Re: [Lsvr] Final draft LSVR re-charter text - final disagreements before end-of-business day 30 Jan 2024

Gyan Mishra <hayabusagsm@gmail.com> Fri, 26 January 2024 05:56 UTC

Return-Path: <hayabusagsm@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: lsvr@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: lsvr@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6DDE4C14F710 for <lsvr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 25 Jan 2024 21:56:24 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.093
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.093 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, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_REMOTE_IMAGE=0.01, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id mg-azKWwomqU for <lsvr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 25 Jan 2024 21:56:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pj1-x1033.google.com (mail-pj1-x1033.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::1033]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 39428C14F711 for <lsvr@ietf.org>; Thu, 25 Jan 2024 21:56:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-pj1-x1033.google.com with SMTP id 98e67ed59e1d1-2906bd9f2ebso25323a91.0 for <lsvr@ietf.org>; Thu, 25 Jan 2024 21:56:20 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1706248579; x=1706853379; darn=ietf.org; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=Buv+wWnBR2/Ix1WMuEGWfq1DM2XFYFW9vXAA67zxQgU=; b=RXHWUgTQwlu/z3S943aF+ml6IrYJSRPYV1916nAZuY9kuXTVD/fe43gPpqs0IvuqFT W7sB4A4bwAyfVkrtO+OtC1wySL592gH87RVqBjlkrt/v4ZxZOdiDQ6IL5paysFkDumRy cGeZExVEzCco7teiBIdvbKwyeTmf6sQ9qlwqlfwLQU+B5SlmMblFFUbKkX08xu9PnYaK hfcSDYUuMKVibH2RFCM2rsyi2VpLUP15CNPBKUlaep+aZwC58jOAp6T6bY8erZ3Sj7Gk NDUuxtX5/f0GZzhdELRbKsf/QyoaQy6NAFGzeFR2CMTwLGOdla37z8yRxZc/C8eZg2F4 YQkg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1706248579; x=1706853379; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=Buv+wWnBR2/Ix1WMuEGWfq1DM2XFYFW9vXAA67zxQgU=; b=c0xMatdcm+G5TdY0+POORar2bVx5BTEQiRHoKh4yJ8FDjDoeDDf2va0bKMU5NOEpdT ZmCGSpymjvjBHvCEizeCClZ1lQAxSkRdACoFy9UMOuOIyIk8H9KjP2w8ISWJXYKd5/7+ ipXikqEYsIDAMtA43nhltERGVAYkD753oXrGobTy8qP2O33wKuIA81s5A3E93m5CXsOp aG6mQulXVKAxmVpC7ZNK3cgSaPJFYL9VKQQiiZBvsLqVXIVeB66MXAM6EFyl7ehVmIsL BzLh2048bGler098IG8xEeL8ODmcaAA3/x4ar0WlR5Jpy478ks5//DV5d/WZQMyOnLJC M8XQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YxyjaMVAhf7OG35ZuuBuSXzhP2AXzw5f9l5o8lYS14lYgRJCr3I FHC4u4je64a/MSgUHvS9Y/ya8IQAJkECrsxcfhgi+WhmfKPfXseWoEnChEyyLhzRBGqXPSgOACt gV5/6laBB2Y0y14DNL7wtBkGUuV8=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IECM9iyR4Eu0d0jHsj4+moPJnMMcEOj5Sph8NQxwSAZW7trzC1iybu80k6afv1q6giBVco/nPSUhRmdu4Bw1jU=
X-Received: by 2002:a17:90b:695:b0:28e:8c05:979 with SMTP id m21-20020a17090b069500b0028e8c050979mr639064pjz.45.1706248579375; Thu, 25 Jan 2024 21:56:19 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <AS1PR07MB85897433B55A710C1ECB62B6E07B2@AS1PR07MB8589.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com>
In-Reply-To: <AS1PR07MB85897433B55A710C1ECB62B6E07B2@AS1PR07MB8589.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com>
From: Gyan Mishra <hayabusagsm@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2024 00:56:08 -0500
Message-ID: <CABNhwV0nNF4tetbgD92=DtxSt-nT-uSROAxUpecnCtRu-O1fag@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Dongjie (Jimmy)" <jie.dong@huawei.com>, "Gunter van de Velde (Nokia)" <gunter.van_de_velde=40nokia.com@dmarc.ietf.org>, Ketan Talaulikar <ketant.ietf@gmail.com>
Cc: "lsvr@ietf.org" <lsvr@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000078e8dd060fd2f48d"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lsvr/bA_nb3DKbnTWXQGFqC8ovMqxKe4>
Subject: Re: [Lsvr] Final draft LSVR re-charter text - final disagreements before end-of-business day 30 Jan 2024
X-BeenThere: lsvr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: Link State Vector Routing <lsvr.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/lsvr>, <mailto:lsvr-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/lsvr/>
List-Post: <mailto:lsvr@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:lsvr-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsvr>, <mailto:lsvr-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2024 05:56:24 -0000

I reviewed the proposed Charter and it looks good.

