Re: [Lsr] FW: New Version Notification for draft-bonica-lsr-ip-flexalgo-00.txt
Peter Psenak <ppsenak@cisco.com> Fri, 09 October 2020 15:57 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 53E923A09F6 for <lsr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 9 Oct 2020 08:57:46 -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=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 S0sS4rYiwuQA for <lsr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 9 Oct 2020 08:57:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from aer-iport-1.cisco.com (aer-iport-1.cisco.com [173.38.203.51]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EF1A93A09F4 for <lsr@ietf.org>; Fri, 9 Oct 2020 08:57:43 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=7174; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1602259064; x=1603468664; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date: mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=3EeqCAH4gZlWoUdb6yRymmXy3taILdGj6bkHad/W7qc=; b=kcqZZttgTa9rRNnXmoEyKXf4UQJTBFH/I84Vi7i0BIjbIn/HNbgXs/n4 cPrf5tYVNeQI1p/rNZWa2E15OMAaTp+6VYv0kf05hFR9XIiiTZaKRlxPJ ay5OIbl+ummn6l0lf2RT2cmm/aDDVB48k5egxKGX1ImQQNbMB6Ndgsivu k=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0A5AQCZh4Bf/xbLJq1gHAEBAQEBAQcBARIBAQQEAQFAgT4EAQELAYMZVQEgEiyEPYkCh2oIJooRkCyBaQsBAQEPGA0KBAEBgWyCXgKCFCY3Bg4CAwEBCwEBBQEBAQIBBgRthVwMhXIBAQEBAgEBASEVNgkCDAQLEQQBAQECAiMDAgIhBh8JCAYBDAYCAQGDHQQBAYJLAw4gD6hsdoEyhVSCagMKYoE8BoEOKgGNT4FBP4ERJwyCXT6CGkIBAQKBKAESAYM4gmAEkCYJglWJAZsDUoJygxSFbIxchH8FBwMfgxOKCIUYjwOTHIpwgmySbYFqJA1acDMaCBsVO4I1ATNQGQ2OKxeDToUUhUQ/AzACAQEzAgYKAQEDCY5IAQE
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.77,355,1596499200"; d="scan'208";a="30230753"
Received: from aer-iport-nat.cisco.com (HELO aer-core-2.cisco.com) ([173.38.203.22]) by aer-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA; 09 Oct 2020 15:57:39 +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 099FvdvC007771; Fri, 9 Oct 2020 15:57:39 GMT
To: "Dongjie (Jimmy)" <jie.dong@huawei.com>, Ron Bonica <rbonica=40juniper.net@dmarc.ietf.org>, Yingzhen Qu <yingzhen.qu@futurewei.com>, Gyan Mishra <hayabusagsm@gmail.com>
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> <f4fdff8b-fe11-cb75-3cd7-7766baedf730@cisco.com> <CB2F6A55-B231-4A2D-821C-D3F2ABE6649E@futurewei.com> <00158dee-bb0d-6f5e-f740-b7bac61a1c74@cisco.com> <7F26707A-8137-4114-9236-D80B060E2528@futurewei.com> <DM6PR05MB6348C6FBFD50C19C06DE719BAE0E0@DM6PR05MB6348.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> <4896cf59c3314f1c92cdb491d1d8a5a3@huawei.com>
From: Peter Psenak <ppsenak@cisco.com>
Message-ID: <c9b0f0aa-975a-f042-6773-58a603ba5d39@cisco.com>
Date: Fri, 09 Oct 2020 17:57:39 +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: <4896cf59c3314f1c92cdb491d1d8a5a3@huawei.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
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/bOdiptK6LHVbPrwWeu-W3MKz9kA>
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, 09 Oct 2020 15:57:46 -0000
Hi Jimmy, On 09/10/2020 04:59, Dongjie (Jimmy) wrote: > Hi Ron, > > Thanks for explaining the difference between IP Flex-Algo and SR Flex-algo. As you said, the major difference is the data plane. > > If my understanding is correct, for one Flex-Algo to be used correctly, the set of nodes need to apply consistent constraints in computation, and bind the FAD to the same data plane. > > Is it possible that different nodes may use the same Flex-Algo with different data plane, e.g. some with SR-MPLS, some with SRv6, and some with pure IP etc., or each Flex-Algo is always associated with only one data plane? In the former case, should the flex-algo definition also indicate the data plane(s) to be used with the flex-algo? let me respond to this query, as this is not specific to Ron's draft. FAD is data plane agnostic and is used by all of them. thanks, Peter > > Best regards, > Jie > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Lsr [mailto:lsr-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Ron Bonica >> Sent: Sunday, October 4, 2020 4:34 AM >> To: Yingzhen Qu <yingzhen.qu@futurewei.com>; Peter Psenak >> <ppsenak@cisco.com>; Gyan Mishra <hayabusagsm@gmail.com> >> Cc: lsr@ietf.org; Jeff Tantsura <jefftant.ietf@gmail.com> >> Subject: Re: [Lsr] FW: New Version