Re: [mpls] New version: draft-ietf-mpls-sfc-03.txt
Loa Andersson <loa@pi.nu> Wed, 17 October 2018 13:34 UTC
Return-Path: <loa@pi.nu>
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 519A4130DC8 for <mpls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 17 Oct 2018 06:34:58 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, 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 iGY7ZcygladL for <mpls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 17 Oct 2018 06:34:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pipi.pi.nu (pipi.pi.nu [83.168.239.141]) (using TLSv1.1 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B77751277C8 for <mpls@ietf.org>; Wed, 17 Oct 2018 06:34:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.20] (unknown [119.94.168.220]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: loa@pi.nu) by pipi.pi.nu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BA8F8180121E; Wed, 17 Oct 2018 15:34:48 +0200 (CEST)
To: adrian@olddog.co.uk, mpls@ietf.org
References: <017501d4630f$15fa9530$41efbf90$@olddog.co.uk> <19b32d43-6404-918a-96ed-a2aabd9d0f5e@pi.nu> <069301d4660b$e99e3500$bcda9f00$@olddog.co.uk>
From: Loa Andersson <loa@pi.nu>
Message-ID: <1afa4cf8-118f-1fd9-d01f-a55c6835e787@pi.nu>
Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2018 21:34:36 +0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.9.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <069301d4660b$e99e3500$bcda9f00$@olddog.co.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mpls/AiW8AGyecQBaFJ4jiKwPuf0ARow>
Subject: Re: [mpls] New version: draft-ietf-mpls-sfc-03.txt
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: Wed, 17 Oct 2018 13:34:58 -0000
Adrian, authors, Yes I'd say you are OK to start the wglc process. Normally that involves: - sheperd review (updates as necessary) - IPR poll - wglc (updates as mecessary) I normally start the IPR poll as soon as I'm convinced that we will do the wglc on the current version (maybe +1) /Loa On 2018-10-17 19:24, Adrian Farrel wrote: > Thanks Loa, > > Not hearing any raised voices on this, we probably leave the text as it is (with an extended special purpose label). > > What's next, chairs? Are we good for WG last call? > > Thanks, > Adrian > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Loa Andersson [mailto:loa@pi.nu] >> Sent: 14 October 2018 05:29 >> To: adrian@olddog.co.uk; mpls@ietf.org >> Subject: Re: [mpls] New version: draft-ietf-mpls-sfc-03.txt >> >> Adrian, Authors, working group, >> >> Speaking as someone that has to manage the rather scarce pool of >> "regular" special purpose labels. >> >> If there is no compelling reason to use the "regular" special purpose >> labels, I'd say that we stay with the extended special purpose label. >> >> /Loa >> >> On 2018-10-14 00:09, Adrian Farrel wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> The update here is just to fix an email address and a reference. >>> >>> >From my point of view this work is done with just one open question for the >>> WG... >>> >>> Currently we use an extended special purpose label to identify that SFC labels >>> follow. The question is: is this work sufficiently mainstream to use a regular >>> special purpose label? >>> >>> Thoughts? >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Adrian >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: I-D-Announce [mailto:i-d-announce-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of >>>> internet-drafts@ietf.org >>>> Sent: 13 October 2018 17:05 >>>> To: i-d-announce@ietf.org >>>> Cc: mpls@ietf.org >>>> Subject: I-D Action: draft-ietf-mpls-sfc-03.txt >>>> >>>> >>>> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts >>> directories. >>>> This draft is a work item of the Multiprotocol Label Switching WG of the IETF. >>>> >>>> Title : An MPLS-Based Forwarding Plane for Service Function >>> Chaining >>>> Authors : Adrian Farrel >>>> Stewart Bryant >>>> John Drake >>>> Filename : draft-ietf-mpls-sfc-03.txt >>>> Pages : 28 >>>> Date : 2018-10-13 >>>> >>>> Abstract: >>>> Service Function Chaining (SFC) is the process of directing packets >>>> through a network so that they can be acted on by an ordered set of >>>> abstract service functions before being delivered to the intended >>>> destination. An architecture for SFC is defined in RFC7665. >>>> >>>> The Network Service Header (NSH) can be inserted into packets to >>>> steer them along a specific path to realize a Service Function Chain. >>>> >>>> Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) is a widely deployed forwarding >>>> technology that uses labels placed in a packet in a label stack to >>>> identify the forwarding actions to be taken at each hop through a >>>> network. Actions may include swapping or popping the labels as well, >>>> as using the labels to determine the next hop for forwarding the >>>> packet. Labels may also be used to establish the context under which >>>> the packet is forwarded. >>>> >>>> This document describes how Service Function Chaining can be achieved >>>> in an MPLS network by means of a logical representation of the NSH in >>>> an MPLS label stack. It does not deprecate or replace the NSH, but >>>> acknowledges that there may be a need for an interim deployment of >>>> SFC functionality in brownfield networks. >>>> >>>> >>>> The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: >>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-mpls-sfc/ >>>> >>>> There are also htmlized versions available at: >>>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-mpls-sfc-03 >>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-mpls-sfc-03 >>>> >>>> A diff from the previous version is available at: >>>> https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-mpls-sfc-03 >>>> >>>> >>>> Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission >>>> until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. >>>> >>>> Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: >>>> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> I-D-Announce mailing list >>>> I-D-Announce@ietf.org >>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce >>>> Internet-Draft directories: http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html >>>> or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> mpls mailing list >>> mpls@ietf.org >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls >>> >> >> -- >> >> >> Loa Andersson email: loa@pi.nu >> Senior MPLS Expert >> Bronze Dragon Consulting phone: +46 739 81 21 64 > -- Loa Andersson email: loa@pi.nu Senior MPLS Expert Bronze Dragon Consulting phone: +46 739 81 21 64
- [mpls] New version: draft-ietf-mpls-sfc-03.txt Adrian Farrel
- Re: [mpls] New version: draft-ietf-mpls-sfc-03.txt Loa Andersson
- Re: [mpls] New version: draft-ietf-mpls-sfc-03.txt Adrian Farrel
- Re: [mpls] New version: draft-ietf-mpls-sfc-03.txt Loa Andersson