Re: [mpls] Poll 2: New SPL vs re-purposed ELI for carrying Network Action Indicators

bruno.decraene@orange.com Fri, 17 June 2022 16:54 UTC

Return-Path: <bruno.decraene@orange.com>
X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D02E6C14CF03; Fri, 17 Jun 2022 09:54:09 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.106
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.106 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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=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=orange.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 BlMDrxzocXDl; Fri, 17 Jun 2022 09:54:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from relais-inet.orange.com (relais-inet.orange.com [80.12.66.41]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 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 70922C157B34; Fri, 17 Jun 2022 09:54:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from opfedar04.francetelecom.fr (unknown [xx.xx.xx.6]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by opfedar22.francetelecom.fr (ESMTP service) with ESMTPS id 4LPlVz33H1z303d; Fri, 17 Jun 2022 18:54:03 +0200 (CEST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=orange.com; s=ORANGE001; t=1655484843; bh=Y3dqQPKecSv1dPC5Tb34ya66ehhJhcYnlr8qVR0ZbLg=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version; b=DI9TlEWVQV0MXjm3WOk6h/C/GjxomBf4Os6YucNFY8zCSSRlomAfEvPPlc+tj6ogR o5aU0Yc7pmbVWU9sGE9xdvlxpONQDPKfp/WbkrvhgcElZJAMdK1FFFsQndi2sNya5O Pi2p8mEXw8F14ESppY4lbEEQKAEDpnmAdLhLPubskp7rZpPEilg4rqGuXPQoc1ykLc V6NKRmuxgAnDwiI+91PMZg3fIJwlObELEVQF9gUKg6q+NUz2XtdbTImAxXQVfn+Uj5 epDSjlqEcsNeokNidW/HK5jOwTne8nBfkwhOArx0fYhIfCB3ALDTRgiqff1M7G9QeP EOtiKr2a7Kvsw==
From: bruno.decraene@orange.com
To: Greg Mirsky <gregimirsky@gmail.com>
CC: Tony Li <tony.li@tony.li>, "Zafar Ali (zali)" <zali@cisco.com>, "mpls@ietf.org" <mpls@ietf.org>, "pals-chairs@ietf.org" <pals-chairs@ietf.org>, "mpls-chairs@ietf.org" <mpls-chairs@ietf.org>, DetNet Chairs <detnet-chairs@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [mpls] Poll 2: New SPL vs re-purposed ELI for carrying Network Action Indicators
Thread-Index: AQHYgmFUbByd4Y31YEOzBMMeaOtS0a1Tzxug
Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2022 16:54:02 +0000
Message-ID: <25852_1655484843_62ACB1AB_25852_28_1_7229e1a9bb9a4920b5e6f0c5fc3e445c@orange.com>
References: <6e5c6fa9-539f-80c3-7c92-5b97ad67560c@pi.nu> <447_1654704927_62A0CB1F_447_309_1_1f59cd955500419a988e2218a3f2246e@orange.com> <9F79E3D5-7ACE-4D15-83D7-8BF3FF60F671@gmail.com> <C9D1FD4A-2549-49C0-8904-84E3F559E85C@cisco.com> <988F5CAF-1A12-4209-92B5-B9AE75477B5C@tony.li> <4D3BA352-6E89-489D-A849-2B72A5D0DC1F@cisco.com> <1F0A4345-C258-4BE6-92D4-C846C0B77048@tony.li> <7111_1655456559_62AC432F_7111_124_1_196adfdc44ba4f44bd7e59deb7e6410a@orange.com> <CA+RyBmWVnt0V=MD=P-ieGB0iKCibF=ctn-rCVFEVyveXwOMAHA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CA+RyBmWVnt0V=MD=P-ieGB0iKCibF=ctn-rCVFEVyveXwOMAHA@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: fr-FR, en-US
Content-Language: fr-FR
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
msip_labels: MSIP_Label_f47c794b-e3ab-43f0-9e0f-29fc3e503192_Enabled=true; MSIP_Label_f47c794b-e3ab-43f0-9e0f-29fc3e503192_SetDate=2022-06-17T16:54:01Z; MSIP_Label_f47c794b-e3ab-43f0-9e0f-29fc3e503192_Method=Standard; MSIP_Label_f47c794b-e3ab-43f0-9e0f-29fc3e503192_Name=Orange_restricted_external.2; MSIP_Label_f47c794b-e3ab-43f0-9e0f-29fc3e503192_SiteId=90c7a20a-f34b-40bf-bc48-b9253b6f5d20; MSIP_Label_f47c794b-e3ab-43f0-9e0f-29fc3e503192_ActionId=25843e8f-b41b-4251-83ca-100ec3823aa3; MSIP_Label_f47c794b-e3ab-43f0-9e0f-29fc3e503192_ContentBits=2
x-originating-ip: [10.115.27.53]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_7229e1a9bb9a4920b5e6f0c5fc3e445corangecom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mpls/4Zjy6lNYB_uMCVaYxfUdXILwij8>
Subject: Re: [mpls] Poll 2: New SPL vs re-purposed ELI for carrying Network Action Indicators
X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG <mpls.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/mpls>, <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/mpls/>
List-Post: <mailto:mpls@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls>, <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2022 16:54:09 -0000

Hi Greg,

Please see inline [Bruno]

From: Greg Mirsky <gregimirsky@gmail.com>
Sent: Friday, June 17, 2022 5:46 PM
To: DECRAENE Bruno INNOV/NET <bruno.decraene@orange.com>
Cc: Tony Li <tony.li@tony.li>; Zafar Ali (zali) <zali@cisco.com>; mpls@ietf.org; pals-chairs@ietf.org; mpls-chairs@ietf.org; DetNet Chairs <detnet-chairs@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [mpls] Poll 2: New SPL vs re-purposed ELI for carrying Network Action Indicators

Hi Bruno,
you've said that your proposal allows for up to 8 MNA indicators. How do you envision the encoding of data associated with these indicators?

