Re: [mpls] Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-lag-multipath-06: (with COMMENT)

Mach Chen <mach.chen@huawei.com> Wed, 13 March 2019 10:40 UTC

Return-Path: <mach.chen@huawei.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 1624E130EED; Wed, 13 Mar 2019 03:40:22 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, 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 R3XXgzewhuLO; Wed, 13 Mar 2019 03:40:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [185.176.76.210]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 51400130EF5; Wed, 13 Mar 2019 03:40:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lhreml707-cah.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.18.7.106]) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTP id 8A08740698CDE5C9A72E; Wed, 13 Mar 2019 10:40:17 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from DGGEML423-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.1.199.40) by lhreml707-cah.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.48) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.408.0; Wed, 13 Mar 2019 10:40:16 +0000
Received: from DGGEML510-MBX.china.huawei.com ([169.254.2.190]) by dggeml423-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.1.199.40]) with mapi id 14.03.0415.000; Wed, 13 Mar 2019 18:40:10 +0800
From: Mach Chen <mach.chen@huawei.com>
To: Mirja Kuehlewind <ietf@kuehlewind.net>
CC: =?utf-8?B?TWlyamEgS8O8aGxld2luZCB2aWEgRGF0YXRyYWNrZXI=?= <noreply@ietf.org>, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, "mpls@ietf.org" <mpls@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-lag-multipath@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-lag-multipath@ietf.org>, "mpls-chairs@ietf.org" <mpls-chairs@ietf.org>, "loa@pi.nu" <loa@pi.nu>
Thread-Topic: =?utf-8?B?TWlyamEgS8O8aGxld2luZCdzIE5vIE9iamVjdGlvbiBvbiBkcmFmdC1pZXRm?= =?utf-8?Q?-mpls-lsp-ping-lag-multipath-06:_(with_COMMENT)?=
Thread-Index: AQHU2Oy6s520bV8QO0y5RWWbir7qHKYJRALQ//+IqQCAAJNrAA==
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2019 10:40:09 +0000
Message-ID: <F73A3CB31E8BE34FA1BBE3C8F0CB2AE2928FB16D@dggeml510-mbx.china.huawei.com>
References: <155240641959.16274.10292530156982066442.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <F73A3CB31E8BE34FA1BBE3C8F0CB2AE2928FAF0D@dggeml510-mbx.china.huawei.com> <F4C6A6A4-C40A-41D9-B135-E66EFC9EE06C@kuehlewind.net>
In-Reply-To: <F4C6A6A4-C40A-41D9-B135-E66EFC9EE06C@kuehlewind.net>
Accept-Language: en-US, zh-CN
Content-Language: zh-CN
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.111.194.201]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mpls/Bft5WFgjGP9qX6jTvhybauSL6f0>
Subject: Re: [mpls] =?utf-8?q?Mirja_K=C3=BChlewind=27s_No_Objection_on_draft-?= =?utf-8?q?ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-lag-multipath-06=3A_=28with_COMMENT=29?=
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, 13 Mar 2019 10:40:23 -0000

Hi Mirja,

Thanks, that's help a lot :-)

Best regards,
Mach 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mirja Kuehlewind [mailto:ietf@kuehlewind.net]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 13, 2019 5:51 PM
> To: Mach Chen <mach.chen@huawei.com>;
> Cc: Mirja Kühlewind via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>;; The IESG
> <iesg@ietf.org>;; mpls@ietf.org; draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-lag-
> multipath@ietf.org; mpls-chairs@ietf.org; loa@pi.nu
> Subject: Re: Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-lag-
> multipath-06: (with COMMENT)
> 
> Hi Mach,
> 
> Please see below
> 
> > On 13. Mar 2019, at 10:15, Mach Chen <mach.chen@huawei.com>; wrote:
> >
> > Hi Mirja,
> >
> > Thanks for your comments!
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Mirja Kühlewind via Datatracker [mailto:noreply@ietf.org]
> >> Sent: Wednesday, March 13, 2019 12:00 AM
> >> To: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>;
> >> Cc: draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-lag-multipath@ietf.org;
> >> mpls-chairs@ietf.org; loa@pi.nu; mpls@ietf.org
> >> Subject: Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on
> >> draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-lag-
> >> multipath-06: (with COMMENT)
> >>
> >> Mirja Kühlewind has entered the following ballot position for
> >> draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-lag-multipath-06: No Objection
> >>
> >> When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
> >> email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut
> >> this introductory paragraph, however.)
> >>
> >>
> >> Please refer to
> >> https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
> >> for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.
> >>
> >>
> >> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
> >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-lag-multipa
> >> th/
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> -
> >> COMMENT:
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> -
> >>
> >> I wanted to comment on the same sentence/normative requirement as
> >> Alvaro did in his point (2). Given Alvaro's additional information
> >> that there is actually even a technical conflict with this
> >> requirement, I think this should be address before publication and
> >> might even be discuss-worthy. However, I'm really not an expert on
> >> MPLS and therefore leave the decision to state a discuss ballot position to
> potentially other, more knowledgable ADs.
> >>
> >> Thanks for addressing the TSV-ART review comments (and thanks Jörg
> >> for the review)! I support adding another sentence with a pointer to
> >> rate-limit requirements in other docs. Thanks for proposing this
> >> change. Looking forward this see this in the doc!
> >
> > Are you suggesting to add a reference, do you have any specific docs
> suggestion?
> 
> In your reply to Joerg’s tsv-art review (on Dec 14 already), you proposed to
> add the following statement:
> 
> "For an LSP path, it may be over several LAGs. For each LAG, there will be
> many member links. To exercise all the links, many Echo Request/Reply
> messages will be sent in a short period. It's possible that those messages may
> traverse a common path as a burst. Under some circumstances this might
> cause congestion at the common path. To avoid potential congestion, it is
> RECOMMENDED that implementations to randomly delay the Echo Request
> and Reply messages at the Initiating LSRs and Responder LSRs.”
> 
> You also said:
> "RFC8029 (Security Consideration) does recommend the implementation to
> regulate the ping traffic to the control plane, it  applies to this document as
> well.
> 
> At the same time, RFC 6425 (P2MP LSP Ping, section 2.2) introduces some
> ways to limit the message rate. The way of random delay messages would
> apply to this document as well.”
> 
> So adding pointer to these two documents/sections would be good as well
> maybe.
> 
> Thanks!
> Mirja
> 
> 
> >
> > Best regards,
> > Mach
> >>
> >