Re: [Lsr] LSR WG Adoption Poll for "IS-IS Topology-Transparent Zone" - draft-chen-isis-ttz-11.txt

Richard Li <richard.li@futurewei.com> Wed, 19 August 2020 23:05 UTC

Return-Path: <richard.li@futurewei.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 9B2CF3A0F22 for <lsr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 19 Aug 2020 16:05:12 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.989
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.989 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, HTTPS_HTTP_MISMATCH=0.1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, T_SPF_PERMERROR=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=futurewei.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 xuzmf7fWuoV8 for <lsr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 19 Aug 2020 16:05:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from NAM11-DM6-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-dm6nam11on2114.outbound.protection.outlook.com [40.107.223.114]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9AF7B3A0EFF for <lsr@ietf.org>; Wed, 19 Aug 2020 16:05:10 -0700 (PDT)
ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=aSVhm60/JLW7MlFwwikXrGtZgMXTreopE7MPeLoaqYhSEEP4mJoiPzyuAwbKXwrK/h3dS6DMRNG4XmQ28PKjoI7SWitkPHIEsJkJM83iX7P1N20L98mqQuK/L7bRiNTwkTUBuMdT5257MInFr7lpMj5lO4ptlJTx4WJNoxlMbddkskIOOCe6qjqg6qLzmSFM1hliBo9WEHHod2Essj73omFCEyZg8mIjIE4+teXNTdFPsch9SJPqHKaftOgHSrRMOEpLIKAcSTDtJIOm7rHegcbT6k5/ThFzMl/PFiI6KPAgW5aPz5Oa/qcykAFtPuuJVK3EurBe1Nw3wjrw+BSsCA==
ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=TfyaYqR44cP57Ul/TylqFkoQw6BxRoVQhKQyn5P2Cac=; b=YM+mOsRqtjNrgA2ep17HqQhzh1PaUw5O1xXlVCAN5/sSHEIQr+KkjEfQxnzVVCw26tJX9znvgF+zD2O5d0iylU0cuM/9v5l+p3iyvSZU/ViUzDTTup9RlTPx3AMkVgwg24vHFd3DO+K6cKprZCTrZh/8fs33yALc2i+NyEocaY46xoflJJmeEy2sOD1bxsROzgt/7wqwcG7OqUcsHfLHjWt0u5rHrIH+VtlnemvForbpIzjhru6FhTGbDQAOHf1KuC6Kqn/44ouPWeri7Qz/49huySHEbkmJJgQP/YIHsJf7SJl1e0rtzoEOSaNsbjaskTxeuUMrDEHvIq4bYXJgSw==
ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=futurewei.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=futurewei.com; dkim=pass header.d=futurewei.com; arc=none
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=Futurewei.com; s=selector2; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=TfyaYqR44cP57Ul/TylqFkoQw6BxRoVQhKQyn5P2Cac=; b=P0+r/5pjMeIxN17lK+5SW6xC0TtE79tmY4SSr67iGnGA2Q9300AsI53SuYxrNVYHJYVi/1pkpMx9d6tjjMFZ+HXT8NTlI7RRvcJqOX+Qkain3V6VWyFi7xaUh7RmIHVI/qb7iRgA5N5OFsYBLLvwNMK3oJ4R+ubyEcHT8yrjOyM=
Received: from BYAPR13MB2279.namprd13.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:a02:bd::21) by BY5PR13MB3873.namprd13.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:a03:229::11) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.3305.10; Wed, 19 Aug 2020 23:05:04 +0000
Received: from BYAPR13MB2279.namprd13.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::ccc8:6aa6:a378:e210]) by BYAPR13MB2279.namprd13.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::ccc8:6aa6:a378:e210%7]) with mapi id 15.20.3305.018; Wed, 19 Aug 2020 23:05:04 +0000
From: Richard Li <richard.li@futurewei.com>
To: Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net>
CC: "Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee=40cisco.com@dmarc.ietf.org>, "lsr@ietf.org" <lsr@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [Lsr] LSR WG Adoption Poll for "IS-IS Topology-Transparent Zone" - draft-chen-isis-ttz-11.txt