Thank you


<http://www.verizon.com/>

*Gyan Mishra*

*Network Solutions A**rchitect *

*Email gyan.s.mishra@verizon.com <gyan.s.mishra@verizon.com>*



*M 301 502-1347*



On Wed, Jan 24, 2024 at 11:40 AM Gunter van de Velde (Nokia)
<gunter.van_de_velde=40nokia.com@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:

> Hi LSVR WG,
>
> This note is provide an update on the eminent LSVR re-chartering. Together
> with our AD it was agreed to keep the changes minimal and focus upon
> formally including the Layer-3 Discovery and Liveness deliverable and a
> revised Milestone agenda, without expanding any other LSVR scope. In
> addition we also added more explicit reference to bgp-spf. Please find
> below the finally proposed revised LSVR charter. If no strong opposition,
> before End-of-Business day 30 January we’ll move forward and formally
> propose the below charter to our AD.
>
>  Be well and kind Regards,
>
> Gunter & Ketan
>
> =========== Final draft LSVR Charter ===========
>
> Data Centers have been steadily growing to commonly host tens of thousands
> of end points, or more, in a single network. Because of their topologies
> (traditional and emerging), traffic patterns, need for fast restoration,
> and for low human intervention, data center networks have a unique set of
> requirements that is resulting in the design of routing solutions specific
> to them.
>
> The Link-State Vector Routing (LSVR) Working Group is chartered to develop
> and document a hybrid routing protocol utilizing a combination of
> link-state and path-vector routing mechanisms along with mechanisms for
> the discovery and liveness monitoring of links to neighboring routers.
> The LSVR WG will utilize existing IPv4/IPv6 transport, packet formats and
> error handling of BGP-4 consistent with BGP-LS NLRI encoding mechanisms (
> RFC9552 <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc7752/>) to facilitate
> Link-State Vector (LSV) routing information distribution. An LSV is
> intended to be specified as a data structure comprised of link attributes,
> neighbor information, and other potential attributes that can be utilized
> to make routing decisions.
>
> The LSVR specification is initially focused on operation within a single
> datacenter (DC) as a single distribution domain, which is defined as a set
> of participating nodes in a single administrative domain. Routing protocol
> functionality defined by LSVR, called BGP-SPF, would be typically routing
> within a datacenter’s underlay routing plane. The work will include
> coexistence considerations with BGP IPv4/IPv6 unicast address families
> installing and advertising routes into the same RIB. The WG may consider
> protocol extensions for deployments beyond a single domain DC focus after
> completion of the base protocol specification.
>
> The WG will consider the effects (if any) of deploying the BGP-SPF
> protocol while concurrently using the same transport session as other
> existing BGP address families. These considerations will be documented as
> part of the main protocol specification. A mechanism to be able to
> independently deploy BGP-SPF from other address families may be defined (as
> needed).
>
> The BGP-SPF protocol is intended as a self-standing routing protocol even
> if using existing BGP transport mechanisms and encodings, or if sharing the
> same transport session with other existing BGP address families. Similar as
> existing routing protocols, the BGP-SPF protocol will not internally
> combine the route selection mechanisms or share routing information, except
> through common external interaction methods in the RIB.
>
> In order to achieve the noted objective, the working group will focus on
> standardization of BGP-SPF protocol functionality, defining Link-State
> Vectors (LSVs) and defining standard path-vector route selection utilizing
> the Dijkstra SPF based algorithm, BGP-4 protocol mechanics and BGP-LS NRLI
> encoding.
>
> The WG will also develop protocol mechanisms for the Layer-3 discovery of
> neighboring routers running BGP-SPF for various BGP peering models thereby
> providing the ability to discover the properties of adjacent LSVR routers
> for advertisement as LSVs. Such mechanisms must support the discovery of
> the link and node attributes such as AS numbers, IP addresses,
> encapsulation support, and other information as may be necessary for the
> LSVR protocol and network operations. The mechanism should also support the
> monitoring of reachability of neighboring routers over links as well as
> leverage the use of existing mechanisms such as BFD for faster liveness
> monitoring.
>
> The working group will provide specifications to manage routing
> information from other unicast routing protocols or BGP address families to
> common prefixes.
>
> The LSVR WG is chartered to deliver the following documents:
>
>    - Specification document describing LSV with standard Dijkstra SPF
>    route/path selection (calculation) utilizing existing BGP protocol baseline
>    functionality and BGP-LS packet encoding formats
>    - Specification documenting protocol extensions required to
>    efficiently reuse BGP to distribute LSVs within an IPv4/IPv6 DC with scope
>    to include privacy and security considerations
>       - The impact of these extensions to the security properties of BGP
>       will be studied and documented
>       - New attack vectors will be explored and documented
>       - Mitigations to any new attack vectors identified will be
>       discussed and documented
>    - Specification documenting a Layer-3 discovery and liveness
>    monitoring protocol for supporting BGP-SPF operations
>       - A base protocol documenting discovery and liveness for
>       neighboring Layer-3 BGP-SPF routers
>       - Protocol extensions for discovery and exchange of information
>       required by an upper-layer or client protocol such as BGP-SPF
>       - Security, authentication, and confidentiality aspects of the
>       protocol and the information exchanged
>       - Configuration and management of the protocol extensions
>    - Applicability Statement for the use of LSVR in the Datacenter
>    - YANG model specification for LSVR management
>
> The WG will closely collaborate with the IDR WG. Any modifications or
> extension to BGP that will not be specifically constrained to be used by
> LSVR must be carried out in the IDR WG, but may be done in this WG after
> agreement with all the relevant chairs and the responsible Area Directors.
>
>
>
> Milestones:
>
> Date
> Milestone
> Associated documents
>
> Mar 2024            LSV distribution using BGP transport
>
> Mar 2024            LSVR with standard Dijkstra path selection
>
> Jul 2024               Applicability statement for LSVR in DCs
>
> Jul 2024               Layer-3 Discovery and Liveness Protocol
> Specification
>
> Dec 2024             YANG specification for LSVR
>
> Dec 2024             YANG specification for Layer-3 discovery and liveness
> monitoring protocol
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Lsvr mailing list
> Lsvr@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsvr
>