[Bruno] Two paths :
- post stack data.
- in-stack data located after the ELI, EL e.g. as proposed in draft-jags-mpls-ext-hdr (but different encoding would also work)

At this point, post-stack data is probably my preference as the use of the label stack is already specified/used hence brings constraints.

Regards,
--Bruno



Re-use the EL space? Or these can be only no-data MNAIs?

Regards,
Greg

On Fri, Jun 17, 2022 at 2:03 AM <bruno.decraene@orange.com<mailto:bruno.decraene@orange.com>> wrote:
Tony,



Orange Restricted


Orange Restricted
From: Tony Li <tony1athome@gmail.com<mailto:tony1athome@gmail.com>> On Behalf Of Tony Li
Sent: Friday, June 17, 2022 5:26 AM
To: Zafar Ali (zali) <zali@cisco.com<mailto:zali@cisco.com>>
Cc: Kireeti Kompella <kireeti.ietf@gmail.com<mailto:kireeti.ietf@gmail.com>>; DECRAENE Bruno INNOV/NET <bruno.decraene@orange.com<mailto:bruno.decraene@orange.com>>; mpls@ietf.org<mailto:mpls@ietf.org>; pals-chairs@ietf.org<mailto:pals-chairs@ietf.org>; mpls-chairs@ietf.org<mailto:mpls-chairs@ietf.org>; DetNet Chairs <detnet-chairs@ietf.org<mailto:detnet-chairs@ietf.org>>
Subject: Re: [mpls] Poll 2: New SPL vs re-purposed ELI for carrying Network Action Indicators


Zafar,

Again, my problem with Bruno's draft is that the limited space found in the ELI/EL LSE's is clearly insufficient to begin to capture the use cases that we already can foresee for MNA, much less provide any room for growth.  It doesn't scale. We need more bits.

[Bruno] Thank you for providing a technical argument.
draft-decraene-mpls-slid-encoded-entropy-label-id provides 8 indicators while being backward compatible with existing egress/signaling.
If more are required, solution can be extended to provide more indicators (and data) but at the cost of requiring new dataplane feature on the LSR egress (and new signaling). Just like the proposals using a new SPL.
The net benefit is that in the short/medium term more devices/deployments can start using those 8 indicators, while waiting for the new generation to support the new proposal.

Regards,
--Bruno




For that reason alone, Bruno's draft is not a tenable solution to MNA and discussing it further is pointless.

Tony


On Jun 16, 2022, at 7:32 PM, Zafar Ali (zali) <zali@cisco.com<mailto:zali@cisco.com>> wrote:

Tony, Kireeti,

So "I do not want to modify my current implementation" is the argument to stop people interested in Bruno's draft from using it?
If such HW can/ need be modified to implement the new complex encoding scheme you proposed, why it cannot implement simple encoding in Bruno's draft?

Please also look at  https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-decraene-mpls-slid-encoded-entropy-label-id-04#section-4.4 and https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-decraene-mpls-slid-encoded-entropy-label-id-04#section-4.5

Thanks

Regards ... Zafar


From: Tony Li <tony1athome@gmail.com<mailto:tony1athome@gmail.com>> on behalf of Tony Li <tony.li@tony.li<mailto:tony.li@tony.li>>
Date: Thursday, June 16, 2022 at 3:10 PM
To: "Zafar Ali (zali)" <zali@cisco.com<mailto:zali@cisco.com>>
Cc: Kireeti Kompella <kireeti.ietf@gmail.com<mailto:kireeti.ietf@gmail.com>>, "bruno.decraene@orange.com<mailto:bruno.decraene@orange.com>" <bruno.decraene@orange.com<mailto:bruno.decraene@orange.com>>, "mpls@ietf.org<mailto:mpls@ietf.org>" <mpls@ietf.org<mailto:mpls@ietf.org>>, "pals-chairs@ietf.org<mailto:pals-chairs@ietf.org>" <pals-chairs@ietf.org<mailto:pals-chairs@ietf.org>>, "mpls-chairs@ietf.org<mailto:mpls-chairs@ietf.org>" <mpls-chairs@ietf.org<mailto:mpls-chairs@ietf.org>>, DetNet Chairs <detnet-chairs@ietf.org<mailto:detnet-chairs@ietf.org>>
Subject: Re: [mpls] Poll 2: New SPL vs re-purposed ELI for carrying Network Action Indicators





The draft has been implemented for the exact (SLID) use-case on hardware platforms based on Broadcom Jericho2 family of ASIC
Please take a look at https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-decraene-mpls-slid-encoded-entropy-label-id-04#section-7
No such issue was noted


And Jericho2 is the only thing that counts in the entire world?

T


_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________



Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc

pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler

a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,

Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci.



This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law;

they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.

If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments.

As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified.

Thank you.
_______________________________________________
mpls mailing list
mpls@ietf.org<mailto:mpls@ietf.org>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc
pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler
a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,
Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci.

This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law;
they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.
If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments.
As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified.
Thank you.