Re: [mpls] Review and Consensus call on text from the MPLS Open DT on in-stack indicators

Toerless Eckert <tte@cs.fau.de> Fri, 06 August 2021 23:33 UTC

Return-Path: <eckert@i4.informatik.uni-erlangen.de>
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 B8C4E3A1E20; Fri, 6 Aug 2021 16:33:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.898
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 Fit3a8hOSWiY; Fri, 6 Aug 2021 16:33:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from faui40.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (faui40.informatik.uni-erlangen.de [131.188.34.40]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8A54B3A1E1E; Fri, 6 Aug 2021 16:33:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de [131.188.34.52]) by faui40.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id E6D38548049; Sat, 7 Aug 2021 01:33:11 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (Postfix, from userid 10463) id DE5D74400EF; Sat, 7 Aug 2021 01:33:11 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Sat, 7 Aug 2021 01:33:11 +0200
From: Toerless Eckert <tte@cs.fau.de>
To: gregory.mirsky@ztetx.com
Cc: loa@pi.nu, mpls@ietf.org, pals-chairs@ietf.org, mpls-chairs@ietf.org, detnet-chairs@ietf.org
Message-ID: <20210806233311.GD50813@faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de>
References: <1cfaeafc-7d2c-7e04-c6e2-767feb6e8364@pi.nu> <202108070622129564929@zte.com.cn>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <202108070622129564929@zte.com.cn>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mpls/AeFByyykSxxBtoqOfjlVn9rViZc>
Subject: Re: [mpls] Review and Consensus call on text from the MPLS Open DT on in-stack indicators
X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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, 06 Aug 2021 23:33:26 -0000

Not rejecting or applauding this proposal yet,
but would like to see a motivation/justification.

Cheers
    Toerless

On Sat, Aug 07, 2021 at 06:22:12AM +0800, gregory.mirsky@ztetx.com wrote:
> Hi Loa,
> 
> many thanks to all who contributed to the text. I have a suggestion and a comment to the following sentence:
> 
> 
> GAL/GACH will only be an OAM or instrumentation tool and will not be used to carry meta-data with user-traffic.
> 
> As I understand how GAL/G-ACh (and ACH in PWs) have been used, I think that by OAM, we mean active OAM (per RFC 7799 classification of OAM measurement methods). I believe that it would be helpful to explicitly refer here to the active OAM and differentiate from, for example, IAOM, which is classified as a hybrid OAM method.
> 
> And to my comment. In PWs, using GAL is optional in PWs, MPLS-TP, and non-MPLS-TP (RFC 6423), and ACH can be used without GAL. It has been understood that all G-ACh channel types are also applicable to PW ACH (and vice versa). Let us be mindful of that when discussing the future use of GAL/G-ACh.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Regards,
> 
> 
> Greg Mirsky
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sr. Standardization Expert
> 预研标准部/有线研究院/有线产品经营部 Standard Preresearch Dept./Wireline Product R&D Institute/Wireline Product Operation Division
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> E: gregory.mirsky@ztetx.com 
> www.zte.com.cn
> 
> 
> 
> Original Mail
> 
> 
> 
> Sender: LoaAndersson
> To: mpls@ietf.org;
> CC: pals-chairs@ietf.org;mpls-chairs@ietf.org;DetNet Chairs;
> Date: 2021/08/05 07:52
> Subject: [mpls] Review and Consensus call on text from the MPLS Open DT on in-stack indicators
> 
> 
> Working Group, MPLS Open DT,
>  
> The week before IETF 111 the Open DT met and agreed upon a text on  
> "indicators". The terminology we use is that somewhere in the label  
> stack there is an indicator tell the processing node that a specific  
> packet needs a certain set of Forwarding Actions, for example some iOAM  
> action might be required. To support the forwarding action there is  
> often ancillary data with the packet.
>  
> The text the DT produced is about the indicators, a companion text on  
> ancillary data will follow.
>  
> The text was discussed in the Joint meeting and reported to the MPLS  
> working group at IETF 111. The Open DT itself can only propose, the text  
> is therefore now sent out to the working group for review and consensus  
> call.
>  
> The proposed text is found at:
> https://trac.ietf.org/trac/mpls/wiki/2021-07-22-agenda
>  
> Please review the proposed text and comment on the MPLS wg mailing list  
> (mpls@ietf.org).
>  
> We plan to keep the consensus call open until 2021-08-20.
>  
> /Loa
> Open DT Co-ordinator / MPLS wg co-chair
>  
>  
> --  
>  
> Loa Andersson                        email: loa@pi.nu
> Senior MPLS Expert                          loa.pi.nu@gmail.com
> Bronze Dragon Consulting             phone: +46 739 81 21 64
>  
> _______________________________________________
> mpls mailing list
> mpls@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls




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


-- 
---
tte@cs.fau.de