Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang-lsr-isis-mfi-00.txt
Peter Psenak <ppsenak@cisco.com> Thu, 04 March 2021 15:20 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 CBBD03A0D5A for <lsr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 4 Mar 2021 07:20:22 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -9.602
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.602 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, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, 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 YLtKdTKgRJf4 for <lsr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 4 Mar 2021 07:20:18 -0800 (PST)
Received: from aer-iport-4.cisco.com (aer-iport-4.cisco.com [173.38.203.54]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 079F73A0D4A for <lsr@ietf.org>; Thu, 4 Mar 2021 07:20:17 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=8877; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1614871218; x=1616080818; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date: mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=At8BjS6k+UGVVelK5NL8iaj9xzrU3k0LaMbsmF/tzjc=; b=S0SCXWhM9m09vr3zG5IvA+RXwC2QEqoK/QjqS7iycLXKJ4EfO8rUzssV B7zAnPEFz8VqibiFLJAG8v4aQ2rif/tW6I+EkQOJZtNA7RAUl7vEUjcNj D8XDI9s9uh4EYu/YKmQNWkrnkznJ06KIcGuh2utxJOhu6U9+1R1EBdlvd U=;
X-IPAS-Result: A0BdAABN+kBglxbLJq1fAxkBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQESAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBQIFPgXaBK1YBJxIxhEGJBIgpLQOBBYkfhHeNMAsBAQEPHQsMBAEBhE0CgXsmOBMCAwEBAQMCAwEBAQEFAQEBAgEGBBQBAQEBAQEBAYY2DYZEAQEBAwEBASEPAQU2CQIMBAsHCgQBAQECAiMDAgIhBh8JCAYBDAYCAQEXglUBglUDDiEPrWt2gTKFWIJYDWKBRIEOKgGICYFGg3MWLIFJQoEQASeCPjU+ghpCAQGCAQUhgk+CXwSCRgFjBEMPASA7IAoTNBEMGg8oKhCQAwQeOII5iDaLPpFZW4MGgy+TRYI3gmkFBwMfgzeKT4VPjTiCSZRVggmMNo8JBA+Ea4FrIYFZMxoIGxU7gmkJRxkNiEmFb4NWg0aBToVGQAMvOAIGAQkBAQMJjBMBAQ
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.81,222,1610409600"; d="scan'208";a="33854948"
Received: from aer-iport-nat.cisco.com (HELO aer-core-3.cisco.com) ([173.38.203.22]) by aer-iport-4.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA; 04 Mar 2021 15:20:13 +0000
Received: from [10.60.140.52] (ams-ppsenak-nitro3.cisco.com [10.60.140.52]) by aer-core-3.cisco.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 124FKCue002810; Thu, 4 Mar 2021 15:20:13 GMT
To: wangyali <wangyali11@huawei.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>
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> <1520992FC97B944A9979C2FC1D7DB0F40525E4FF@DGGEML504-MBS.china.huawei.com>
From: Peter Psenak <ppsenak@cisco.com>
Message-ID: <45db4eee-55cf-f09e-1db3-83c30e434213@cisco.com>
Date: Thu, 04 Mar 2021 16:20:12 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.14; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <1520992FC97B944A9979C2FC1D7DB0F40525E4FF@DGGEML504-MBS.china.huawei.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Outbound-SMTP-Client: 10.60.140.52, ams-ppsenak-nitro3.cisco.com
X-Outbound-Node: aer-core-3.cisco.com
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lsr/VmNjNyhmROdYNzeI9R3ZQwyJSSM>
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 15:20:23 -0000
Hi Yali, On 04/03/2021 14:45, wangyali wrote: > 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>; 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> > 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>; 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> >> 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. it's not the name that is as important. It's the concept that looks questionable - how well can you isolate the update processing if the data are part of the same LSDB and whether such update process separation would prove to be useful at all. I don't know, so far I have not seen any evidence. thanks, Peter > > 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>; 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> >>> 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>; 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>; 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 >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> > > >
- Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang… wangyali
- Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang… Tony Li
- Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang… Les Ginsberg (ginsberg)
- Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang… wangyali
- Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang… wangyali
- Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang… Tony Li
- Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang… wangyali
- Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang… Robert Raszuk
- Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang… Aijun Wang
- Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang… Robert Raszuk
- Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang… Acee Lindem (acee)
- Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang… Gyan Mishra
- Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang… Peter Psenak
- Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang… Gyan Mishra
- Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang… wangyali
- Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang… wangyali
- Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang… wangyali
- Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang… wangyali
- Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang… Tony Li
- Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang… Peter Psenak
- Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang… wangyali
- Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang… wangyali
- Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang… Peter Psenak
- Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang… wangyali
- Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang… Peter Psenak
- Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang… wangyali
- Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang… Aijun Wang
- Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang… Peter Psenak
- Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang… wangyali
- Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang… Gyan Mishra
- Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang… Peter Psenak
- Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang… Gyan Mishra
- Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang… Peter Psenak
- Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang… Gyan Mishra
- Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang… Les Ginsberg (ginsberg)
- Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang… Tony Przygienda
- Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang… Tony Przygienda
- Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang… wangyali
- Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang… Gyan Mishra
- Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang… Gyan Mishra
- Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang… Tony Przygienda
- Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang… Les Ginsberg (ginsberg)
- Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang… Aijun Wang
- Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang… Gyan Mishra
- Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang… Les Ginsberg (ginsberg)
- Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang… Les Ginsberg (ginsberg)
- Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang… Tony Przygienda
- Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang… Acee Lindem (acee)
- Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang… Gyan Mishra
- Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang… Les Ginsberg (ginsberg)
- Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang… Robert Raszuk
- Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang… Lizhenbin
- Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang… Lizhenbin
- Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang… Aijun Wang