Thread-Index: AQHWdWo2KYWgaPUbtk6IEMCEThi+P6k+YUmAgABgWQCAAEdbgIAA8hRQ
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2020 23:05:04 +0000
Message-ID: <BYAPR13MB22793800D719310DB59C9DB5875D0@BYAPR13MB2279.namprd13.prod.outlook.com>
References: <F30AFA48-367E-4B32-B6E1-390B07507410@cisco.com> <CAOj+MMG3knK4N3Sp5nWau9L59M2x1mW2um_pRE5SD9wg0D=MWQ@mail.gmail.com> <BYAPR13MB2279202E0880A79D04FF5A5D875D0@BYAPR13MB2279.namprd13.prod.outlook.com> <CAOj+MMEaVV9skD=BaSMh_xbgVgcsqMnzkyjwEjOuxj=85HKX1w@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAOj+MMEaVV9skD=BaSMh_xbgVgcsqMnzkyjwEjOuxj=85HKX1w@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
authentication-results: raszuk.net; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;raszuk.net; dmarc=none action=none header.from=futurewei.com;
x-originating-ip: [76.102.116.231]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: c3043b29-3310-4183-31fa-08d844944eea
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: BY5PR13MB3873:
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <BY5PR13MB3873799EECF38963104DC264875D0@BY5PR13MB3873.namprd13.prod.outlook.com>
x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:10000;
x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0;
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: JlJl/8Xhm2MOT69QvPb0VnkBIBonV7AzPmXTlJE4bWyXU/fD7+HThNYdb2XIlvJw6maXHZ5Rx6VdVZ5oyXymKC2WJER3oJBkMpaypT9GwMbmIOM4H/JymclgvgH9qIISuM63/FgQKkSw3eOZKPlLcIexZWPOPjwMlrxeZoIXFKC+4gElx6/H8P/mwJbdHjMFE/8oxB1x4D7RHK006T8lAXUOkaM9wL3j47ugiZQe2G33xRSmlrtLjg7Xa/JQ7V4wYiMJ4gBqOMsMkbme5aLRn2tOrhNeEXqCt6IYPI85/+wUhQVNR2uVj7lzrKD9Q7DE8NKjW2yBvFusRiFUdxE0LiHp7ABdicNpLiEGEcNEDIe3LBKOn4DXVrUku3tHVXacRBfqbp8EMAM8G3S31F1GYg==
x-forefront-antispam-report: CIP:255.255.255.255; CTRY:; LANG:en; SCL:1; SRV:; IPV:NLI; SFV:NSPM; H:BYAPR13MB2279.namprd13.prod.outlook.com; PTR:; CAT:NONE; SFS:(4636009)(396003)(136003)(346002)(366004)(39850400004)(376002)(7696005)(4326008)(186003)(8676002)(44832011)(9326002)(26005)(8936002)(316002)(2906002)(6506007)(64756008)(86362001)(53546011)(478600001)(966005)(66556008)(66446008)(66476007)(9686003)(71200400001)(66946007)(76116006)(52536014)(54906003)(5660300002)(55016002)(166002)(83380400001)(33656002)(6916009); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102;
x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata: 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
x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_BYAPR13MB22793800D719310DB59C9DB5875D0BYAPR13MB2279namp_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: Futurewei.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthAs: Internal
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthSource: BYAPR13MB2279.namprd13.prod.outlook.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: c3043b29-3310-4183-31fa-08d844944eea
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 19 Aug 2020 23:05:04.1795 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 0fee8ff2-a3b2-4018-9c75-3a1d5591fedc
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: IW9Lo1Fx7AZyAi/0WlXXTEPNoDAYsJblLtVkcC7M/hqz8zMrjm806fyajOgcXn1JHiSsK76dYYsLr6eTCrEjEw==
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BY5PR13MB3873
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lsr/xqW8YuDwD469S8DMw6bEAyDbheo>
Subject: Re: [Lsr] LSR WG Adoption Poll for "IS-IS Topology-Transparent Zone" - draft-chen-isis-ttz-11.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: Wed, 19 Aug 2020 23:05:13 -0000

