Re: [Lsvr] Kicking off the LSVR (Link State Vector Routing) charter discussion

"Jakob Heitz (jheitz)" <jheitz@cisco.com> Tue, 23 January 2018 02:16 UTC

Return-Path: <jheitz@cisco.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 BAE3A12D88C for <lsvr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 22 Jan 2018 18:16:11 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.53
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.53 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.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 N7cIIZ1iNrPy for <lsvr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 22 Jan 2018 18:16:09 -0800 (PST)
Received: from alln-iport-5.cisco.com (alln-iport-5.cisco.com [173.37.142.92]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3BBC812D88B for <lsvr@ietf.org>; Mon, 22 Jan 2018 18:16:09 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=5769; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1516673769; x=1517883369; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:references:in-reply-to: content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=ZRCJYygINkDg/IfDSwCBGLeFR4LJDWdoB5ruDM5tr0o=; b=D8KFiLOM0Kar4Cj7nMMk6/lcNn+wyEueWegfMtF8PWsh/jhykvgcU5jF DKSvdNEstt2ZsbJbGNUxd3fBFyoDYfA++Cwm6cJJ1K2QjdjLDb2g2C419 72YrumeeMvf/2GpTK1/v3OfOZ6Y4mR5DeP/dFhzjmsY1hWiIIynk71/TJ 8=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0AbAQCLmmZa/4QNJK1eGQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQcBAQEBAYNCZnQnB416jmaCAnyWQhWCAgoYC4UYAoRwVBgBAQEBAQEBAQFrHQuFIwEBAQQBAWwXBAIBCBEEAQEOGgcnCxQJCAEBBBMIiisQtnaKPwEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBARsFhEmCFYFXgWiCeDaDLwEBAoE8ARIBCIYTBZJ+kHwChxiEdYlDgiSSBIp1jCUCERkBgTsBHzlgcG8VPYIqhFd4iCeBJYEXAQEB
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.46,398,1511827200"; d="scan'208";a="59655167"
Received: from alln-core-10.cisco.com ([173.36.13.132]) by alln-iport-5.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 23 Jan 2018 02:16:07 +0000
Received: from XCH-RCD-015.cisco.com (xch-rcd-015.cisco.com [173.37.102.25]) by alln-core-10.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id w0N2G7MG010012 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL) for <lsvr@ietf.org>; Tue, 23 Jan 2018 02:16:07 GMT
Received: from xch-aln-014.cisco.com (173.36.7.24) by XCH-RCD-015.cisco.com (173.37.102.25) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1320.4; Mon, 22 Jan 2018 20:16:06 -0600
Received: from xch-aln-014.cisco.com ([173.36.7.24]) by XCH-ALN-014.cisco.com ([173.36.7.24]) with mapi id 15.00.1320.000; Mon, 22 Jan 2018 20:16:06 -0600
From: "Jakob Heitz (jheitz)" <jheitz@cisco.com>
To: "lsvr@ietf.org" <lsvr@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: Kicking off the LSVR (Link State Vector Routing) charter discussion
Thread-Index: AdOJ/UwcaD75A6yMRfGV3jqNSACMxQJ7NLIA
Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2018 02:16:06 +0000
Message-ID: <f590456ccee0498eadbb5fa4e4e048cc@XCH-ALN-014.cisco.com>
References: <AM5PR0701MB2836FFBB9A9F6C3D7C3C7122E0110@AM5PR0701MB2836.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com>
In-Reply-To: <AM5PR0701MB2836FFBB9A9F6C3D7C3C7122E0110@AM5PR0701MB2836.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [10.24.121.238]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lsvr/qoqv_rdojw11aU0FxQEDHDPR8tk>
Subject: Re: [Lsvr] Kicking off the LSVR (Link State Vector Routing) charter discussion
X-BeenThere: lsvr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: Tue, 23 Jan 2018 02:16:12 -0000

I'll participate.

Some considerations:
Should  LSVR introduce a grouping in the way that OSPF has areas and ISIS has levels?
If so, should the LSVR area border router terminate links from multiple areas (the IGP way) or use a special link to connect to adjoining areas (like an ASBR in BGP)?

