apr 2020 16:08:44 -0700
Message-ID: <CA+RyBmUOgz9kGEBxZYrd7_ADeFPRiwODxqx3FcjpYYAE6tRwGQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net>
Cc: "Joel M. Halpern" <jmh@joelhalpern.com>, "lsr@ietf.org" <lsr@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000087856305a256e2ca"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lsr/5tOEh05SpZ9_RuHoH_UECLlzHZs>
Subject: Re: [Lsr] A new version of I-D, draft-liu-lsr-isis-ifit-node-capability-02
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, 02 Apr 2020 23:08:59 -0000

Hi Robert,
I think that there's no apparent requirement to collect performance
information form each node in the network in order to select a path with
bounded delay and packet loss. Would you agree?

Regards,
Greg

On Thu, Apr 2, 2020 at 4:03 PM Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net> wrote:

> Hi Joel,
>
> > Robert, you seem to be asking that we pass full information about the
> > dynamic network state to all routers
>
> No not at all.
>
> Only TE headends need this information.
>
> To restate ... I am not asking to have a synchronized input to all routes
> in the domain such that their computation would be consistent.
>
> I am only asking for TE headends to be able to select end to end paths
> based on the end to end inband telemetry data. I find this a useful
> requirement missing from any of today's operational deployments.
>
> Many thx,
> R.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, Apr 3, 2020 at 12:59 AM Joel M. Halpern <jmh@joelhalpern.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Robert, you seem to be asking that we pass full information about the
>> dynamic network state to all routers so that they can, if needed, serve
>> as fully intelligent path computation engines.  If you want to do that,
>> you will need more than just the telemetry.  You will need the demands
>> that are coming in to all of those routers, so that you can make global
>> decisions sensibly.
>> Which is why we use quasi-centralized path computation engines.
>>
>> Yours,
>> Joel
>>
>> On 4/2/2020 6:16 PM, Robert Raszuk wrote:
>> >
>> >      > If you consider such constrains to provide reachability for
>> >     applications you will likely see value that in-situ telemetry is
>> >     your friend here. Really best friend as without him you can not do
>> >     the proper end to end path exclusion for SPT computations..
>> >
>> >     [as wg member] Are you thinking that shifting traffic to a router is
>> >     not going to affect it's jitter/drop rate?
>> >
>> >
>> > Well this is actually the other way around.
>> >
>> > First you have your default topology. They you are asked to
>> > construct new one based on applied constrains.
>> >
>> > So you create complete TE coverage and start running end to end data
>> > plane probing over all TE paths (say SR-TE for specific example). Once
>> > you start collecting the probe results you can start excluding paths
>> > which do not meet your applied constraints. And that process continues..
>> >
>> > To your specific question - It is not that unusual where routers
>> degrade
>> > their performance with time and in many cases the traffic is not the
>> > cause for it but internal bugs and malfunctions.
>> >
>> > Best,
>> > R.
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Lsr mailing list
>> > Lsr@ietf.org
>> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr
>> >
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Lsr mailing list
> Lsr@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr
>