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

[Greg Mirsky <[e-mail]>]

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]> 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]>
> *Sent:* Wednesday, June 26, 2024 9:12 PM
>
> *To:* Jaganbabu Rajamanickam (jrajaman) <jrajaman=
> [e-mail]>
> *Cc:* [e-mail]; mpls <[e-mail]>;
> [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]> 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]
> To unsubscribe send an email to [e-mail]
>
> _______________________________________________
> mpls mailing list -- [e-mail]
> To unsubscribe send an email to [e-mail]
>