Re: [Lsr] Warren Kumari's No Objection on draft-ietf-ospf-mpls-elc-13: (with COMMENT)

Warren Kumari <warren@kumari.net> Sat, 16 May 2020 01:41 UTC

Return-Path: <warren@kumari.net>
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 913EF3A0837 for <lsr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 15 May 2020 18:41:43 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.898
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kumari-net.20150623.gappssmtp.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 KxCEJi4ZABtg for <lsr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 15 May 2020 18:41:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lj1-x22a.google.com (mail-lj1-x22a.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::22a]) (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 3AE773A0968 for <lsr@ietf.org>; Fri, 15 May 2020 18:41:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-lj1-x22a.google.com with SMTP id v16so99945ljc.8 for <lsr@ietf.org>; Fri, 15 May 2020 18:41:32 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kumari-net.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=8CfVowI+ogaSw7nNd8JoZQxzF1UPIIH3vk7IkotXM0A=; b=zacjwooSPGJJrimebrmUa8K6i8OWpSruBUD4tj+GnaPVzF4Vz4Mzg4mCJBPn+1CoGZ kddWwtL2fhoSJzdSGl+EcIO6ni2sKqIvnwj1DrtOP/xqxLmDjeIyyv1lli37mBJAgbq9 aPrMlEqv5K/EvlNzsENC+NUwnKmxoLdlAkj5HS4oumj4Iu9WO8UazTOmfop3aK7n0HEw HiHZc4IS8KDUEK5Vs9NKQdHQFVnMkU8A7E5mNZDK1S5sUjWPxjRYYrAR4bb3OFJCgTrH 9npV4aFCWwUldLXwIioPfnWxVGc7UyxKi9X7W97y6GGYChUfHVrNjW2ecmfrNzc9VEj4 HHGw==
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=8CfVowI+ogaSw7nNd8JoZQxzF1UPIIH3vk7IkotXM0A=; b=iBtXvniy2myKNIrhsIuTmT+uqZUuRh2fkzr8DzOpt3vCIYdpmMx9P1AILRv/dKbNFs kj8qYU2FsdhTFu2Cs4wKupNiVK8RrA5S3zmS0lP92YKKL8eLfmn0b7DQuziQFqZ18hiV w1xRKs94WS3hi19m1YNbA6agjd9QJ4TodbntgUhW3Wue+P2awX0W1wVx/tyWjHZhrbIo Fa61RscQLvl/3JifmpCibblsC4gTwVruAvejeVm8Cy052pnUpCw/zjKNkCmgHQEGhlAr jxUDmrYncpmMYnONI78SGcsdejm6VKS+hUWFaAFgrm00Wnrdm+8doclF/ziLl33GnKg6 N8vw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5336NWw+y3oKpIn4TTCkaI1Xsfd/Zd4L94tb1WZkztkxlb6CW1eJ IIESogWMhat5JdS8RlwvqOfNqQPgECNefl0DvYPYQg==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJztm4lmfBf1F65vyz+qcmhwcA0I3qrsMQ7yS7rQwnxuMzM9VnQV70CVkMihOUTzsOCpD+DebpJH/mBReqIA45c=
X-Received: by 2002:a2e:7610:: with SMTP id r16mr3986502ljc.156.1589593289972; Fri, 15 May 2020 18:41:29 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <158950595036.5639.14249690264747935521@ietfa.amsl.com> <c463544f-0397-bc06-a65a-e6c42a1cadcd@cisco.com> <CAHw9_iL2v74h2fgDGxRu4UoZRPUMnGHvyG7kpE37rR9vvp9jqw@mail.gmail.com> <AE27DFF2-B2F1-460F-8A30-EC7D233A14DD@cisco.com> <CAHw9_i+=p-8JTu_mcYTVZ636+BquMOmbFR4z6jqG_2vSYgyZXQ@mail.gmail.com> <MW3PR11MB461963161BD57057C4AD6793C1BA0@MW3PR11MB4619.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
In-Reply-To: <MW3PR11MB461963161BD57057C4AD6793C1BA0@MW3PR11MB4619.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
From: Warren Kumari <warren@kumari.net>
Date: Fri, 15 May 2020 21:41:18 -0400
Message-ID: <CAHw9_iJRsxungrW7jAMcZDpceQ8PDsK_YDqKZ-yUEbd666PrDA@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Les Ginsberg (ginsberg)" <ginsberg@cisco.com>
Cc: "Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee@cisco.com>, Alvaro Retana <aretana.ietf@gmail.com>, "Peter Psenak (ppsenak)" <ppsenak@cisco.com>, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-ospf-mpls-elc@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-ospf-mpls-elc@ietf.org>, "lsr-chairs@ietf.org" <lsr-chairs@ietf.org>, "lsr@ietf.org" <lsr@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000006307db05a5ba07b3"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lsr/ni1Ljhc6i7-p2oiwcYsWnqux9GQ>
Subject: Re: [Lsr] Warren Kumari's No Objection on draft-ietf-ospf-mpls-elc-13: (with COMMENT)
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: Sat, 16 May 2020 01:41:44 -0000

On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 8:07 PM Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) <ginsberg@cisco.com>
wrote:

> Warren –
>
>
>
> The problem I have with your suggestion is that we do not know whether the
> destination protocol for redistribution even supports the signaling.
>
>
>
> I am very supportive of Acee’s characterization of redistribution as
> outside the scope of specification.
>
>
Okey dokey, I’m convinced...

