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

[Jeff Tantsura <[e-mail]>]

Hi Ron,

the readers would benefit if the draft would state that in order for the technology to work properly, there must be a contiguous set of connected routers that support it between the S/D, since lookup (route installed in context of the algo it is associated with) is done per hop.

Cheers,
Jeff
On Sep 30, 2020, 9:03 AM -0700, Ron Bonica <rbonica=[e-mail]>, wrote:
> Hi Muthu,
>
> Thanks for the review.
>
> An interface can be associated with, at most, one Flexible Algorithm. Likewise, an IP address can be associated with, at most, one Flexible Algorithm.
>
> I tried to express this in the text below, but probably didn’t do a very good job. If you can think of a better way to say it, I would appreciate suggestions.
>
>                                                   Ron
>
> Text from draft
> ============
>
> Network operators configure multiple loopback interfaces on an egress
>    node.  They can associate each loopback interface with:
>
>    o  Zero or more IP addresses.
>
>    o  Zero or one Flexible Algorithms.
>
>    If an IP address and a Flexible Algorithm are associated with the
>    same interface, they are also associated with one another.  An IP
>    address MAY be associated with, at most, one interface.
>
>
>
>
>
> Juniper Business Use Only
> From: Muthu Arul Mozhi Perumal <[e-mail]>
> Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2020 9:59 AM
> To: Ron Bonica <[e-mail]>
> Cc: [e-mail]
> Subject: Re: [Lsr] FW: New Version Notification for draft-bonica-lsr-ip-flexalgo-00.txt
>
> [External Email. Be cautious of content]
>
> A quick question:
>   If an IP address and a Flexible Algorithm are associated with the
>   same interface, they are also associated with one another.  An IP
>   address MAY be associated with, at most, one interface.
>
> If multiple IP addresses and multiple flexible algorithms are associated with a loopback interface, is each IP address associated with all flexible algorithms? What matters is the association b/w an IP address and a flexalgo, so the relationship should be defined in a direct way rather than each being associated with an interface, right?
>
> Regards,
> Muthu
>
> On Tue, Sep 29, 2020 at 7:07 PM Ron Bonica <rbonica=[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> Please review and comment
>
>                                        Ron
>
>
>
> Juniper Business Use Only
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [e-mail] <[e-mail]>
> > Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2020 9:36 AM
> > To: Parag Kaneriya <[e-mail]>; Shraddha Hegde
> > <[e-mail]>; Ron Bonica <[e-mail]>; Rajesh M
> > <[e-mail]>; William Britto A J <[e-mail]>
> > Subject: New Version Notification for draft-bonica-lsr-ip-flexalgo-00.txt
> >
> > [External Email. Be cautious of content]
> >
> >
> > A new version of I-D, draft-bonica-lsr-ip-flexalgo-00.txt
> > has been successfully submitted by Ron Bonica and posted to the IETF
> > repository.
> >
> > Name:           draft-bonica-lsr-ip-flexalgo
> > Revision:       00
> > Title:          IGP Flexible Algorithms (Flexalgo) In IP Networks
> > Document date:  2020-09-29
> > Group:          Individual Submission
> > Pages:          14
> > URL:            https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.ietf.org/id/draft-bonica-
> > lsr-ip-flexalgo-00.txt__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!X7PVDP-
> > FnUA0oCcZMw3Qde6in0C72hu_9hOZ53kPspIarR8fNDyU9Vck80Zbjoij$
> > Status:
> > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-bonica-lsr-
> > ip-flexalgo/__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!X7PVDP-
> > FnUA0oCcZMw3Qde6in0C72hu_9hOZ53kPspIarR8fNDyU9Vck8x7e5ZqI$
> > Htmlized:
> > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-
> > bonica-lsr-ip-flexalgo__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!X7PVDP-
> > FnUA0oCcZMw3Qde6in0C72hu_9hOZ53kPspIarR8fNDyU9Vck82w_6CyU$
> > Htmlized:       https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-
> > bonica-lsr-ip-flexalgo-00__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!X7PVDP-
> > FnUA0oCcZMw3Qde6in0C72hu_9hOZ53kPspIarR8fNDyU9Vck81_QrJ_p$
> >
> >
> > Abstract:
> >    An IGP Flexible Algorithm computes a constraint-based path and maps
> >    that path to an identifier.  As currently defined, Flexalgo can only
> >    map the paths that it computes to Segment Routing (SR) identifiers.
> >    Therefore, Flexalgo cannot be deployed in the absence of SR.
> >
> >    This document extends Flexalgo, so that it can map the paths that it
> >    computes to IP addresses.  This allows Flexalgo to be deployed in any
> >    IP network, even in the absence of SR.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission
> > until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.
> >
> > The IETF Secretariat
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Lsr mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr
> _______________________________________________
> Lsr mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr