Re: [Lsr] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse-12

Peter Psenak <ppsenak@cisco.com> Mon, 01 June 2020 16:01 UTC

Return-Path: <ppsenak@cisco.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 2065E3A119E; Mon, 1 Jun 2020 09:01:13 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -9.601
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.601 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 gLq8w11LYGwf; Mon, 1 Jun 2020 09:01:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from aer-iport-3.cisco.com (aer-iport-3.cisco.com [173.38.203.53]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8F7833A10EF; Mon, 1 Jun 2020 09:01:10 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=4957; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1591027271; x=1592236871; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date: mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=eVDFvAaEYdGEnNSOa4zeUlJsOWJgYsufv9GCG3NS2wI=; b=kM1hmdv2KFNnH2i6BQZlSiydN7jTHyHi/n9eAdGihfRrrr1KzXWDGMm2 p3PKIbWUKgK9jxgqCcfJB81BbVOt8LAB3BmgyRcklOY5UZU8Se7NT+53d B8mi8GUDtzcUs5B1sVEXtZc9Hy4ZsIZjGv0R5H6/u6YbJdPn7Y/EhJ+QT o=;
X-IPAS-Result: A0B+AABzJdVe/xbLJq1mGgEBAQEBAQEBAQEDAQEBARIBAQEBAgIBAQEBQIFKgxhUASASLIQliQGIC5t2CwEBAQ4vBAEBhEQCgiclOBMCAwEBAQMCAwEBAQEFAQEBAgEGBG2FZYVyAQEBAQIBIw8BBS8SBQcECxEDAQEBAQICIwMCAkYJCAYBDAYCAQGDIgGCXCCtYHaBMoVRg0KBOgaBDiqMYYFBP4EQASeCaT6EJU+CboJgBI51H6Q7gmGCepVuBx6CZokHhGiNQ5BfniKBaiIMgUozGggbFYMkUBkNkEwXjic/AzA3AgYBBwEBAwmLKoJFAQE
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.73,461,1583193600"; d="scan'208";a="24363856"
Received: from aer-iport-nat.cisco.com (HELO aer-core-4.cisco.com) ([173.38.203.22]) by aer-iport-3.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA; 01 Jun 2020 16:01:06 +0000
Received: from [10.60.140.51] (ams-ppsenak-nitro2.cisco.com [10.60.140.51]) by aer-core-4.cisco.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 051G15bW028857; Mon, 1 Jun 2020 16:01:05 GMT
To: Linda Dunbar <linda.dunbar@futurewei.com>, "gen-art@ietf.org" <gen-art@ietf.org>
Cc: "last-call@ietf.org" <last-call@ietf.org>, "lsr@ietf.org" <lsr@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse.all@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse.all@ietf.org>
References: <159068537978.29606.17882487660677527802@ietfa.amsl.com> <be900a0e-2f9f-e9f9-ad87-63121ae9703c@cisco.com> <SN6PR13MB2334975577CB640D7812E816858F0@SN6PR13MB2334.namprd13.prod.outlook.com> <dffb293d-2b95-9e89-eba3-567de72b8ae0@cisco.com> <SN6PR13MB23347E70A4C0DDA9BBA2E618858A0@SN6PR13MB2334.namprd13.prod.outlook.com>
From: Peter Psenak <ppsenak@cisco.com>
Message-ID: <23b697ab-b773-b781-5e84-15c64f008907@cisco.com>
Date: Mon, 01 Jun 2020 18:01:05 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.14; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.7.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <SN6PR13MB23347E70A4C0DDA9BBA2E618858A0@SN6PR13MB2334.namprd13.prod.outlook.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Outbound-SMTP-Client: 10.60.140.51, ams-ppsenak-nitro2.cisco.com
X-Outbound-Node: aer-core-4.cisco.com
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lsr/JxkedVnLJgzRioycBG69Ych7uU0>
Subject: Re: [Lsr] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse-12
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: Mon, 01 Jun 2020 16:01:13 -0000

Hi Linda,


On 01/06/2020 17:30, Linda Dunbar wrote:
> Peter,
> You said:
> /“//the problem with existing advertisement is that RSVP-TE will use it, 
> even if it was not intended to be used by RSVP-TE.//”/
> What is the problem if RSVP-TE use the advertisement? What specific 
> attributes that RSVP-TE shouldn’t use?

Following text has been added to the draft based on comments from Scott.