Hi Robert,

-šŸ˜Š It was not meant to be a silver-bullet by saying ā€œ5Gā€. It happened that I have been discussing with folks on the design of the mobile backhaul/core/MEC.  Most of the designers and planners of the mobile backhaul/core/MEC do not work on routing technologies themselves, instead they choose and pick up some existing solutions provided by the IETF, and if they are not comfortable with the existing solutions, they use central controller/orchestrator and/or other management systems in a quasi-static config way.

Indeed, the WP you quoted does not indicate a need for zones. That said, you cannot deny that MEC is a set of inter-connected nodes, especially when being connected to the aggregation ring. Now the question is whether or not you allow such nodes to participate in routing. If you do, TTZ is a good candidate to reduce the internal topology and to turn MEC into a virtualized one; if you donā€™t, however, there is no space to discuss it.

Anyway, TTZ is aimed to be ā€œexperimentalā€.


Best regards,

Richard



From: Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net>
Sent: Wednesday, August 19, 2020 12:25 AM
To: Richard Li <richard.li@futurewei.com>
Cc: Acee Lindem (acee) <acee=40cisco.com@dmarc.ietf.org>; lsr@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Lsr] LSR WG Adoption Poll for "IS-IS Topology-Transparent Zone" - draft-chen-isis-ttz-11.txt

Hi Richard,

I understand that these days you say "5G" and you are done for any use case. :)

So I read this paper: https://www.etsi.org/images/files/ETSIWhitePapers/etsi_wp28_mec_in_5G_FINAL.pdf<https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.etsi.org%2Fimages%2Ffiles%2FETSIWhitePapers%2Fetsi_wp28_mec_in_5G_FINAL.pdf&data=02%7C01%7Crichard.li%40futurewei.com%7C1a28b96b430246e2eaa208d8441111f2%7C0fee8ff2a3b240189c753a1d5591fedc%7C1%7C1%7C637334187402121649&sdata=l7uwLpOhqEkY20ZsQgCv4N0Ce9JgVMG%2FskWQ1RdkjJ4%3D&reserved=0>

There is nothing there which would indicate a need for zone or even area separation to effectively deploy MEC. To me MEC data path can be constructed with a form of encapsulation in an arbitrary fashion. In fact I could say the more underlay walls you implement the harder it becomes to construct arbitrary MEC mesh.

At least for LSR WG if I were to justify any work here like TTZ I would explain why Multi access edge computing requires IGP/underlay type of separation and moreover why such separation can not be constructed with areas or levels.

Thx,
R.

On Wed, Aug 19, 2020 at 5:18 AM Richard Li <richard.li@futurewei.com<mailto:richard.li@futurewei.com>> wrote:
This is a use case:

The user plane of 5G is distributed, and MEC is deployed as part of the user plane to provide some functions at Access Aggregation Ring or Regional Aggregation Ring or at the border between Regional Aggregation Ring and the National Core. Using TTZ, MEC or part of it can be virtualized and topologically simplified. Note that the outside really doesnā€™t care about the internals of MEC.


Thanks,

Richard



From: Lsr <lsr-bounces@ietf.org<mailto:lsr-bounces@ietf.org>> On Behalf Of Robert Raszuk
Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2020 2:25 PM
To: Acee Lindem (acee) <acee=40cisco.com@dmarc.ietf.org<mailto:40cisco.com@dmarc.ietf.org>>
Cc: lsr@ietf.org<mailto:lsr@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Lsr] LSR WG Adoption Poll for "IS-IS Topology-Transparent Zone" - draft-chen-isis-ttz-11.txt

Dear WG,

The draft in question does not describe even a single practical use case.

While it describes the mechanics on how to construct the new model of the abstraction it fails to prove we need it.

Not everything which can be invented should be standardized or implemented therefore until the document extensively describes the real use cases with justification why use of areas may not be sufficient for such use cases I don't think LSR WG should adopt it.

Regards,
Robert.

On Tue, Aug 18, 2020 at 4:17 PM Acee Lindem (acee) <acee=40cisco.com@dmarc.ietf.org<mailto:40cisco.com@dmarc.ietf.org>> wrote:

Based on the discussions in the last meeting and on the mailing list regarding draft-chen-isis-ttz-11, the chairs feel that there are enough differences with draft-ietf-lsr-isis-area-proxy-03 and in the community to consider advancing it independently on the experimental track.

These differences include abstraction at arbitrary boundaries and IS-IS extensions for smooth transition to/from zone abstraction.

We are now starting an LSR WG adoption call for draft-chen-isis-ttz-11.txt. Please indicate your support or objection to adoption prior to Tuesday, September 2nd, 2020.

Thanks,
Acee and Chris

_______________________________________________
Lsr mailing list
Lsr@ietf.org<mailto:Lsr@ietf.org>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr<https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ietf.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Flsr&data=02%7C01%7Crichard.li%40futurewei.com%7C1a28b96b430246e2eaa208d8441111f2%7C0fee8ff2a3b240189c753a1d5591fedc%7C1%7C1%7C637334187402131636&sdata=0wIVp2ymiUSfvbsNWjswxRilK03oyF9wOVdQbX9i0rI%3D&reserved=0>