IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Lsvr] [Idr] Why L2 liveness needed for BGP-SPF

Greg Mirsky <gregimirsky@gmail.com> Sun, 22 July 2018 14:44 UTC

Return-Path: <gregimirsky@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 6AFA0129C6B; Sun, 22 Jul 2018 07:44:01 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.998
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.998 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.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 9ErSZxY_t5e9; Sun, 22 Jul 2018 07:43:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lf1-x143.google.com (mail-lf1-x143.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::143]) (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 E543D126CC7; Sun, 22 Jul 2018 07:43:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-lf1-x143.google.com with SMTP id y200-v6so4685245lfd.7; Sun, 22 Jul 2018 07:43:58 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=QOU+nkHAS4Ho8LJdJh4m3W8vg0UbsO2mnokBVNLRA+Q=; b=d7jT9ccgOI9OsKjWvvx4xjuwPA+1RoUDSLYOrnCwRJ9vWrh3+l19F+bGBcYHvsgxLf d9IwPG/f0kjDm5muBIQHyxJGettpBPKzdWTEG7jK9yGnlyYUaOkcvH0wPgZwmo+TTpqo YOfqa5zNi3JwwSf7bpvxzerEp9nbiCegsYqcpqGxgvYaCMIQMX1h0cM3j3HQYCoHnnVp jDHlsNXUvUXM0hr9l2U3SXZYmSCu4EliU0QEUfBn8XkEf3E5IefA0Gk3xvqjWlVEWsYe 63CibUnUZLrl3/LXYlzper5YzIY6Y6RQ9VNNz8dmnOZKWNxWqkWlQdQvP94Kf2cVfF1z zphg==
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=QOU+nkHAS4Ho8LJdJh4m3W8vg0UbsO2mnokBVNLRA+Q=; b=noX9qlDLQV9Ps5dWxilg5WLMbW1gMwYPyZA+7JHiHjri9X0iuBfCIFrrxnEAYNod7X sgxXepeUc9y4b4GOiewjU7P8bClfEK37Nc1LixboGg9oQJ604XFQxvs4nim0WMVdUmWC 1sWEMOuEAPffSg30+zafW6eXubJjUWkNVftnITUmR3toSe4AnMR5VHIUoWox00VT6r0H tQH4uXY7e2OFVoaaFRfm2v7uj8hCkfBqrGw02R1kxJkqkDF6l6boJI2Y/E2R1l9ZGWJ6 WOZT+Zb9CnN4/A17Mtm/WWXyEPhjeBCFF64snxgfql5hIGH/f0PnCfRP6WrkgvdXwRMX vXXQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOUpUlFtLvjsapAio1Y8Wyt2KMZbGGvu5EL1eERS/4nAW44JdGeOb3Rf L5IK5r6lJp/goN/p7JE/+ztN/RhyVE4cXhqGY/s=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AAOMgpeQBuUhIFi1mfZc/qymzugf8EB5f3IVT46RySKPtcFDbqTU0n08NRTleerLo6+JNModa7Zf0LV1W3IXoJgstf0=
X-Received: by 2002:a19:ea5c:: with SMTP id i89-v6mr5251538lfh.19.1532270637086; Sun, 22 Jul 2018 07:43:57 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <fb35cb79-881d-4ca2-8a0b-738886d28b8f.xiaohu.xxh@alibaba-inc.com> <bd5ff63067a8446ca8e2267c891933ad@XCH-ALN-014.cisco.com> <m2muujec6q.wl-randy@psg.com> <CAJc3aaNCM0XCDEVmkKxxvKxXdMdKsB+YDWLM3qGo83x271D-ow@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAJc3aaNCM0XCDEVmkKxxvKxXdMdKsB+YDWLM3qGo83x271D-ow@mail.gmail.com>
From: Greg Mirsky <gregimirsky@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2018 09:43:44 -0500
Message-ID: <CA+RyBmXvE2gJVuXBB31jj8+CDRB8zBq+97fhhgzpJbNAVDbmZg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Victor Kuarsingh <victor@jvknet.com>
Cc: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>, idr@ietf.org, "Jakob Heitz (jheitz)" <jheitz@cisco.com>, "Lsvr@ietf.org" <Lsvr@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000005fdaa0571978f39"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lsvr/ccauKhd3ehGh4PdDy1U662Mvurs>
Subject: Re: [Lsvr] [Idr] Why L2 liveness needed for BGP-SPF
X-BeenThere: lsvr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27
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: Sun, 22 Jul 2018 14:44:02 -0000

Dear All,
hope an easy question you'll help me with. Liveness as path continuity
check or as connectivity verification.

Regards,
Greg

On Sun, Jul 22, 2018, 09:09 Victor Kuarsingh <victor@jvknet.com> wrote:

>
>
> On Sun, Jul 22, 2018 at 7:35 AM Randy Bush <randy@psg.com> wrote:
>
>> > L2 can be Ethernet, Token Ring, ATM, Frame Relay, PPP, SLIP, MTP2 and
>> > others that may be invented in the future.
>>
>> it could be tin cans and a string.  but out here in the internet, it's
>> ethernet.  there are tiny vestiges of sonet, which you seem to have
>> forgotten; but no one is gonna run bgp-spf over them.  it is a mono-
>> culture; ethernet won.
>
>
>>
> At this point, the current applicability for BGP-SPF is Data Center / CLOS
> networks as described in the applicability document (
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-keyupate-lsvr-applicability-02)
>
> There is some texts around future use of this protocol (SP backbone), but
> again not the focus of our current work.
>
> That said, as noted by Randy, these topologies are currently Ethernet (at
> least in the cases we are aware of).
>
> Regards,
>
> Victor K
>
>
>
>
>> randy
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Idr mailing list
>> Idr@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Lsvr mailing list
> Lsvr@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsvr
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email