Re: [mpls] Rtgdir early review of draft-ietf-mpls-bfd-directed-07

Greg Mirsky <gregimirsky@gmail.com> Mon, 17 July 2017 09:24 UTC

Return-Path: <gregimirsky@gmail.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 45330129B5B; Mon, 17 Jul 2017 02:24:37 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.998
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.998 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-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=gmail.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 VF7ViQhrB53Q; Mon, 17 Jul 2017 02:24:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qt0-x232.google.com (mail-qt0-x232.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c0d::232]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4B91D129ADD; Mon, 17 Jul 2017 02:24:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qt0-x232.google.com with SMTP id 21so25976952qtx.3; Mon, 17 Jul 2017 02:24:35 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=7xT8ad1eh8tqM+bHwn8I8AEYIGxPb0Q6ciU+ZyQHNiA=; b=h8ypuzsCYHYwAypju/OQNZwFSl9LsB/jQoN2mFFR+EtV/Dshv/DLDe9Xk0p/1eSitV rI+7h4+i+kxI203kwhzaLuZOvBg0dAq99UD14Xb2OL7TGFZ0/WOVqULbDelyxmwuiBkm 05cGUnsnO2lueomg6j09dc7zdrvcIzPqYXUMlntcMwvi+r3onuvCd/NJqKCObmauoPfz UULb3Si1G7p+nIUKy7tHS29lJB7398QkNK25rdehAoxZG1vNnX6NU8TWdhwG3qro2T4C J6x5fuX74DQZvdX4NBBu126fGCGjRDmpEFc+Jru3etK4WVClHAFSU8XAFdb8E1vid3+o /+2Q==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=7xT8ad1eh8tqM+bHwn8I8AEYIGxPb0Q6ciU+ZyQHNiA=; b=Y1F3cvH+duldacbJv84uKF9+QPzkI0kJNH4fN4qF3kLO7TXOlRkiL0T5WZaxoeEGO0 A4eHi2Brc1U01KTX1lrrq/a7/ttar6MxqEiInmgYkt3wgU4G9ybIcP33279jMpFzMrN5 nbeiQRtmMjoNikUTlhhOrVXWJVIf+MEyr+u77nCWKa8OpZQmRHG9/oexpbhHdn5ZDJKu KXWDW1nBUDbKa1CKdAkXYiWIJvzvSRq6Y8Cky9yx3W/3Xw+mjF/DH7AOnvlCnthY36Qs +cFhtq0MAlU27hc0xqujyHPOkZp61BOn3w28Ro+fgeagZPIaWFi6WF4pZyNmZuS2yRRu h7Yw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AIVw110jGkPKfjO9+Wna9kwYN+Fc1h9HmATSjwe0Wb62TjSRYspthqKR i/gdsaF7W4p2obQQHabCAWHepSXzvYSn
X-Received: by 10.200.49.180 with SMTP id h49mr7212936qte.176.1500283474385; Mon, 17 Jul 2017 02:24:34 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.140.22.227 with HTTP; Mon, 17 Jul 2017 02:24:33 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <20170717092332.GD24942@pfrc.org>
References: <149978159930.12344.18347332855391607627@ietfa.amsl.com> <CA+RyBmUrraRZeO3mwmurfaVwZva22J=3YNOTSN77utjhZc5Osw@mail.gmail.com> <20170717090400.GC24942@pfrc.org> <CA+RyBmXZmb0tXx2Up=uyDAv2-i2sbPzHfSQ4K-ov6+K6WQy4og@mail.gmail.com> <20170717092332.GD24942@pfrc.org>
From: Greg Mirsky <gregimirsky@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2017 02:24:33 -0700
Message-ID: <CA+RyBmUpHfB7=2WabjH3uYeBGtdA3O3UnEMP9bFD0zd-rO8QMQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Jeffrey Haas <jhaas@pfrc.org>
Cc: Carlos Pignataro <cpignata@cisco.com>, rtg-dir@ietf.org, "mpls@ietf.org" <mpls@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-mpls-bfd-directed.all@ietf.org, bfd-chairs@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a1145d2708da00205547ff756"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mpls/E_mPZlLvhRewOBiG7tKo87Qcn_s>
Subject: Re: [mpls] Rtgdir early review of draft-ietf-mpls-bfd-directed-07
X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: Mon, 17 Jul 2017 09:24:37 -0000

Hi Jeff,
thank you for pointing that the use of LSP Ping to update the existing BFD
session should be explicitly documented in the draft. I agree that this is
valid request and, if the MPLS WG agrees, will add it in the next version
along what I've outlined in our discussion.

Regards,
Greg

On Mon, Jul 17, 2017 at 2:23 AM, Jeffrey Haas <jhaas@pfrc.org>; wrote:

> On Mon, Jul 17, 2017 at 02:06:01AM -0700, Greg Mirsky wrote:
> > true, the RFC 5884 does not discuss handling of subsequent LSP Ping with
> > the same BFD Discriminator value in BFD Discriminator TLV. My reference
> to
> > RFC 5884 is to point that the default, implied path for the reverse
> > direction of the BFD session is over IP network and that how this draft
> > interprets BFD Reverse Path TLV with none- sub-TLVs included. And yes,
> > nodes that would support this draft MUST handle subsequent LSP Ping Echo
> > Request with BFD Discriminator and BFD Reverse TLVs.
> >
>
> I don't believe the procedure updating 5884 to change existing session
> properties is called out in the -directed document.  I don't have a strong
> opinion about the use case of whether such updates are desired or not.
> That's a decision for the MPLS WG.  However, I do think such procedure
> needs
> to be clear if it's desired.  This is part of Carlos' point.
>
> -- Jeff
>