Re: [mpls] Concerns about ISD

Tianran Zhou <zhoutianran@huawei.com> Fri, 06 May 2022 00:28 UTC

Return-Path: <zhoutianran@huawei.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 4DA4EC14F725 for <mpls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 5 May 2022 17:28:57 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6_FEcrJGi5jA for <mpls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 5 May 2022 17:28:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from frasgout.his.huawei.com (frasgout.his.huawei.com [185.176.79.56]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4B6D5C14792E for <mpls@ietf.org>; Thu, 5 May 2022 17:28:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from fraeml703-chm.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.18.147.200]) by frasgout.his.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4KvWYv2Njtz67Pmj; Fri, 6 May 2022 08:25:39 +0800 (CST)
Received: from kwepemi500010.china.huawei.com (7.221.188.191) by fraeml703-chm.china.huawei.com (10.206.15.52) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.2375.24; Fri, 6 May 2022 02:28:49 +0200
Received: from kwepemi500009.china.huawei.com (7.221.188.199) by kwepemi500010.china.huawei.com (7.221.188.191) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2375.24; Fri, 6 May 2022 08:28:09 +0800
Received: from kwepemi500009.china.huawei.com ([7.221.188.199]) by kwepemi500009.china.huawei.com ([7.221.188.199]) with mapi id 15.01.2375.024; Fri, 6 May 2022 08:28:09 +0800
From: Tianran Zhou <zhoutianran@huawei.com>
To: Greg Mirsky <gregimirsky@gmail.com>
CC: Tony Li <tony.li@tony.li>, John E Drake <jdrake@juniper.net>, mpls <mpls@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [mpls] Concerns about ISD
Thread-Index: AdhKc4fdvDv9lzMNTfy5c++8iNI9i///poSA//7GfeCAAt4vgP/7wPiAgAhY2QD//2GkAAAn72wA//7TxPD//eE1gP/7NOOg//aGzID/67yBQP/A47NQ/4IVBQD/AoIJwP4FIVMA/Ajye8D4EaIJgPAiknoV4EWd0IDAgkrxQIEE/46Aggl1M9CEElWLAIgj0Ujw
Date: Fri, 6 May 2022 00:28:09 +0000
Message-ID: <cf7f726841ae4f6a915bee1d2880bf76@huawei.com>
References: <6cc272447d2f4c779e85d5c42d3b3c6c@huawei.com> <8623637D-A32E-47A4-B5FC-4D2CF40BEDD1@tony.li> <6199e0e886f9437c95ef9b70719b00ec@huawei.com> <BCFD3F4A-36D6-47C2-B907-FC40B402F97C@tony.li> <3fb1f261ddff48deb0c2ea083cdbd16f@huawei.com> <6B96F21B-9331-4FA8-AD7B-84A4CA8B6FAB@tony.li> <903c57a48280454091495673ec2fe275@huawei.com> <BD5C1BE7-4633-4B51-BAC1-B2AE1C537F36@tony.li> <ad6b8c42b0aa4880b9dee02516f5e46f@huawei.com> <F5BB2CEB-CC8C-4E71-A2E7-B4212878C3B1@tony.li> <aa9c4b913d844410b2af90c8db78c194@huawei.com> <BY3PR05MB8081937B52E657713E8293BFC7ED9@BY3PR05MB8081.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> <a29c96be774845e582a66700d2264f7b@huawei.com> <e986565c98c24cadb858ca4abf6dbbfb@huawei.com> <BY3PR05MB8081A6A725740415356DB2EBC7FA9@BY3PR05MB8081.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> <eb8d7858982d449e94511f81eb9913c8@huawei.com> <BY3PR05MB808117E628EC6487362E6275C7FD9@BY3PR05MB8081.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> <ded09bb6ec864465982f5e025937c8e0@huawei.com> <BY3PR05MB80817C746EF6621F80730082C7FC9@BY3PR05MB8081.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> <41561193f7d448ff96129d6da20e49a2@huawei.com> <535C336B-545F-4E0E-A9DF-990FC0AB53CC@juniper.net> <d3c84493e63648ffaa6c902712c0739e@huawei.com> <DD62DC4D-C858-436C-B4A7-91A31F1DD0E8@tony.li> <5882db0f905847859d9973316bea3c85@huawei.com> <CA+RyBmWx+8Af7DRWnh_KOMWePBam+nfN_HRW0UPBNChpzU+9Lw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CA+RyBmWx+8Af7DRWnh_KOMWePBam+nfN_HRW0UPBNChpzU+9Lw@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US
Content-Language: zh-CN
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.112.40.195]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_cf7f726841ae4f6a915bee1d2880bf76huaweicom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mpls/_atD6E2J6ah72h3jZa9PCTiGWss>
Subject: Re: [mpls] Concerns about ISD
X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34
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: Fri, 06 May 2022 00:28:57 -0000

Hi Greg,
I am afraid I do not understand the scenario you presented.
Why IOAM is presented preceding some data which is more important?
What if IOAM is after those respective data?
Best,
Tianran

From: Greg Mirsky [mailto:gregimirsky@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, May 6, 2022 3:25 AM
To: Tianran Zhou <zhoutianran@huawei.com>
Cc: Tony Li <tony.li@tony.li>li>; John E Drake <jdrake@juniper.net>et>; mpls <mpls@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [mpls] Concerns about ISD

Hi Tianran,
I think that IOAM's Pre-allocated or Incremental trace options for hop-by-hop collection of the telemetry information present a use case that overturns your assumption. Consider a scenario when multiple MNAs are requested and IOAM is preceding some of the respective ancillary data segments in PSD. The size of the IOAM data area can grow large and thus making accessing other ancillary data very costly.

Regards,
Greg

On Wed, May 4, 2022 at 7:39 PM Tianran Zhou <zhoutianran=40huawei.com@dmarc.ietf.org<mailto:40huawei.com@dmarc.ietf.org>> wrote:
Hi Tony,

I think we have discussed the scenario before, sr or lsp.
For normal lsp, the stack should not be too large. Hence no big difference from ISD and PSD. I.e, no space for optimization.
So I think our context is only about sr.

Best,
Tianran

From: Tony Li [mailto:tony1athome@gmail.com<mailto:tony1athome@gmail.com>] On Behalf Of Tony Li
Sent: Thursday, May 5, 2022 10:18 AM
To: Tianran Zhou <zhoutianran@huawei.com<mailto:zhoutianran@huawei.com>>
Cc: John E Drake <jdrake@juniper.net<mailto:jdrake@juniper.net>>; John E Drake <jdrake=40juniper.net@dmarc.ietf.org<mailto:40juniper.net@dmarc.ietf.org>>; mpls <mpls@ietf.org<mailto:mpls@ietf.org>>
Subject: Re: [mpls] Concerns about ISD



On May 4, 2022, at 5:42 PM, Tianran Zhou <zhoutianran@huawei.com<mailto:zhoutianran@huawei.com>> wrote:

It does not make sense to me to create a new mechanism as ISD in operators’ network, while not using existing mature BSID.
There is no sign the reinvented wheel could be better.


Hi Tianran,

BSID assumes that SR is in use.  What if it isn’t?

Tony

_______________________________________________
mpls mailing list
mpls@ietf.org<mailto:mpls@ietf.org>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls