Re: [mpls] [sfc] Working Group adoption of draft-farrel-mpls-sfc
Loa Andersson <loa@pi.nu> Wed, 02 May 2018 11:22 UTC
Return-Path: <loa@pi.nu>
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 851F5126C83; Wed, 2 May 2018 04:22:22 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9] 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 UpjjjMlu3X3n; Wed, 2 May 2018 04:22:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pipi.pi.nu (pipi.pi.nu [83.168.239.141]) (using TLSv1.1 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 521FA126B72; Wed, 2 May 2018 04:22:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.0.102] (81-236-221-144-no93.tbcn.telia.com [81.236.221.144]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: loa@pi.nu) by pipi.pi.nu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6141A1801590; Wed, 2 May 2018 13:22:16 +0200 (CEST)
To: "Andrew G. Malis" <agmalis@gmail.com>
Cc: "Zafar Ali (zali)" <zali@cisco.com>, "mpls@ietf.org" <mpls@ietf.org>, SPRING WG List <spring@ietf.org>, mpls <mpls-bounces@ietf.org>, "sfc@ietf.org" <sfc@ietf.org>
References: <2ac6b61d-3a38-1aaf-62ae-d923f1ad7468@pi.nu> <CA+b+ERnJNad6Awo+-2dU2kz6rwx-HQEniXcWgjoWUd-zm3r2qQ@mail.gmail.com> <F64C10EAA68C8044B33656FA214632C88828EFEB@MISOUT7MSGUSRDE.ITServices.sbc.com> <CA+b+ER==g53MZK5RSNmaFkg1UBC8zEiNsfxNLKCNXDumannaHg@mail.gmail.com> <F64C10EAA68C8044B33656FA214632C88828F06D@MISOUT7MSGUSRDE.ITServices.sbc.com> <052998BB-B820-412C-8363-B3EB7551B299@nokia.com> <1522554645079.8864@bell.ca> <CA+b+ERmzFPZRyrCnBvnRVhK5F25RMc8+Wt-n6NXKrONWy9G+_g@mail.gmail.com> <1522812352107.5966@bell.ca> <489a9667-f159-4607-5834-b4bacf64989c@gmail.com> <09337fcf-64c9-450c-8dbc-ba8330611fe4.xiaohu.xxh@alibaba-inc.com> <6EE25554-3714-4A75-896F-24CC89BAA807@gmail.com> <5dab5411-0b08-4bd4-86ec-752e1803c3ff.xiaohu.xxh@alibaba-inc.com> <6bea41f6-5519-f512-92e5-a72bbd6187da@gmail.com> <BD0B4559-A1B8-4724-B55D-B11D6DE94278@cisco.com> <CAA=duU0BWK9tik2FXvj_wqMbfMwp5XmU6ADNXE52bpetMXdczw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Loa Andersson <loa@pi.nu>
Message-ID: <48af626d-bfae-3e11-39ec-a36fa2984d81@pi.nu>
Date: Wed, 02 May 2018 13:22:15 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.7.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAA=duU0BWK9tik2FXvj_wqMbfMwp5XmU6ADNXE52bpetMXdczw@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mpls/VVMYff4KLOmLQD6z2y-biGh-JFo>
Subject: Re: [mpls] [sfc] Working Group adoption of draft-farrel-mpls-sfc
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: Wed, 02 May 2018 11:22:22 -0000
Andy, The chairs of the SPRING and MPLS wg has discussed the proposal to adopt draft-xuclad-spring-sr-service-chaining in the MPLS wg. Our agreement is that draft-xuclad-spring-sr-service-chaining belongs in the SPRING wg. /Loa for the SPRING and MPLS wg co-chairs On 2018-04-15 16:55, Andrew G. Malis wrote: > Zafar, et al, > > Perhaps the fairest to all concerned is for the MPLS WG to adopt both > drafts, and then it will be up to the WG (rather than the authors) to > best determine the technical details going forward, and how best to > document them. That way the work becomes the consensus product of the WG. > > Cheers, > Andy > > > On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 12:44 AM, Zafar Ali (zali) <zali@cisco..com > <mailto:zali@cisco.com>> wrote: > > Dear Stewart, WG Chairs and the WG, ____ > > __ __ > > I do not agree with Stewart’s points and will response in a separate > email. But all that is just noise and that cannot resolve the issue > at hand. ____ > > __ __ > > A countless time, Xiaohu has raised the issue that the intellectual > property for the contents in section 6 of draft-farrel-mpls-sfc > belongs to draft-xu-mpls-service-chaining. Please see one of > Xiaohu's recent emails with the subject *"[spring] For the fairness > and justice of the IETF culture"* dated Thursday, April 5, 2018 at > 12:34 AM, copied in the following. ____ > > __ __ > > This issue was also raised by many during the WG adoption poll of > the document. The chairs adopted the work with the promise of fixing > the issue. Specifically, in the email to announce the adoption of > the ID to the WG, the chair(s) mentioned the following:____ > > __ __ > > "That decision is taken, the issues that has been pointed out are____ > > noted. These issues need to be resolved on the mailing list and____ > > rough consensus need to be reached for text changes in the document.