Re: [Lsr] FW: New Version Notification for draft-bonica-lsr-ip-flexalgo-00.txt

Peter Psenak <ppsenak@cisco.com> Fri, 02 October 2020 16:42 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 B6ACC3A1156 for <lsr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 2 Oct 2020 09:42:12 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -9.814
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.814 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=-0.213, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=unavailable 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 UcGpj9ROzNlD for <lsr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 2 Oct 2020 09:42:11 -0700 (PDT)
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 2CFF63A1147 for <lsr@ietf.org>; Fri, 2 Oct 2020 09:42:10 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1530; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1601656931; x=1602866531; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date: mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=KYAcG13QGBhixAhjKPhSehnuLIgqeVbS14aG88/HVmw=; b=YBB8Lwu4kI36El2Gh/v/1xj7dRhmAEvs2/uXkbo2ZTP9+uaaZK9Fj4cW ZJbH7MO74QvJ/QXj9zxr+gV0NY6LIjHIqKIcu994KVflTJlyFBZASKO69 XfZ56r0HG3SaX7d/YoWsa4NLONBKo5FvDTeCELorhkBNYHxAEyVEVQP7s s=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0CUAwA5V3df/xbLJq1gHAEBAQEBAQcBARIBAQQEAQFAgU+DbwEgEoRpiQKICC6cIgsBAQEPLwQBAYRKAoI3JjgTAgMBAQsBAQUBAQECAQYEbYVohXIBAQEBAgEjDwEFPwIFCwsOCgICJgICVwYBDAgBAYMigl0gqE12gTKFVINCgUKBDiqNSYFBP4E4gmk+h1SCYASQH4Jekz+REoJxgxOXQgUHAx+SIo57kxOgPIFrI4FXMxoIGxWDJU8ZDZxoPwNnAgYBCQEBAwmOSAEB
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.77,328,1596499200"; d="scan'208";a="30012765"
Received: from aer-iport-nat.cisco.com (HELO aer-core-2.cisco.com) ([173.38.203.22]) by aer-iport-4.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA; 02 Oct 2020 16:42:07 +0000
Received: from [10.60.140.51] (ams-ppsenak-nitro2.cisco.com [10.60.140.51]) by aer-core-2.cisco.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 092Gg5GX015869; Fri, 2 Oct 2020 16:42:06 GMT
To: Gyan Mishra <hayabusagsm@gmail.com>, Ron Bonica <rbonica=40juniper.net@dmarc.ietf.org>
Cc: "lsr@ietf.org" <lsr@ietf.org>, Jeff Tantsura <jefftant.ietf@gmail.com>
References: <160138654056.12980.329207214151594381@ietfa.amsl.com> <DM6PR05MB63482DBC001DD56BEF6F7311AE320@DM6PR05MB6348.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> <CAKz0y8w5VOf_=baG6UCP8Q9s=VLM2ghT2jhiF5FZNN4JXB23eA@mail.gmail.com> <DM6PR05MB63485389C261CA2E0C08DE50AE330@DM6PR05MB6348.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> <0f85212d-fac7-47ea-a608-4f53061cbf02@Spark> <DM6PR05MB63480E863599BBC810BF334AAE300@DM6PR05MB6348.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> <CABNhwV2+jhjAfxq5FzaukdhCOqXvGCkv75xYWcStN=SCrpni4Q@mail.gmail.com>
From: Peter Psenak <ppsenak@cisco.com>
Message-ID: <f4fdff8b-fe11-cb75-3cd7-7766baedf730@cisco.com>
Date: Fri, 02 Oct 2020 18:42:05 +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: <CABNhwV2+jhjAfxq5FzaukdhCOqXvGCkv75xYWcStN=SCrpni4Q@mail.gmail.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-2.cisco.com
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lsr/YVEptgWeP9MvSbFrusBDXH8GBSw>
Subject: Re: [Lsr] FW: New Version Notification for draft-bonica-lsr-ip-flexalgo-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: Fri, 02 Oct 2020 16:42:13 -0000

Gyan,

On 02/10/2020 18:30, Gyan Mishra wrote:
> All,
> 
> With SRv6 and IP based flex algo a generic question as it applies to 
> both. Is it possible to have within a single IGP domain different sets 
> of nodes or segments of the network running different algorithms.  

absolutely.

> From 
> both drafts it sounds like all nodes have to agree on same algorithm 
> similar to concept of metric and reference bandwidth all have to have 
> the same style metric and play to the same sheet of music.

all participating nodes need to agree on the definition of the flex-algo 
and advertise the participation. That's it.

> If there was 
> a way to use multiple algorithms simultaneously based on SFC or services 
> and instantiation of specific algorithm based on service to be 
> rendered.  Doing so without causing a routing loop or sub optimal 
> routing.  

you can certainly use multiple algorithms simultaneously and use algo 
specific paths to forward specific traffic over it. How that is done 
from the forwarding perspective depends in which forwarding plane you 
use. Flex-algo control plane is independent of the forwarding plane.


>I thought with flex algo that there exists a feature that on 
> each hop there is a way to specify which algo to use hop by hop similar 
> to a hop by hop policy based routing.

no, there is no hop-by-hop classification, that is problematic and does 
not scale for high speeds. Classification is done at the ingress only.

thanks,
Peter

>