Thanks, w


>
> I think we can say what happens intra-protocol – but we should stay away
> from inter-protocol statements.
>
>
>
>    Les
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Lsr <lsr-bounces@ietf.org> *On Behalf Of * Warren Kumari
> *Sent:* Friday, May 15, 2020 2:08 PM
> *To:* Acee Lindem (acee) <acee@cisco.com>
> *Cc:* draft-ietf-ospf-mpls-elc@ietf.org; Alvaro Retana <
> aretana.ietf@gmail.com>gt;; lsr-chairs@ietf.org; The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>rg>;
> lsr@ietf.org; Peter Psenak (ppsenak) <ppsenak@cisco.com>
> *Subject:* Re: [Lsr] Warren Kumari's No Objection on
> draft-ietf-ospf-mpls-elc-13: (with COMMENT)
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 1:34 PM Acee Lindem (acee) <acee@cisco.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Warren,
>
>
>
> *From: *Warren Kumari <warren@kumari.net>
> *Date: *Friday, May 15, 2020 at 1:25 PM
> *To: *"Peter Psenak (ppsenak)" <ppsenak@cisco.com>
> *Cc: *The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>rg>, "draft-ietf-ospf-mpls-elc@ietf.org" <
> draft-ietf-ospf-mpls-elc@ietf.org>gt;, "lsr-chairs@ietf.org" <
> lsr-chairs@ietf.org>gt;, "lsr@ietf.org" <lsr@ietf.org>rg>, Acee Lindem <
> acee@cisco.com>gt;, Alvaro Retana <aretana.ietf@gmail.com>
> *Subject: *Re: Warren Kumari's No Objection on
> draft-ietf-ospf-mpls-elc-13: (with COMMENT)
> *Resent-From: *<alias-bounces@ietf.org>
> *Resent-To: *Acee Lindem <acee@cisco.com>om>, Yingzhen Qu <
> yingzhen.ietf@gmail.com>gt;, Christian Hopps <chopps@chopps.org>
> *Resent-Date: *Friday, May 15, 2020 at 1:25 PM
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 7:28 AM Peter Psenak <ppsenak@cisco.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Warren,
>
> On 15/05/2020 03:25, Warren Kumari via Datatracker wrote:
> > Warren Kumari has entered the following ballot position for
> > draft-ietf-ospf-mpls-elc-13: No Objection
> >
> > When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
> > email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
> > introductory paragraph, however.)
> >
> >
> > Please refer to
> https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
> > for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.
> >
> >
> > The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
> > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ospf-mpls-elc/
> >
> >
> >
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > COMMENT:
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > Nit: “ When an OSPF Autonomous System Boundary Router (ASBR)
> redistributes a
> > prefix from another instance of the OSPF or from some other protocol,
>  it
> > SHOULD preserve the ELC signaling for the prefix.“
> >
> > S/the /OSPF/OSPF/.
>
> fixed.
>
>
>
> thanks!
>
>
> >
> > S/for the prefix/for the prefix (if it exists)/ — some protocols will
> not have
> > / carry the ELC.
>
> fixed.
>
>
>
> thanks!
>
>
> >
> > Apologies if I missed it, but I didn’t see discussion on *exporting* ELC
> into
> > other protocols...
>
> what do you mean by "exporting"?
>
>
>
> Sorry -- the above discusses : "When an OSPF Autonomous System Boundary
> Router (ASBR) redistributes a prefix ... FROM some other protocol,  "
> (imports), but presumably you would also like to be able to do "When an
> OSPF Autonomous System Boundary Router (ASBR) redistributes a prefix
> **INTO** some other protocol,  ..." (exports). Yes, the "other protocol"
> document should describe this in detail, but I think that it is worth
> mentioning the topic here -- we may be helpful for implementers to keep in
> mind that this may occur, and so the data should be reachable
> (likely through the RIB).
>
>
>
> Can you suggest some text? Do you realize that in the Routing Area, route
> redistribution (aka, route import/export) has always been considered an
> implementation matter and is not formally specified. It would hard to
> standardize this now (other than Routing Policy YANG model) due to
> differences between implementations.
>
>
>
> Sure -- how about something like:
>
>    When an OSPF Autonomous System Boundary Router (ASBR) redistributes a
>    prefix from another instance of the OSPF or from some other protocol,
>    it SHOULD preserve the ELC signaling for the prefix.
>
>   **In addition ASBRs should allow the
>
>   ELC signaling for the prefix to be preserved when redistributing
> to another instance of OSPF or to some other protocol**
>
>
>
> (Addition in asterisks).
>
> Note that this is just a suggestion / not a hill I care to die on -- as an
> ops person, when I read "you should be able to preserve X when importing
> into Y", I automatically start wondering how / if I can preserve X when
> exporting from Y.
>
>
>
> But, 'm also fine if y'all don't want to address this,
>
> W
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Thanks,
> Acee
>
>
>
> W
>
>
>
>
> thanks,
> Peter
>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> I don't think the execution is relevant when it was obviously a bad idea
> in the first place.
> This is like putting rabid weasels in your pants, and later expressing
> regret at having chosen those particular rabid weasels and that pair of
> pants.
>    ---maf
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> I don't think the execution is relevant when it was obviously a bad idea
> in the first place.
> This is like putting rabid weasels in your pants, and later expressing
> regret at having chosen those particular rabid weasels and that pair of
> pants.
>    ---maf
>
-- 
I don't think the execution is relevant when it was obviously a bad idea in
the first place.
This is like putting rabid weasels in your pants, and later expressing
regret at having chosen those particular rabid weasels and that pair of
pants.
   ---maf