Should LSVR routes be downloaded into RIB separately from traditional BGP routes?
If so, then they will compete for best path on an equal footing with other protocols when being redistributed into traditional BGP.
If not, then traditional BGP can import an LSVR path and an IGP path for the same prefix.

The sequence number TLV seems overly complex to me. I can appreciate that a speaker can receive multiple copies of a single link state from multiple neighbors. If they are different, then it must be a transient condition. In steady state, all copies should be identical, in contrast to traditional BGP routes. During the transient, what's wrong with choosing the most recently received copy?

As already mentioned, BGP-LS could run over a different session than traditional BGP. This would prevent bulk data in one session from delaying data in the other session. Also, it would allow one session to be reset without resetting the other one. Session resets occur at certain configuration changes (e.g. enabling the address family) and to recover from certain errors.

Thanks,
Jakob


-----Original Message-----
From: rtgwg [mailto:rtgwg-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Van De Velde, Gunter (Nokia - BE/Antwerp)
Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2018 2:51 AM
To: Lsvr@ietf.org
Cc: idr@ietf.org; dcrouting@ietf.org; Victor Kuarsingh <victor.kuarsingh@oracle.com>; Keyur Patel <keyur@arrcus.com>; Van De Velde, Gunter (Nokia - BE/Antwerp) <gunter.van_de_velde@nokia.com>; Shawn Zandi <szandi@linkedin.com>; rtgwg@ietf.org
Subject: Kicking off the LSVR (Link State Vector Routing) charter discussion

[Note: Target audience, and discussions should happen on lsvr@ietf.org, however "rtgwg", "idr" and "dcrouting" email lists have been added as the concepts originated in those working groups]

Since dcrouting@ietf100, a few people have been discussing a possible WG charter for LSVR (Link State Vector Routing).
Here is what we have so far.  Comments and improvements would be most welcome. 

WG page is to be setup soon.
Subscription to LSVR mailing list: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsvr

Feedback (comments, edits, corrections, etc)  on the draft LSVR charter is appreciated 


***** DRAFT CHARTER UPDATE - JAN 10 2018 *****
 
Charter: LSVR - Link State Vector Routing 
 
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.  The LSVR WG will utilize existing the IPv4/IPv6 transport, packet formats, and error handling from BGP-4 (RFC4271). Additionally, the BGP-LS NLRI encoding mechanisms defined in RFC7752 are utilized to facilitate Link-State Vector (LSV) routing information distribution. An LSV is intended to be specified as a data structure comprised of a link identification, link attributes, neighbor information, cost toward neighbors, and other attributes that are defined for control plane function and policy-based routing decisions.
 
The LSVR specification is initially focused on operation within a single datacenter (DC) with preliminary focus on specifying functionality within a single distribution domain.  Routing protocol functionality defined by LSVR would be typically routing within a datacenter's underlay routing plane. 
 
In order to achieve the noted objective, the working group will focus on standardization of protocol functionality, defining Link-State Vectors (LSVs), and defining standard path-vector route selection utilizing existing Dijkstra SPF based algorithm, BGP-4 protocol mechanics, and BGP-LS NRLI encoding.
 
For the purposes of the initial work within the LSVR WG, and until further specified by the WG, the following definitions apply to this charter.
 
- Link-State Vector - An LSV is intended to represent a data structure (data set) comprised of link identification, link attributes, neighbor information, cost towards neighbors, and other potential attributes that can be utilized to make routing decisions.
- LSVR Distribution Domain - Initially scoped as a set of participating LSVR nodes in a single administrative domain.
 
 
The LSVR WG is chartered to deliver the following documents:
 
- Publish Applicability Statement for the use of LSVR in the Datacenter - Target Status: Informational
- Publish specification document describing LSV with standard Dijkstra SPF route/path selection (calculation) utilizing existing BGP protocol baseline functionality and BGP-LS packet encoding formats - Target: Standards Track (Based on draft draft-keyupate-idr-bgp-spf)
- Publish 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 - - Target: Standards Track
- Publish YANG model specification for LSVR - - Target: Standards Track
 
LSVR Milestones:
 
- Applicability statement for LSVR in DCs: March 2019
- LSVR with standard Dijkstra path selection: March 2019
- LSV distribution using BGP transport: March 2019
- YANG specification for LSRV: July 2019

_______________________________________________
rtgwg mailing list
rtgwg@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg