Re: [mpls] thought about the ADI name

Loa Andersson <loa.pi.nu@gmail.com> Wed, 22 December 2021 05:46 UTC

Return-Path: <loa.pi.nu@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 E24D93A0DF9 for <mpls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 21 Dec 2021 21:46:33 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.098
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, 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 91y6t-L4uic5 for <mpls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 21 Dec 2021 21:46:29 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pl1-x62c.google.com (mail-pl1-x62c.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::62c]) (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 E4E603A0DF6 for <mpls@ietf.org>; Tue, 21 Dec 2021 21:46:28 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-pl1-x62c.google.com with SMTP id p14so1064637plf.3 for <mpls@ietf.org>; Tue, 21 Dec 2021 21:46:28 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to :date:cc:message-id:references:to; bh=CgLPanex/0SzlmX8UfzJmDwmavTQPyAeEbPJ15sNxvs=; b=Urisrh4RaO3y/oSvbnP9se78ZGSeMqB7QpLtJQpRVlZCoJ8MyHZzeiS2iuPr8jWvHb ayuqdU9vzy7Fv2UsT/Caamk51lwImnnzg8feZLK+L66lPy2uJHTZ0vrGduouh50AYX3k VK28a0HDy+dApMAFhKmpYK/m7ZFqUNyamlAaGq2bPkQVA/iVeraGPGvZxcBph6BcXc/5 ceFDgX4vTQwQOM1M+Ck0GNGR8ZJmMunt9Ll8wQqHQesA2pBzB+RGvHT9ogm8GgaYnbSS dquchZDVjLnCJJvr1orPQVqf02zKbXIf5KFr3vsExKVAuV7OBnsRHm0zzSwGYveAhbbG BMKQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:subject :from:in-reply-to:date:cc:message-id:references:to; bh=CgLPanex/0SzlmX8UfzJmDwmavTQPyAeEbPJ15sNxvs=; b=LzKuT4m1GOYBkMURCj4wrlKUVyVO/QYBeA95+REvAbRjExz6yxBtzNPknAu9nK8LIw 5Wfupb6f+nOKOLtmoKMbiLAqQGR/fpQDEDMPDeLUILZeSQHpN/sxuEofLBGzzJixJwGn cu9+cmumaGW2Frw8CsfcMX5MaxH5YmUTmjFXdrbGe9/GC+vSaZ/2dnaU1oqSmZ+ZXMeo 145aJ/3aSxxzFTwBXqHsESYLtHkob4c2ot9u2/1g9fa4245WbbzTHvxFdkNBUiqg1Ghk yGqharcN2zCpWnDWmlxQ0VEL/yEufRvHG6sJUzB0HkrQkKQazjgNnG0DZ4HObWLGmmQs mySg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532yUQrK4dvXCMn3O8XIDb9t7wAOS4NtQhYptf99rC0RYPSB21Wr hDbvGVT4kqB/h/3LYpsXv1Q=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJww4zxGHJhk80rn4F0eUjVJ4jTxgUmR/EZjaEbjB7Gsaf/xkKErlFSnjV+ZT6a2JCPDftAuGA==
X-Received: by 2002:a17:90a:384d:: with SMTP id l13mr2035646pjf.104.1640151987794; Tue, 21 Dec 2021 21:46:27 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtpclient.apple ([2001:4451:11e2:f000:3427:cd25:faf3:b05]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id s14sm915375pfk.171.2021.12.21.21.46.26 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 21 Dec 2021 21:46:27 -0800 (PST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
From: Loa Andersson <loa.pi.nu@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <BY3PR05MB808140653295F4BD7441B89BC77A9@BY3PR05MB8081.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2021 13:46:24 +0800
Cc: Loa Andersson <loa@pi.nu>, mpls@ietf.org
Message-Id: <92323D54-406D-4EB5-9875-5860A41FD42B@gmail.com>
References: <BY3PR05MB808140653295F4BD7441B89BC77A9@BY3PR05MB8081.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
To: John E Drake <jdrake=40juniper.net@dmarc.ietf.org>
X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (19B81)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mpls/Q9ITb45zd3qu8qyk5JhaHJWP9fU>
Subject: Re: [mpls] thought about the ADI name
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, 22 Dec 2021 05:46:34 -0000

John,

A couple of things

- I think we are at the stage when your proposal would benefit from a draft

- you should also closely follow the terminology we have agreed on, data in that are placed in LSEs are called “In Stack Data (ISD)” and data placed after the stack are called ”Post Stack Data (PSD)”. Plz try to align with what we have in the wiki.
- I agree that both actions that rely on ISD and PSD needs to be carefully specified, as well as all the info needed on the ancillary data 

What I did in my mail was discussing a very little piece of the terminology in the requirement specification, the ADIs indicates both action and data. This is not  obvious from the name. 

/Loa

Sent from my iPhone

> On 20 Dec 2021, at 00:42, John E Drake <jdrake=40juniper.net@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
> 
> Loa,
> 
> This is an updated version of what I had previously written:
> 
> When defining a network action, it is necessary to define whether that action is hop-by-hop, processed by every transit node on the packet's path from ingress  node to egress node, or end-to-end, processed only by the  egress node, whether that action requires ancillary data and if so, what is that ancillary data and is placed in label stack entries (LSE) or after the BoS (BoS data).  If a given network action is directly related to forwarding and requires ancillary data, that data SHOULD be placed in LSEs.
> 
> I.e., the definition of a given network action itself and whether that network action is specified in a given packet tells a P router what it needs to know wrt that network action's ancillary data. 
> 
> Yours Irrespectively,
> 
> John
> 
> 
> Juniper Business Use Only
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: mpls <mpls-bounces@ietf.org> On Behalf Of Loa Andersson
>> Sent: Sunday, December 19, 2021 11:32 AM
>> To: mpls@ietf.org
>> Subject: [mpls] thought about the ADI name
>> 
>> [External Email. Be cautious of content]
>> 
>> 
>> Working Group,
>> 
>> The MIAD Requirement Specification use the abbreviation ADI, it stands for
>> Ancillary Data Indicator. Which is all nice and dandy.
>> 
>> But isn't it he case  that the indicator gives us two things, the action to be
>> performed and where to find the data needed, i.e., an Ancillary Data and Action
>> indication (ADAI?).
>> 
>> No I'm not suggesting that we change, but we should be aware, and it would be
>> nice to have it mentioned somewhere.
>> 
>> /Loa
>> --
>> 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://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls__;!!
>> NEt6yMaO-
>> gk!SNycbCzI_j0rr9X3QVbA_AAsVuZUQ9wOPPKKJgkJybtC4vHvsybGBlRLFInWoKQ
>> $
> 
> _______________________________________________
> mpls mailing list
> mpls@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls