IETF Logo Mail Archive

[Lsr] Fwd: Publication has been requested for draft-ietf-lsr-ip-flexalgo-06

Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net> Tue, 17 May 2022 10:01 UTC

Return-Path: <robert@raszuk.net>
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 C2872C147921 for <lsr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 17 May 2022 03:01:31 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.098
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 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, HTML_MESSAGE=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=raszuk.net
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id bmz92wSwSwVF for <lsr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 17 May 2022 03:01:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-vk1-xa2b.google.com (mail-vk1-xa2b.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::a2b]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 74964C14F74A for <lsr@ietf.org>; Tue, 17 May 2022 03:01:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-vk1-xa2b.google.com with SMTP id bc42so8750907vkb.12 for <lsr@ietf.org>; Tue, 17 May 2022 03:01:00 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=raszuk.net; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=GFmRnc65wVp9dd6nBodCKpGugcneeZrPBv0avkeKsv4=; b=C4eMCuRyS4m1o3X1v8owT+4HBZQUwwK5yhPEd51enh7VDHbewcTvgZp9o40XwW4oqv aqQIPAGJQsoupt3s5D+hWSVpi8zdBVEAxoNxd9fKLn27o2L/zDR+Ka1qerDkHLFzghEO 3hiXDaeIMRQhoYi/C5CVM37YRvWwm11YFDxMPzHTRfY/mF4KR/P5egyENczJpYe1j0Fa N60T518GsLZe6PL8a65aeARqU38fR8bWgyI3Upk2Hnnrf4h43nRY7DE4Ke8QDq2+hU6P KptJ4mVO4ZUuf0hkLc/lefHHqyLNge8GLsvlVbB2L1Yw5+3yPMTCHuVHCuuM5rPjEutH W+/g==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=GFmRnc65wVp9dd6nBodCKpGugcneeZrPBv0avkeKsv4=; b=E7Okrz73rfJbskLB5oFjQ4j3PO2tgRNT78juXzHS8cfBL68GKNk0fnhaXdKEoa5JZN U1ObUBjvHY+/zdxCDlZR6iOfIsvGdIcScO3cojPhQJKmLR5MfNeJIRWCh+rzTewLXb2+ hyewVpCNqkBbIdz3fh98BUHcps0hDa/DurzY47bvVeICsLCzpcbj2ZX6ANnQbcRAy/8D nP/2V6CbiAr8sSG179sb1rrDoIiHq6umBxrJs3TW/6TAb6QQngdd0KuYqxhSKN0NY4Uu LCRFQN8xka88MoxZ4X46K3prfEl1DhFyjKBrLvT5DjKJFsMo7s5n1QpdNsn7/dsNP7US Kc+Q==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530lj6gzczETzO8ShZfZjjrOsDNNqx0Kj3aupDEe4p2YHYdnQ837 CBNpAPM858+044RDS5K+LsqBGsFtxR8DuyYDafG83YIKFOtVww==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxkIhssUJDIfo42fxheVbMPm6ppeAjpx+WLYvVDNM+NqWD4UTu7XEQsMiMxwnx5PuEgHc+ZOvkhPCiEDF/bDdQ=
X-Received: by 2002:a1f:e447:0:b0:352:4a90:add4 with SMTP id b68-20020a1fe447000000b003524a90add4mr7691638vkh.5.1652781659437; Tue, 17 May 2022 03:00:59 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <165270816129.62374.13329927223902426661@ietfa.amsl.com>
In-Reply-To: <165270816129.62374.13329927223902426661@ietfa.amsl.com>
From: Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net>
Date: Tue, 17 May 2022 12:01:20 +0200
Message-ID: <CAOj+MMGoNOLMW0r3-JpMxyGQFv6ehKR5o4w4eqWQT8VmT=MO5A@mail.gmail.com>
To: lsr <lsr@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000b3cfe405df3237dc"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lsr/69GU9aXP-L_rDgR3yHwo6E6RuKY>
Subject: [Lsr] Fwd: Publication has been requested for draft-ietf-lsr-ip-flexalgo-06
X-BeenThere: lsr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34
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: Tue, 17 May 2022 10:01:31 -0000

Folks,

A bit related to Aijun's point but I have question to the text from the
draft he quoted:

   In cases where a prefix advertisement is received in both a IPv4
   Prefix Reachability TLV and an IPv4 Algorithm Prefix Reachability
   TLV, the IPv4 Prefix Reachability advertisement MUST be preferred
   when installing entries in the forwarding plane.

Does this really mean that I can not for a given prefix say /24 use default
topology for best effort traffic and new flex-algo topology for specific
application ?

Is the "workaround 1" to always build two new topologies for such /24
prefix (one following base topo and one new) and never advertise it in base
topology ?

Is the "workaround 2" to forget about native forwarding and use for example
SR and mark the packets such that SID pool corresponding to base topology
forwarding will be separate from SID pool corresponding to new flex-algo
topology ?

Many thx,
Robert


---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Acee Lindem via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>
Date: Mon, May 16, 2022 at 3:36 PM
Subject: [Lsr] Publication has been requested for
draft-ietf-lsr-ip-flexalgo-06
To: <jgs@juniper.net>
Cc: <acee@cisco.com>, <iesg-secretary@ietf.org>, <lsr-chairs@ietf.org>, <
lsr@ietf.org>


Acee Lindem has requested publication of draft-ietf-lsr-ip-flexalgo-06 as
Proposed Standard on behalf of the LSR working group.

Please verify the document's state at
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-lsr-ip-flexalgo/


_______________________________________________
Lsr mailing list
Lsr@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email