Re: [Lsr] more feedback on draft-ietf-lsr-isis-srv6-extensions-04

Chris Bowers <chrisbowers.ietf@gmail.com> Fri, 07 February 2020 22:03 UTC

Return-Path: <chrisbowers.ietf@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 E6D8D1200E5 for <lsr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 7 Feb 2020 14:03:59 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.998
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.998 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-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 x4LkX-9tgQqX for <lsr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 7 Feb 2020 14:03:57 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-qt1-x829.google.com (mail-qt1-x829.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::829]) (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 BABCD1200A3 for <lsr@ietf.org>; Fri, 7 Feb 2020 14:03:57 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-qt1-x829.google.com with SMTP id w47so597328qtk.4 for <lsr@ietf.org>; Fri, 07 Feb 2020 14:03:57 -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=rN2b0v8WCbZ5mM7oT4zksjM3vW6zq4dISzkseqBRk/w=; b=mx9AuZn7f7soCrAyjKQPASMQQ31lVsEY5S6ZvFh9SpcTFjPH00PqjemG5hEzeJzW3w hPU7XNapOOd7J7w2ASw0t1oJTZyY810retu1YIAu1HSBA/Fyos+UUs5DqFC8/Uld0wF8 iRtK/cf3Vb99Vppy995S6BTjjW8DVbozPYWUdHsh3sRtBq7stTzMvbYmI5j854bkMCcD pJWRcrRK0nfViQiAHFWtrSSDjddYv0DFeNZKRoirzX8T6eeHe17mfw1wq7zfaOI+Nqty wYUEiSsbuWHxEAcbAr7/zOdZEIaz/PMjm7R4X9LNk7Fug7ybX2fueZ5OkHC7Yi+ajrVK CE8g==
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=rN2b0v8WCbZ5mM7oT4zksjM3vW6zq4dISzkseqBRk/w=; b=Lpzx+dh4UwzSFBTOSAdE+1K0e2ZGw6vTRs0xVpynk66ZgeAx963zvrI7R6jd/ZPLML am6ds6eQwkj80xDHWpVhyw7lupBzjLTyyRbxPpzRWy5CHJF2eOfc0jrtRL5NO13XhPyZ jGmdujSNE3gxKX0aWwyxncn6ZUYkRCWD6mdsU3gqDqKN6LS2VqyaAkdbE45O2a7Ed3P0 DiflV0+46fo2M/hCp4vaGMOzCaSgJyJID9sNZAV+zof+7P5vlAFISGy3eOQiwEEHxd8B i0qorxCRp+HtwcC/u5oJ6Pk9HhY0UkC+72jTCURcIAizr+B5D/n9HxTkUpkvp5oNN6he 3lxw==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAWEDlEBDChmL5uQvWqcae8PrxnQbpJxUYPsWbYSoixIui0Of+Lx tHHl4OhogNWikzfWON1otCy8Du3fxgj85ORRb0R7sQ==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqyN6pbbQTPZgEHRxjG5QcghPPAJGYDPZDB8UrVxybgltd3y7KadzyssdeMxJrq1E0fuBVegiovJE8I3cs1g6oA=
X-Received: by 2002:ac8:4c89:: with SMTP id j9mr487378qtv.29.1581113036921; Fri, 07 Feb 2020 14:03:56 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAHzoHbv8PwaKZ9uvFhoGpkxaKApdCndM_kQt4JYsTUFn1Cng1Q@mail.gmail.com> <7d115b05-03df-6cbd-167b-37d4aff8a0ad@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <7d115b05-03df-6cbd-167b-37d4aff8a0ad@cisco.com>
From: Chris Bowers <chrisbowers.ietf@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 7 Feb 2020 16:01:34 -0600
Message-ID: <CAHzoHbvtEdPC5Psq4wirwq8i036m_6QSBxkoox6Hy1dEpG5-Tg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Peter Psenak <ppsenak@cisco.com>
Cc: lsr@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000ea60cc059e039075"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lsr/_wV57GUXEDYyV_ko61dtS22nn2s>
Subject: Re: [Lsr] more feedback on draft-ietf-lsr-isis-srv6-extensions-04
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, 07 Feb 2020 22:04:00 -0000

Thanks.  The proposed text below looks good to me.

Chris

On Wed, Feb 5, 2020 at 5:13 AM Peter Psenak <ppsenak@cisco.com> wrote:

> Hi Chris,
>
> On 05/02/2020 00:27, Chris Bowers wrote:
> > LSR,
> >
> > I have some more feedback on draft-ietf-lsr-isis-srv6-extensions-04 that
> > I am putting in a separate thread so as not to confuse the other thread
> > related to N and A flags.
> >
> > =======
> > The end of Section 5 points out several issues that can result in
> > forwarding not working correctly.  The reader might think that the next
> > section is going to discuss protocol mechanisms to avoid these issues.
> > Since this is not the case, I think it would be helpful to add some text
> > near the end of Section 5 like:
> >
> > "In order to ensure correct forwarding, network operators should take
> > steps to make sure that this requirement is not compromised."
>
> ##PP
> sure.
>
> >
> >
> > =========
> >
> > In section 6, I think it would be useful to explicitly state the
> > following requirement for SRv6 Locator TLVs and their associated SRv6
> SIDs:
> >
> >
> > "When anycast SRv6 Locator TLVs for the same prefix are advertised by
> > different nodes, the SRv6 Locator TLVs MUST all advertise identical sets
> > of SRv6 SIDs."
>
> ##PP
> here's the proposed text:
>
> All the nodes advertising the same anycast locator MUST instantiate the
> exact same set of SIDs under such anycast locator.
>
> >
> >
> > Section 3.3 of RFC 8402 has similar text: "Within an anycast group, all
> > routers in an SR domain MUST advertise the same prefix with the same SID
> > value."  That text only refers to a single SID value, so it seems
> > somewhat open to interpretation text in the context of an SRv6 locator
> > that carries multiple SRv6 SIDs. I think it would be better to avoid any
> > potential ambiguity by using the text proposed above in this document.
> >
> > =========
> >
> > In section 12.1.2. "Revised sub-TLV table" it might avoid an extra
> > interaction with IANA to add a line for the flex-algo prefix metric
> > (currently 6) indicating "n" for TLV#27.
>
> ##PP
> flex-algo prefix metric is not defined in this draft, so I don't believe
> we can mention it here.
>
> thanks,
> Peter
>
> >
> > ==========
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Chris
> >
> >
> >
>
>