Re: [Lsr] Prefix Unreachable Announcement Use Cases

Gyan Mishra <hayabusagsm@gmail.com> Tue, 17 November 2020 20:31 UTC

Return-Path: <hayabusagsm@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 7B25C3A084D for <lsr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 12:31:46 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.087
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.087 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, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_REMOTE_IMAGE=0.01, 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 L24kaSleSe1b for <lsr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 12:31:44 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pl1-x635.google.com (mail-pl1-x635.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::635]) (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 D3D113A0846 for <lsr@ietf.org>; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 12:31:44 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-pl1-x635.google.com with SMTP id 35so6734749ple.12 for <lsr@ietf.org>; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 12:31:44 -0800 (PST)
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=e+nziKsKm8h1Atsh68VQTv0FFMOmk9zYt5Lkj6rMJJM=; b=rYLvjcyV3SryH1mx+IIKlMcpTtYD28qa85/P9muydVjRyRvdK8HQtLh5MKsAzG0YQ1 9weJF3T9eYS1QKfTF4vm3gXLD4AkNIKMDVb8HOhguSb6lI/wm4IxpEK75shk/Wi+ibfy HlEcfrA3hXSedbEqqBjZwEdYpSATxK1/gqeiwUIML4IzOKCNzLnOAixh/oyoNh2hPK+X Lf73DpjVkWbH7nq0GrYRFCE5p1wFsoyCYo51zmwNiikUDqd046JYNToU+FPYp968K1+v aXm4yX26IxMooJnVwIL/Dng9dEGnZwd2ouHz1uq0ojl2EAOh4jehHJmQPeb65jZL+8pd awbw==
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=e+nziKsKm8h1Atsh68VQTv0FFMOmk9zYt5Lkj6rMJJM=; b=AiwkNLvgOLSPIohltFtmLg3WE7QcyRue37R0vakCxVKd6sY7reWVeA69PAKevS0ILF e9VMPDdvk4bKo39Xu7r07NUuabO1YU5L414KgMWr2bt9PhZ0znHSvCq790MqyNuI5Gd/ 1oxAjFfQ5vQh75CeIaDPAx0G0462qhKhxG3x4bY0cnHchrgSM4iA8KVUXpMf4Q8MOaWE EdsbHlRP6O/PgQeOo1EW/PE/mabm+oPZ+MTage+dS0F9wXNG+RKhm34h124/tSynysYa Jq904371oFExDrBVJ5dKcnfvVMn8ZSJwGuAWFNpM+ml9XnFZ/gNMBN9Y+yq9FaQOFkg7 CsYg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531CqP1MuIBoL3Z9BjLKwrHy+xpc826FzkgN2PZ2aDmzNldfLv4u CkhHE8YdkGspuK0mRFy5ry51HgYczTI5ILvIrvw=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzrW2wz4TdpDxAdV8RT+p9348EXXk+gGUg2XnEIS4ElSoTDuVlkihHSvRpVUBtgAIVnkMsiAn/3Yy9y7zqm2nc=
X-Received: by 2002:a17:90a:178b:: with SMTP id q11mr761222pja.132.1605645104227; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 12:31:44 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAOj+MMH7zRaXNJTRC0ua7ohasUpo0MmeqgzcU9BdpcD7wD+Yrg@mail.gmail.com> <D477846E-1086-46A8-B2D6-E552623E2643@gmail.com> <016b01d6bca9$cf908c20$6eb1a460$@tsinghua.org.cn> <CAOj+MMEKbBU1mymU2RzWzwi6Se8ZwQ9OsCBn4NUiX3YAceLdoQ@mail.gmail.com> <CABNhwV1yS1KdPe0hYGOUhDBpqbNqZCaO=xNEr_LaRg35b=f55g@mail.gmail.com> <CAOj+MMGnRkYrTcC45QEy+F5HNCoFn75r=1gn-+OT89Q53D_pYA@mail.gmail.com> <CABNhwV1pK5JX5sDcPyRKuR67eAkAq-q3wRmYqbsfCwOj0wWjSw@mail.gmail.com> <CABNhwV1o6PHhmYawMs8iZm-Zvwo2yAFyPp+_jkrEeF50LcWh-A@mail.gmail.com> <CAOj+MMHT_7mO3rWS3JxPHCT5f5janrHY1a9fN7C7+166AYkNSg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAOj+MMHT_7mO3rWS3JxPHCT5f5janrHY1a9fN7C7+166AYkNSg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Gyan Mishra <hayabusagsm@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 15:31:33 -0500
Message-ID: <CABNhwV1Tr64ujpk176CP9m91WxgnQeyBRd3rzcVhGbkGp7T98A@mail.gmail.com>
To: Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net>
Cc: "Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee=40cisco.com@dmarc.ietf.org>, Aijun Wang <wangaijun@tsinghua.org.cn>, Jeff Tantsura <jefftant.ietf@gmail.com>, lsr <lsr@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000012ac4705b4536245"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lsr/QoZQj_rCQen1XfYT1EGLVSK1fUU>
Subject: Re: [Lsr] Prefix Unreachable Announcement Use Cases
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: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 20:31:47 -0000

On Tue, Nov 17, 2020 at 9:43 AM Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net> wrote:

> Hi Gyan,
>
>       Gyan>. We could use Aijun’s passive interface new top level TLV to
>> link the next hop rewrite loopback to the PE-CE links all being set to
>> passive. So if any PE-CE link goes down a PUA is sent and the next hop
>> converges PIC core PE-CE link which is now associated with the Loopback.
>> This would be a major benefit of PUA for PIC core convergence when
>> next-hop-self is used which applies to MPLS and SR and IP based core.
>>
>
> I have read the above three sentences five times and came with two basic
> observations:
>
> * You are mixing PIC Core with PIC Edge - Please do not. Those are
> completely separate features and it is a feature not a bug to keep them
> that way.
>

   Gyan> Sorry for the confusion. I agree we are not taking BGP PIC core
which is H-FIB core feature for core failures resulting in IGP next hop
update.  Also we are not talking about BGP PIC edge pre programmed backup
paths.  What I was trying to address is use of PUA to resolve a issue with
BGP convergence related to using BCP use of next hop self rewrite so PE-CE
link next hops do not have to be flooded into the IGP.  Down side of
next-hop-self is for convergence in the core from edge failure, the edge
failure is not detected and you have to wait for route to be withdrawn. So
I was thinking maybe PUA data plane convergence mechanism would be a way to
help with convergence.  Not sure how or if possible but was thinking that
as a possible use case for PUA.

>
> * You are mixing external PE-CE interfaces with IGP passive interfaces -
> Please do not. There should be no IGP flooding of any sort associated with
> state of PE-CE interface. No need.
>

    Understood.  Bad idea.

>
> Thx a lot,
> R.
>
> --

<http://www.verizon.com/>

*Gyan Mishra*

*Network Solutions A**rchitect *



*M 301 502-134713101 Columbia Pike *Silver Spring, MD