____ > > Actually the members of the working group have much more influence > on____ > > a working group document, than on an individual draft.____ > > It would be far better if we now focused on proposing text changes,____ > > rather than discussing processes."____ > > __ __ > > This is a serious issue; we need to remove section 6 from draft- > farrel-mpls-sfc to move forward. These contents will proceed in > draft-xu*, where the contents started initially. Everyone will have > a fair chance to contribute to the contents as part of > collaborations on draft-xu*. __ __ > > __ __ > > Thanks____ > > __ __ > > Regards … Zafar ____ > > __ __ > > *From: *spring <spring-bounces@ietf.org > <mailto:spring-bounces@ietf.org>> on behalf of "徐小虎(义先)" > <xiaohu..xxh@alibaba-inc.com <mailto:xiaohu.xxh@alibaba-inc.com>> > *Date: *Thursday, April 5, 2018 at 12:34 AM > *To: *"mpls@ietf.org <mailto:mpls@ietf.org>" <mpls@ietf.org > <mailto:mpls@ietf.org>>, SPRING WG List <spring@ietf.org > <mailto:spring@ietf.org>> > *Cc: *"ietf@ietf.org <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>" <ietf@ietf.org > <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>> > *Subject: *[spring] For the fairness and justice of the IETF > culture//Re: [mpls] What to do with draft-ietf-mpls-sfc-00.txt____ > > __ __ > > Hi all,____ > > __ __ > > As I had pointed out before, this draft describes two MPLS-based SFC____ > > approaches: one is how to encode the NSH info, more specifically, > the SPI____ > > and SI info by two MPLS labels, which is still a stateful SFC > mechanism____ > > just like NSH; another is how to leverage the MPLS-SR to realize a____ > > stateless SFC (see section 6).____ > > __ __ > > It has been pointed out by many people that section 6 of the draft > copies____ > > the____ > > idea of (https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-xu-mpls-service-chaining > <https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-xu-mpls-service-chaining>)____ > > without any technology contribution except replacing “MPLS Segment____ > > Routing” by “Label Stack”. Funnily, one author of > draft-ietf-mpls-sfc____ > > had inadvertently admitted____ > > "using a different name for the same thing is not so clever" (see____ > > https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mpls/y7FTc38ysVf6PyJlA04MEFSN9nc > <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mpls/y7FTc38ysVf6PyJlA04MEFSN9nc>) > in____ > > another thread. ____ > > __ __ > > IMHO, the indulgence towards such behavior of copying____ > > ideas of existing drafts with word tricks would seriously trample____ > > underfoot the fairness and justice of the IETF culture. At least, it > would____ > > badly damage the interest and enthusiasm of IETF participants, > especially____ > > newcomers and non-native speakers of English.____ > > __ __ > > Best regards,____ > > Xiaohu____ > > __ __ > > __ __ > > __ __ > > __ __ > > *From: *mpls <mpls-bounces@ietf.org <mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org>> > on behalf of Stewart Bryant <stewart.bryant@gmail.com > <mailto:stewart.bryant@gmail.com>> > *Date: *Friday, April 13, 2018 at 3:10 AM > *To: *"徐小虎(义先)" <xiaohu..xxh@alibaba-inc.com > <mailto:xiaohu.xxh@alibaba-inc.com>> > *Cc: *"mpls@ietf.org <mailto:mpls@ietf.org>" <mpls@ietf.org > <mailto:mpls@ietf.org>>, mpls <mpls-bounces@ietf.org > <mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org>>, Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net > <mailto:robert@raszuk.net>>, "sfc@ietf.org <mailto:sfc@ietf.org>" > <sfc@ietf.org <mailto:sfc@ietf.org>> > *Subject: *Re: [mpls] [sfc] Working Group adoption of > draft-farrel-mpls-sfc____ > > __ __ > > __ __ > > __ __ > > On 13/04/2018 08:23, 徐小虎(义先) wrote:____ > > Hi Stewart,____ > > __ __ > > Thanks for your response. For the SR-based SFC mechanism that > has been described in draft-xuclad*, it's not helpful to > describe it again in another draft. The most simple and > efficient way to address the overlapping issue is to reference > draft-xuclad* rather than "using a different name > for the same thing". I'm looking forward to seeing the revision > of draft-farrel* that would address the overlapping issue > concretely.____ > > > Please read what I said. > > There are subtle but important technical differences between the two > approaches. > > - Stewart > > > ____ > > > > ____ > > If co-authors of draft-farrel* believed the current text as > described in draft-xuclad* is not good enough or misses > something important, any comments and suggestions are more than > welcome.____ > > > I will send you some text to include in draft-xuclad that points to > the important differences in the approach taken in draft-farrel. > This will clarify the issue to the reader. > > I hope that this is an acceptable resolution of this issue. > > - Stewart > > > > ____ > > > > ____ > > Best regards,____ > > Xiaohu____ > > ------------------------------------------------------------------____ > > Stewart Bryant > <stewart.bryant@gmail.com><mailto:stewart.bryant@gmail.com>____ > > 2018年4月13日(星期五) 13:27____ > > 徐小虎(义先) > <xiaohu.xxh@alibaba-inc.com><mailto:xiaohu.xxh@alibaba-inc.com>____ > > mpls <mpls-bounces@ietf.org><mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org>; > "Bernier, Daniel" > <daniel.bernier@bell.ca><mailto:daniel.bernier@bell.ca>; > Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net><mailto:robert@raszuk.net>; > mpls@ietf.org<mailto:mpls@ietf.org><mpls@ietf.org><mailto:mpls@ietf.org>; > sfc@ietf.org<mailto:sfc@ietf.org><sfc@ietf.org><mailto:sfc@ietf.org>____ > > Re: [mpls] [sfc] Working Group adoption of > draft-farrel-mpls-sfc____ > > __ __ > > Hi Xiaohu ____ > > __ __ > > What an earlier version of the draft said is of no > importance. What it says going forward is what counts.____ > > __ __ > > Perhaps the way to address your concern is to include some > text of the form that I used in my email of yesterday to > describe to the reader the difference in approach. This is > consistent with earlier advice in this discussion to > reference the work from which this forked.____ > > __ __ > > - Stewart____ > > __ __ > > __ __ > > Sent from my iPad____ > > > On 13 Apr 2018, at 03:35, 徐小虎(义先) > <xiaohu.xxh@alibaba-inc.com<mailto:xiaohu.xxh@alibaba-inc.com>> > wrote:____ > > Hi Stewart,____ > > __ __ > > If draft-farrel* was just describing an MPLS-based SFC > technology that is different from the MPLS-SR-based SFC > technology that has been described in draft-xuclad*, that > would be fine. However, draft-farrel* also described the > technology that has been described in draft-xuclad* (see > section 6) by "using a different name for the same thing". > Note that the title of section 6 in those pervious versions > of draft-farrel* is ____ > > "MPLS Segment Routing". One co-author of draft-farrel* said > they worked very hard to change the "Segment Routing" term > to "label stack" term in the new version of draft-farrel* in > order to deal with the overlapping issue. However, such > change is just "using a different name for the same thing", > and it doesn't solve the overlapping issue at all, as had > been pointed out by many people. As said by one co-author of > draft-farrel*, in a thread which is irrelavant to this > overlapping issue, "using a different > name for the same thing is not so clever:)". In fact, it > would cause unneccessary confusions to implementors by > describing the same technology within different drafts. More > badly, it would set a bad precedant in the IETF of copying > the idea of the existing draft by > "using a different name for the same thing".