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

wangyali <wangyali11@huawei.com> Thu, 04 March 2021 13:45 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 DECE83A098D for <lsr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 4 Mar 2021 05:45:24 -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 iv01Qol7Pfzz for <lsr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 4 Mar 2021 05:45:20 -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 85E613A098A for <lsr@ietf.org>; Thu, 4 Mar 2021 05:45:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: from fraeml704-chm.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.18.147.207]) by frasgout.his.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4DrsPB1SBZz67pQT; Thu, 4 Mar 2021 21:37:34 +0800 (CST)
Received: from fraeml704-chm.china.huawei.com (10.206.15.53) by fraeml704-chm.china.huawei.com (10.206.15.53) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.2106.2; Thu, 4 Mar 2021 14:45:18 +0100
Received: from DGGEML424-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.1.199.41) by fraeml704-chm.china.huawei.com (10.206.15.53) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_0, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA_P256) id 15.1.2106.2 via Frontend Transport; Thu, 4 Mar 2021 14:45:18 +0100
Received: from DGGEML504-MBS.china.huawei.com ([169.254.11.115]) by dggeml424-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.1.199.41]) with mapi id 14.03.0513.000; Thu, 4 Mar 2021 21:45:11 +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//+wnAIAAn3pggAEHDgCAAIegUA==
Date: Thu, 4 Mar 2021 13:45:11 +0000
Message-ID: <1520992FC97B944A9979C2FC1D7DB0F40525E4FF@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> <1520992FC97B944A9979C2FC1D7DB0F40525E441@DGGEML504-MBS.china.huawei.com> <e0bfca37-d9ca-2a06-4fe9-1e6fa3374f45@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <e0bfca37-d9ca-2a06-4fe9-1e6fa3374f45@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/NeGptoLNlUphcJphMvFK26QRJTI>
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 13:45:25 -0000

Hi Peter,

Please see inline [Yali2]. Thanks a lot.

-----Original Message-----
From: Peter Psenak [mailto:ppsenak@cisco.com] 
Sent: Thursday, March 4, 2021 6:50 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

Hi Yali,

On 04/03/2021 11:42, wangyali wrote:
> 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."

I wonder what is the difference between "MFI-specific LSDB subdivided from a single LSDB" versus the "MFI-specific LSDB".
[Yali2]: Actually I am trying to optimize and accurately describe the key point that multiple Update processes associated with each MFI operate on a common LSDB within the zero IS-IS instance, and each Update process is isolated from each other and does not affect each other. 
So we say "MFI-specific LSDB subdivided from a single LSDB", which may explicitly indicate each MFI-specific LSDB shares a common LSDB but each Update process associated with a MFI is isolated. However, from your previous question and suggestions,  "MFI-specific LSDB" looks like unclear and misleading. Any good idea on improving the expression are welcome.

thanks,
Peter

> 
> 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
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
> 
> 
>