Re: [mpls] I-D Action: draft-ietf-mpls-rmr-00.txt

Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net> Wed, 02 December 2015 09:39 UTC

Return-Path: <rraszuk@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 56BB01A6FA7 for <mpls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 2 Dec 2015 01:39:15 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.277
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.277 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=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 YKOda4ktgl4c for <mpls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 2 Dec 2015 01:39:12 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-wm0-x233.google.com (mail-wm0-x233.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c09::233]) (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 D83731A6F97 for <mpls@ietf.org>; Wed, 2 Dec 2015 01:39:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: by wmec201 with SMTP id c201so49609993wme.1 for <mpls@ietf.org>; Wed, 02 Dec 2015 01:39:10 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject :from:to:cc:content-type; bh=bUrKOochth9pLfQ8guNgHiBWBJjvj89wg5WQOBJ5Pb4=; b=WjZYM580ohDm/K5OoMirgJg92GvxeDMo/i8e5/9ftJAAGYIzoQcIo4SRG/jeeE8+i7 FdGDJXWC5l8kKNekXBAJQl91TXQezGSMDfrN2FCZEQSL91jfmg5sX7avdm5FcQWTuLop r66Rv3SFsZzRW68rfXwh6sn/JZz+gQ5Gx3a09STKV5RbVbBgf4fAs3MpToRwtikvXkZI XqyCeHNDNytb+M3bPH5aIhmJTpKRvtjpPygZOQSqFp1J6be0G8YJUvHkiAK4ai1kFmXe ofwtBJDk8E+1EogPxfJpJd82RrCbuykLNFVHNp+xSJ6+l5EI7tOOBGSWHDPkQvem7s4c 1OlQ==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.194.203.99 with SMTP id kp3mr3305602wjc.3.1449049150346; Wed, 02 Dec 2015 01:39:10 -0800 (PST)
Sender: rraszuk@gmail.com
Received: by 10.194.204.195 with HTTP; Wed, 2 Dec 2015 01:39:10 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <20151102070404.20181.56171.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
References: <20151102070404.20181.56171.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Wed, 02 Dec 2015 10:39:10 +0100
X-Google-Sender-Auth: HX2raabsrVdhwMnhdwEW4deA81Q
Message-ID: <CA+b+ER=96GrjVATNnAs_Ki2ZpfJb89O0oyrphYsmySKMJdn4Bg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net>
To: Kireeti Kompella <kireeti@juniper.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="047d7bd91af2de5f3b0525e70b3d"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mpls/b_cf9wDLElgNUeD-9oW4kEoW3DM>
Cc: "mpls@ietf.org" <mpls@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [mpls] I-D Action: draft-ietf-mpls-rmr-00.txt
X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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 Dec 2015 09:39:15 -0000

Hi Kireeti,

As to the core problem which the below draft attempts to solve (ring
topologies) can you please explain any advantage of introducing such heavy
additional complexity into both control and data plane when the problem has
been already solved over a decade ago ?

Moreover it has been shipping in commercial implementations of at least one
major vendor. It is called Remote Loop-Free Alternate (LFA) Fast Reroute
(FRR).

Notice also that Remote LFAs is an IETF Stadards Track formal RFC #7490
which your draft does not even reference.

https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7490

Also as you may observe Remote LFA already uses either MPLS transport with
vanilla LDP or pure IP transport and its configuration is few simple lines
of the cli.

Aren't we in general suppose to optimize opex a bit these days and use
existing technologies rather then reinventing the wheel over and over :) ?

Best,
R.


On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 8:04 AM, <internet-drafts@ietf.org> wrote:

>
> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts
> directories.
>  This draft is a work item of the Multiprotocol Label Switching Working
> Group of the IETF.
>
>         Title           : Resilient MPLS Rings
>         Authors         : Kireeti Kompella
>                           Luis M. Contreras
>         Filename        : draft-ietf-mpls-rmr-00.txt
>         Pages           : 14
>         Date            : 2015-11-01
>
> Abstract:
>    This document describes the use of the MPLS control and data planes
>    on ring topologies.  It describes the special nature of rings, and
>    proceeds to show how MPLS can be effectively used in such topologies.
>    It describes how MPLS rings are configured, auto-discovered and
>    signaled, as well as how the data plane works.  Companion documents
>    describe the details of discovery and signaling for specific
>    protocols.
>
>
>
> The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-mpls-rmr/
>
> There's also a htmlized version available at:
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-mpls-rmr-00
>
>
> Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of
> submission
> until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.
>
> Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/
>
> _______________________________________________
> mpls mailing list
> mpls@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls
>