[mpls] Re: Request WG adoption for draft-jags-mpls-ps-mna-hdr-03.txt

[Haoyu Song <[e-mail]>]

IOAM trace option is one use case, and some operators need it.
Also, you seem to suggest that there should be use cases the WG agrees before a mechanism supports them is developed. This is clearly not the case when many different types of ISD encodings are defined. I don’t see each has an agreed use case. Does that mean we shouldn’t define them?
Given we already have solid and useful use cases for ISD, I don’t see a reason to defer it.

Best,
Haoyu
From: Joel Halpern <[e-mail]>
Sent: Wednesday, June 26, 2024 4:03 PM
To: Haoyu Song <[e-mail]>
Cc: mpls <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [mpls] Re: Request WG adoption for draft-jags-mpls-ps-mna-hdr-03.txt


You assert that there are multiple accepted use cases where PSD is advantageous over ISD.  Putting aside the iOAM DEX case that we are debating, I have not seen a single use case where the WG agrees that PSD is advantageous over ISD.  My understanding is that the chairs said that PSD work would be deferred until there were such agreed use cases.

Yours,

Joel
On 6/26/2024 3:47 PM, Haoyu Song wrote:
Hi Greg,

You said "I think that the question is Which are MNA use cases that cannot be supported using ISD MNA solution?”

I think this is a wrong question to ask. A similar question is: which use case can’t be supported by using PSD MNA solution?  Of cause, each has its own merits and drawbacks. A use case can be done in a way doesn’t necessarily mean it’s the preferred way and the only way to do it. As for which way is better, it depends on many factors and could be subjective sometimes. Therefore, as the protocol designer, we shouldn’t make the decision for the users because we are not in their shoes.

While I’m not necessarily in favor of the particular PSD solution, I think it has been long established that PSD is useful and necessary. The old proposal has been worked on for several years by most of the people here. It was turned down not because it is unneeded but because some patent issues. PSD is backed by many existing use case proposals, and the mechanism itself is more scalable and flexible with less constraints.  Therefore, I strongly support to continue the development of the PSD solution. If any solution achieves the WG consensus, I’ll support it.  The complete MNA solution with both ISD and PSD will offer choices to users and let market to decide which one to use for each particular application.

Thanks,
Haoyu
From: Greg Mirsky <[e-mail]><mailto:[e-mail]>
Sent: Wednesday, June 26, 2024 8:38 AM
To: Dongjie (Jimmy) <jie.dong=[e-mail]><mailto:jie.dong=[e-mail]>
Cc: Jaganbabu Rajamanickam (jrajaman) <jrajaman=[e-mail]><mailto:jrajaman=[e-mail]>; [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>; mpls <[e-mail]><mailto:[e-mail]>; [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>
Subject: [mpls] Re: Request WG adoption for draft-jags-mpls-ps-mna-hdr-03.txt

Hi Donjie,
thank you for sharing your views. Please find my notes below tagged GIM>>.

Regards,
Greg

On Wed, Jun 26, 2024 at 7:42 AM Dongjie (Jimmy) <jie.dong=[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
Hi Rakesh and all,

I fully agree that the PSD solution could be useful for the IOAM use case as described in draft-ietf-mpls-mna-usecases.
GIM>> I think that the question is Which are MNA use cases that cannot be supported using ISD MNA solution? Of course, all cases listed in draft-ietf-mpls-mna-usecases<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-mpls-mna-usecases/> can be done using PSD, but does that mean that the PSD MNA solution is necessary to support these cases? AFAICS, it is not, as these cases can adequately and satisfactorily can be realized using the ISD MNA approach.

In addition, both the requirement draft and framework draft has many text about PSD, which shows PSD is an integral part of the MNA solution.
GIM>> I don't agree with your interpretation. "Integral", although I am not a native English speaker, means that there is no MNA without a PSD part. But that is clearly not the case so far as there has been no case presented that cannot be realized using ISD PSD. IMHO, PSD is an optional but not an integral and necessary component of MNA.

Lastly, section 5 of draft-ietf-mpls-mna-hdr mentions that for some type of data the encoding with ISD would be inefficient, and PSD can be another (more efficient?) choice.
GIM>> That reference stresses that PSD is an optional approach for cases that cannot be reasonably solved using ISD.

Taking the above into consideration, I would support the request for WG adoption for draft-jags-mpls-ps-mna-hdr-03.
GIM>> Since no credible technical evidence has been presented that any of the MNA cases that the MPLS WG has agreed with (draft-ietf-mpls-mna-usecases) cannot be realized using the ISD MNA solution, I cannot find any reason for considering the WG's adoption of the PSD MNA mechanism.

Best regards,
Jie


From: Rakesh Gandhi <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>
Sent: Wednesday, June 26, 2024 9:12 PM
To: Jaganbabu Rajamanickam (jrajaman) <jrajaman=[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>
Cc: [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>; mpls <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>; [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>
Subject: [mpls] Re: Request WG adoption for draft-jags-mpls-ps-mna-hdr-03.txt

Thanks Jags.

The PSD solution for MNA defined in draft-jags-mpls-ps-mna-hdr-03 is used for IOAM and IOAM DEX in draft-gandhi-mpls-mna-ioam-dex-01:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-gandhi-mpls-mna-ioam-dex-01

IOAM and IOAM DEX use-cases for MNA are defined in draft-ietf-mpls-mna-usecases-10:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-mpls-mna-usecases-10

The PSD solution is useful for IOAM and IOAM-DEX, I support the request for WG adoption for draft-jags-mpls-ps-mna-hdr-03 (as co-author).

P.S. I understand this email was not the WG adoption poll initiated by the chairs.

Thanks,
Rakesh





On Tue, Jun 25, 2024 at 10:52 PM Jaganbabu Rajamanickam (jrajaman) <jrajaman=[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
Hello Chairs,
   We would like to request WG adoption for draft-jags-mpls-ps-mna-hdr.
   Updated the draft with the initial review comments and the latest MNA header format.

  Welcome your review comments and suggestions.


Thanx,
Jags
_______________________________________________
mpls mailing list -- [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>
To unsubscribe send an email to [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>
_______________________________________________
mpls mailing list -- [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>
To unsubscribe send an email to [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>



_______________________________________________

mpls mailing list -- [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>

To unsubscribe send an email to [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>