____ > > > > ____ > > Best regards,____ > > Xiaohu____ > > ------------------------------------------------------------------____ > > Stewart Bryant > <stewart.bryant@gmail.com<mailto:stewart.bryant@gmail.com>>____ > > 2018年4月12日(星期四) 23:04____ > > "Bernier, Daniel" > <daniel.bernier@bell.ca<mailto:daniel.bernier@bell.ca>>; > Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net<mailto:robert@raszuk.net>>____ > > mpls@ietf.org<mailto:mpls@ietf.org><mpls@ietf.org<mailto:mpls@ietf.org>>; > sfc@ietf.org<mailto:sfc@ietf.org><sfc@ietf.org<mailto:sfc@ietf.org>>____ > > Re: [mpls] [sfc] Working Group adoption of > draft-farrel-mpls-sfc____ > > __ __ > > > Rather than have a process discussion, I think we should > go up a level > and better understand the technical differences between > the two drafts. > > draft-farrel-mpls-sfc describes the actions at a > hop in terms of a tuple > that mirrors the SFC approach that allows a short indication of > potentially re-entrant chains. In its simplest form it uses > a compact > MPLS stack to describe an arbitarily complex path that > is compatile with > simple edge routers which are often challenged in terms of > the number of > labels that they can push. > > draft-xu-clad-spring-sr-service-chaining unrolls the > path and explicitly > calls out each hop and each > function into the label stack. This results > in a much larger MPLS label stack that will challenge > some edge routers. > The way that we generally deal with imposition limits > is through the use > of binding-SIDs, which in the limiting case resolves to the > approach in > draft-farrel with the limitation that the position > on the path is > implicit in the label stack size rather than explicitly > specified by the SI. > > Mid-flight path changes (if such things are needed) is > clearly simpler > with draft-farrel. > > The short stack in draft-farrel comes at the cost of > greater network > forwarding stack, and the long stack is the price that > draft-xu-clad > pays for the reduction in forwarding state. > > The optimal design point between forwarding and > control plane state is > something that is dependent on many parameters, and is > dependent on many > network and operational > factors, so much so, that don't think it is wise > to rule either out of scope at this stage. > > The hybrid mode in section 6 of draft-farrel supports the > mixed mode in > section 7 of the draft. This allows the construction of > SFCs that are > the concatination of two or more compacted sub-chains. > This allows the > operator to deploy a solution > with the advantages of draft-farrel > together with some of the flexibility of draft-xu-clad. > > At this stage the two drafts are sufficienly different > that I think we > need to proceed with both at least to the point where we fully > understand the detailed consequences of the two > approachs and the > scenarios where each finds it's niche. > > After developing a better understanding the detail of > each design, their > control plane, and operational contexts and how > each maps to customer > network requirements, we can move the drafts to the > appropriate IETF > track. Such tracks may be anything from abandonment to > IETF standard for > one or both of these approaches. > > Meanwhile I think that we need to focus our efforts on a deeper > understanding of the technology and how each might > make the Internet > work better, rather than spending effort on arguing > about IETF process. > > - Stewart > > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org<mailto:mpls@ietf.org> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls<https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls>____ > > __ __ > > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org<mailto:mpls@ietf.org> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls<https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls>____ > > __ __ > > > > ____ > > > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org <mailto:mpls@ietf.org> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls> > > > > > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > -- Loa Andersson email: loa@pi.nu Senior MPLS Expert Bronze Dragon Consulting phone: +46 739 81 21 64
- [mpls] Working Group adoption of draft-farrel-mpl… Loa Andersson
- Re: [mpls] Working Group adoption of draft-farrel… 徐小虎(义先)
- Re: [mpls] Working Group adoption of draft-farrel… Henderickx, Wim (Nokia - BE/Antwerp)
- Re: [mpls] Working Group adoption of draft-farrel… Chengli (IP Technology Research)
- Re: [mpls] Working Group adoption of draft-farrel… Robert Raszuk
- Re: [mpls] [sfc] Working Group adoption of draft-… BRUNGARD, DEBORAH A
- Re: [mpls] [sfc] Working Group adoption of draft-… Robert Raszuk
- Re: [mpls] [sfc] Working Group adoption of draft-… BRUNGARD, DEBORAH A
- Re: [mpls] [sfc] Working Group adoption of draft-… 徐小虎(义先)
- Re: [mpls] [sfc] Working Group adoption of draft-… Henderickx, Wim (Nokia - BE/Antwerp)
- Re: [mpls] [sfc] Working Group adoption of draft-… Henderickx, Wim (Nokia - BE/Antwerp)
- Re: [mpls] [sfc] Working Group adoption of draft-… Zafar Ali (zali)
- [mpls] 回复: [sfc] Working Group adoption of draft-… 徐小虎(义先)
- Re: [mpls] [sfc] Working Group adoption of draft-… Bernier, Daniel
- [mpls] 答复: [sfc] Working Group adoption of draft-… Lizhenbin
- Re: [mpls] [sfc] Working Group adoption of draft-… Robert Raszuk
- Re: [mpls] Working Group adoption of draft-farrel… Loa Andersson
- Re: [mpls] [sfc] Working Group adoption of draft-… Bernier, Daniel
- Re: [mpls] Working Group adoption of draft-farrel… Henderickx, Wim (Nokia - BE/Antwerp)
- Re: [mpls] Working Group adoption of draft-farrel… 徐小虎(义先)
- Re: [mpls] Working Group adoption of draft-farrel… Loa Andersson
- Re: [mpls] Working Group adoption of draft-farrel… Henderickx, Wim (Nokia - BE/Antwerp)
- Re: [mpls] [sfc] Working Group adoption of draft-… Dolganow, Andrew (Nokia - SG/Singapore)
- Re: [mpls] [sfc] Working Group adoption of draft-… 徐小虎(义先)
- Re: [mpls] Working Group adoption of draft-farrel… Robert Raszuk
- Re: [mpls] [sfc] Working Group adoption of draft-… Zafar Ali (zali)
- Re: [mpls] [sfc] Working Group adoption of draft-… Stewart Bryant
- Re: [mpls] [sfc] Working Group adoption of draft-… UTTARO, JAMES
- Re: [mpls] [sfc] Working Group adoption of draft-… Alexander Vainshtein
- Re: [mpls] [sfc] Working Group adoption of draft-… Robert Raszuk
- Re: [mpls] [sfc] Working Group adoption of draft-… Stewart Bryant
- Re: [mpls] [sfc] Working Group adoption of draft-… Robert Raszuk
- Re: [mpls] [sfc] Working Group adoption of draft-… 徐小虎(义先)
- Re: [mpls] [sfc] Working Group adoption of draft-… Stewart Bryant
- Re: [mpls] [sfc] Working Group adoption of draft-… 徐小虎(义先)
- Re: [mpls] [sfc] Working Group adoption of draft-… Stewart Bryant
- Re: [mpls] [sfc] Working Group adoption of draft-… Zafar Ali (zali)
- Re: [mpls] [sfc] Working Group adoption of draft-… Andrew G. Malis
- Re: [mpls] [sfc] Working Group adoption of draft-… Andrew G. Malis
- Re: [mpls] [sfc] Working Group adoption of draft-… Lizhong Jin
- Re: [mpls] [sfc] Working Group adoption of draft-… bruno.decraene
- Re: [mpls] [sfc] Working Group adoption of draft-… Adrian Farrel
- Re: [mpls] [sfc] Working Group adoption of draft-… Loa Andersson
- Re: [mpls] [sfc] Working Group adoption of draft-… Andrew G. Malis