Notification for >> draft-bonica-lsr-ip-flexalgo-00.txt >> >> Hi Yingzhen, >> >> IP Flexible Algorithms are like SR Flexible Algorithms in the following respects: >> >> - Links have IGP metrics, TE metrics, delay metrics and administrative colors >> - FADs define Flexible Algorithms >> >> More specifically, the FAD: >> >> - Indicates which metric type the Flexible Algorithm uses >> - Specifies constraints in terms of link colors that are included or excluded from >> the Flexible Algorithm. >> >> The significant difference between IP Flexible Algorithms and SR Flexible >> Algorithms is: >> >> - SR Flexible Algorithms bind FADs to prefix SIDs or SRv6 locators >> - IP Flexible Algorithms bind FADs to IPv4 or IPv6 addresses. >> >> So, IP Flexible Algorithms can be deployed in any IP network, even in the >> absence of SR. >> >> Ron >> >> >> Juniper Business Use Only >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Yingzhen Qu <yingzhen.qu@futurewei.com> >> Sent: Saturday, October 3, 2020 2:08 PM >> To: Peter Psenak <ppsenak@cisco.com>; Gyan Mishra >> <hayabusagsm@gmail.com>; Ron Bonica <rbonica@juniper.net> >> Cc: lsr@ietf.org; Jeff Tantsura <jefftant.ietf@gmail.com> >> Subject: Re: [Lsr] FW: New Version Notification for >> draft-bonica-lsr-ip-flexalgo-00.txt >> >> [External Email. Be cautious of content] >> >> >> Hi Peter, >> >> Using flex-algo, a SRv6 locator can be associated with a single algo, which >> means an IPv6 or IPv4 address can also be associated with a single algo. So my >> understanding is Ron's proposal is making the configuration of flex-algo easier? >> Instead of using the exclude or include list you can configure a loopback >> address to a flex-algo directly? >> >> Thanks, >> Yingzhen >> >> On 10/3/20, 2:47 AM, "Peter Psenak" <ppsenak@cisco.com> wrote: >> >> Hi Yingzhen, >> >> On 02/10/2020 22:15, Yingzhen Qu wrote: >> > Hi Peter, >> > >> > My understanding of flex-algo is that for traffic destined to a prefix on a >> particular algo, it can only be routed on routers belong to that algo, which also >> means only routers in that algo calculates how to reach that prefix and install >> it into the routing table. It seems to me that using flex-algo (section 12 of the >> draft) it's possible to have a loopback address associated with only one algo, >> please correct me if I'm missing or misunderstood something. >> >> you are right. That is exactly what is being done for flex-algo with >> SRv6 - locator is associated with a single algo only. The proposal uses >> the same concept. >> >> thanks, >> Peter >> >> > >> > Thanks, >> > Yingzhen >> > >> > On 10/2/20, 9:43 AM, "Lsr on behalf of Peter Psenak" >> <lsr-bounces@ietf.org on behalf of ppsenak=40cisco.com@dmarc.ietf.org> >> wrote: >> > >> > 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 >> > >> > > >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Lsr mailing list >> > Lsr@ietf.org >> > >> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/ >> ?url=https*3A*2F*2Fwww.ietf.org*2Fmailman*2Flistinfo*2Flsr&data=02 >> *7C01*7Cyingzhen.qu*40futurewei.com*7Cfe03124c6e414e067c2008d86781 >> 6541*7C0fee8ff2a3b240189c753a1d5591fedc*7C1*7C0*7C63737315273986 >> 5126&sdata=WI48cEAan*2FOkDPmVXGurEAjPItNGF9p9PDQIlD1ip0g*3D >> &reserved=0__;JSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJQ!!NEt6yMaO-gk!X1fRln9MjimeJcR >> EUEIydr-8IIbtNonXMs83eoXvRww6xkaQfVUdNh0kK452GP-G$ >> > >> > >> > >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Lsr mailing list >> Lsr@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr > >
- [Lsr] FW: New Version Notification for draft-boni… Ron Bonica
- Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-boni… tony.li
- Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-boni… Jia Chen
- Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-boni… Huzhibo
- Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-boni… Joel M. Halpern
- Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-boni… Huzhibo
- Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-boni… Robert Raszuk
- Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-boni… Peter Psenak
- Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-boni… Peter Psenak
- Re: [Lsr] FW: New Version Notification for draft-… Muthu Arul Mozhi Perumal
- Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-boni… Robert Raszuk
- Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-boni… Dongjie (Jimmy)
- Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-boni… Peter Psenak
- Re: [Lsr] FW: New Version Notification for draft-… Ron Bonica
- Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-boni… Robert Raszuk
- Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-boni… Les Ginsberg (ginsberg)
- Re: [Lsr] FW: New Version Notification for draft-… Jeff Tantsura
- Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-boni… Peter Psenak
- Re: [Lsr] FW: New Version Notification for draft-… Peter Psenak
- Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-boni… Ron Bonica
- Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-boni… Ron Bonica
- Re: [Lsr] FW: New Version Notification for draft-… Acee Lindem (acee)
- Re: [Lsr] FW: New Version Notification for draft-… Ron Bonica
- Re: [Lsr] FW: New Version Notification for draft-… Gyan Mishra
- Re: [Lsr] FW: New Version Notification for draft-… Peter Psenak
- Re: [Lsr] FW: New Version Notification for draft-… Gyan Mishra
- Re: [Lsr] FW: New Version Notification for draft-… Yingzhen Qu
- Re: [Lsr] FW: New Version Notification for draft-… Jeff Tantsura
- Re: [Lsr] FW: New Version Notification for draft-… Gyan Mishra
- Re: [Lsr] FW: New Version Notification for draft-… Robert Raszuk
- Re: [Lsr] FW: New Version Notification for draft-… Peter Psenak
- Re: [Lsr] FW: New Version Notification for draft-… Peter Psenak
- Re: [Lsr] FW: New Version Notification for draft-… Gyan Mishra
- Re: [Lsr] FW: New Version Notification for draft-… Gyan Mishra
- Re: [Lsr] FW: New Version Notification for draft-… Gyan Mishra
- Re: [Lsr] FW: New Version Notification for draft-… Yingzhen Qu
- Re: [Lsr] FW: New Version Notification for draft-… Ron Bonica
- Re: [Lsr] FW: New Version Notification for draft-… Peter Psenak
- Re: [Lsr] FW: New Version Notification for draft-… Peter Psenak
- Re: [Lsr] FW: New Version Notification for draft-… Gyan Mishra
- [Lsr] draft-zhu-lsr-isis-sr-vtn-flexalgo-01 Huaimo Chen
- Re: [Lsr] FW: New Version Notification for draft-… Dongjie (Jimmy)
- [Lsr] 回复: draft-zhu-lsr-isis-sr-vtn-flexalgo-01 zhuyq8
- Re: [Lsr] FW: New Version Notification for draft-… Peter Psenak
- Re: [Lsr] FW: New Version Notification for draft-… Ron Bonica
- Re: [Lsr] FW: New Version Notification for draft-… Dongjie (Jimmy)
- Re: [Lsr] FW: New Version Notification for draft-… Ron Bonica
- Re: [Lsr] FW: New Version Notification for draft-… Jeff Tantsura
- Re: [Lsr] FW: New Version Notification for draft-… Ron Bonica
- Re: [Lsr] FW: New Version Notification for draft-… Jeff Tantsura
- Re: [Lsr] FW: New Version Notification for draft-… Gyan Mishra
- Re: [Lsr] FW: New Version Notification for draft-… Acee Lindem (acee)
- Re: [Lsr] FW: New Version Notification for draft-… Jeff Tantsura
- Re: [Lsr] FW: New Version Notification for draft-… Dongjie (Jimmy)
- Re: [Lsr] FW: New Version Notification for draft-… Dongjie (Jimmy)
- Re: [Lsr] FW: New Version Notification for draft-… Peter Psenak
- Re: [Lsr] FW: New Version Notification for draft-… Peter Psenak
- Re: [Lsr] FW: New Version Notification for draft-… Peter Psenak
- Re: [Lsr] FW: New Version Notification for draft-… Robert Raszuk
- Re: [Lsr] FW: New Version Notification for draft-… Peter Psenak
- Re: [Lsr] FW: New Version Notification for draft-… Gyan Mishra
- Re: [Lsr] FW: New Version Notification for draft-… Dongjie (Jimmy)
- Re: [Lsr] FW: New Version Notification for draft-… Peter Psenak
- Re: [Lsr] FW: New Version Notification for draft-… Robert Raszuk
- Re: [Lsr] FW: New Version Notification for draft-… Peter Psenak
- Re: [Lsr] FW: New Version Notification for draft-… Dongjie (Jimmy)
- Re: [Lsr] FW: New Version Notification for draft-… Dongjie (Jimmy)
- Re: [Lsr] FW: New Version Notification for draft-… Peter Psenak
- Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-boni… bruno.decraene
- Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-boni… Peter Psenak
- Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-boni… bruno.decraene
- Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-boni… Peter Psenak
- Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-boni… bruno.decraene
- Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-boni… Peter Psenak