"An example where this ambiguity causes problem is a network which has 
RSVP-TE enabled on one subset of links, and SRTE enabled on a different 
subset. A link attribute is advertised for the purpose of some other 
application (e.g. SRTE) for a link that is not enabled for RSV-TE. As 
soon as the router that is an RSVP-TE head-end sees the link attribute 
being advertised for such link, it assumes RSVP-TE is enabled on that 
link, even though in reality, RSVP-TE is not enabled on it. If such 
RSVP-TE head-end router tries to setup an RSVP-TE path via link where 
RSVP-TE is not enabled it will result in the path setup failure."

Hope it makes it clear and addresses your question.

thanks,
Peter





> Linda Dunbar
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Peter Psenak <ppsenak@cisco.com>
> Sent: Friday, May 29, 2020 10:00 AM
> To: Linda Dunbar <linda.dunbar@futurewei.com>; gen-art@ietf.org
> Cc: last-call@ietf.org; lsr@ietf.org; 
> draft-ietf-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse.all@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: Genart last call review of 
> draft-ietf-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse-12
> Linda,
> On 29/05/2020 16:52, Linda Dunbar wrote:
>> Peter,
>> You said:
>> /we are not defining any new attributes./ /We are allowing an existing 
>> link attributes to be used by other applications, including, but not 
>> limited to SRTE./ What prevent a node (or an application on the node) 
>> receiving the LSA from using the attributes carried by the LSA?
> the problem with existing advertisement is that RSVP-TE will use it, 
> even if it was not intended to be used by RSVP-TE.
> We are providing a way to explicitly advertised apps that are allowed to 
> use the advertised attributes.
>> If no new attributes are
>> to be added, then why need a new ASLA sub-TLV?
> to be able to use the existing attributes for new apps, other than RSVP-TE.
> thanks,
> Peter
>> Linda
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Peter Psenak <ppsenak@cisco.com <mailto:ppsenak@cisco.com>>
>> Sent: Friday, May 29, 2020 5:51 AM
>> To: Linda Dunbar <linda.dunbar@futurewei.com <mailto:linda.dunbar@futurewei.com>>; 
> gen-art@ietf.org <mailto:gen-art@ietf.org>
>> Cc: last-call@ietf.org <mailto:last-call@ietf.org>; lsr@ietf.org 
> <mailto:lsr@ietf.org>;
>> draft-ietf-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse.all@ietf.org 
> <mailto:draft-ietf-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse.all@ietf.org>
>> Subject: Re: Genart last call review of
>> draft-ietf-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse-12
>> Hi Linda,
>> On 28/05/2020 19:02, Linda Dunbar via Datatracker wrote:
>>> Reviewer: Linda Dunbar
>>> Review result: Not Ready
>>> 
>>> I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area 
>>> Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed by 
>>> the IESG for the IETF Chair.  Please treat these comments just like 
>>> any other last call comments.
>>> 
>>> For more information, please see the FAQ at
>>> 
>>> <https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ftrac.ietf.org%2Ftrac%2Fgen%2Fwiki%2FGenArtfaq&amp;data=02%7C01%7Clinda.dunbar%40futurewei.com%7C34b141b11fe6484fc65208d803e0e851%7C0fee8ff2a3b240189c753a1d5591fedc%7C1%7C0%7C637263611798933480&amp;sdata=hXIX5xyAiXcFdymKVyg%2BVuQZAznQKJV5Il7U9OOdVv0%3D&amp;reserved=0>.
>>> 
>>> Document: draft-ietf-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse-??
>>> Reviewer: Linda Dunbar
>>> Review Date: 2020-05-28
>>> IETF LC End Date: 2020-05-29
>>> IESG Telechat date: Not scheduled for a telechat
>>> 
>>> Summary: this document introduces a new link attribute advertisement 
>>> in OSPFv2 and OSPFv3 to address general link properties needed for 
>>> new applications, such as Segment Routing.
>>> 
>>> Major issues:
>>> The document has good description on the TLV structure of the 
>>> Application specific Advertisements, but fails to describe what are 
>>> the NEW Link attributes needed by Segment Routing. Page 7 (section 5) 
>>> has a really good description on all the link properties added to 
>>> OSFP (RFC4203, RFC 7308, RFC7471, RFC3630) to achieve TE. I can see 
>>> Segment Routing would need each node to advertise its own SID and the 
>>> SIDs of adjacent nodes. Can't they be encoded (or extended) in OSPF's NODE ID?
>> we are not defining any new attributes.
>> We are allowing an existing link attributes to be used by other 
>> applications, including, but not limited to SRTE.
>> thanks,
>> Peter
>>> 
>>> Minor issues:
>>> 
>>> Nits/editorial comments:
>>> 
>>> Best regards,
>>> 
>>> Linda Dunbar
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>