Re: [mpls] I-D Action: draft-zheng-mpls-lsp-ping-yang-cfg-06.txt
Greg Mirsky <gregimirsky@gmail.com> Wed, 29 November 2017 02:07 UTC
Return-Path: <gregimirsky@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 976D71267BB; Tue, 28 Nov 2017 18:07:43 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.699
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.699 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-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 lRgzu_nxW3sq; Tue, 28 Nov 2017 18:07:42 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-lf0-x236.google.com (mail-lf0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c07::236]) (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 D3E93126E7A; Tue, 28 Nov 2017 18:07:41 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-lf0-x236.google.com with SMTP id f20so2093775lfe.3; Tue, 28 Nov 2017 18:07:41 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=tv6WGWQjIh4AMXni7hPw1bElfhVR51DXD9Q2ueNPEA0=; b=sohjFc2U6d3+CHOxQYtr54m0GoNTJvJ3fVnOJWTp+E1GEIwSNNCcsWgN5T4TEi/lTH QMtYO36NeitMhlHo4dZv4vfnOY8Aiq+iu/gat/tFTnMwot0XMiiXCaIZsByZYIMNhjnb Lvv1MX0BmO2xiZMOLBa/AjprwzD1BqCBqv2dm8Ba7A7RLyGtjxyKAcoKiZjC1BECfWhJ SvqIbYLBN7TBRddRoCpWR342hiWWSHjeyjFfvoH9N7VelHhbjl5Qb+yAh69Uws9w5byC kuELS6Qsg2HpBTh9Fko3qu2LZOlJLsgweXDT8GJVfsQF91iSRiiHRRh2MPrcvfLQvz0X oCMg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=tv6WGWQjIh4AMXni7hPw1bElfhVR51DXD9Q2ueNPEA0=; b=mAeJH97YtQovoZRSp4h93JLbb3tsNlvhgxQcsnzgrAG+W6jAetC4+3BLmcxqM1c0E1 jTTaQMblQ6cbl7uVt56gZnxD5m+E9CJf5pCfp4fyHPckgEWPZ2Gw1LNM+LgD+0VBzIKY 3kudCrn4fjqd6ju3kNQJ4HcUMO1GSUlx1UwqHqPACg7r8bT6Gln3sUHl8NmBU44nV3Ot qEvkrUnLBBol9nUdLd39LH+D0KFcucY9wsZjvr/6FPaZQ2Cmk8rAd/i2Hq1NgAmKGgYn LRT56jyG3YVmZhqgZEe7+jG/2otOM35zNdtOavZRn8QdCcoGsIEfVqT+JPcGUuwzlCUK Skhw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AJaThX7FUgR5kF+pnJ4udn/9lHpb67VquX/vk/CYVo3N2nB3MtbUvDl9 O9AT7F6k8QYl6yZ48GpE8NLZZuY8dy6LKZPWFYI=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGs4zMa7a+7/FOjF1NaUZywVRdDva8EZLc9tshijXD9yfvPuYFUkqvnlPSvmhz2+EKxl3GfoC0oHtpviVWShCKMZdNQ=
X-Received: by 10.46.83.29 with SMTP id h29mr578992ljb.144.1511921259357; Tue, 28 Nov 2017 18:07:39 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.46.32.136 with HTTP; Tue, 28 Nov 2017 18:07:38 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <005300d0a6d84a448fab94dfc6e9759f@XCH-RTP-013.cisco.com>
References: <005300d0a6d84a448fab94dfc6e9759f@XCH-RTP-013.cisco.com>
From: Greg Mirsky <gregimirsky@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2017 18:07:38 -0800
Message-ID: <CA+RyBmVRk_ffwQJYnA_33yKuhA2iYZuQJ9-EaJXgruonFC0TSA@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Faisal Iqbal (faiqbal)" <faiqbal@cisco.com>
Cc: "mpls@ietf.org" <mpls@ietf.org>, "draft-zheng-mpls-lsp-ping-yang-cfg@ietf.org" <draft-zheng-mpls-lsp-ping-yang-cfg@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="94eb2c1ce7fa97aca7055f15993e"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mpls/e2AJ1LEZF0zXeDEre01fEdI-Rlo>
Subject: Re: [mpls] I-D Action: draft-zheng-mpls-lsp-ping-yang-cfg-06.txt
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, 29 Nov 2017 02:07:43 -0000
Hi Faisal, apologies for the delay to respond to your thorough review of the MPLS LSP ping data model and great comments. Please find my answers and notes in-line and tagged GIM>>. I'm looking forward to be working with you as co-author on this draft. Hope you'll agree. Regards, Greg On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 2:27 PM, Faisal Iqbal (faiqbal) <faiqbal@cisco.com> wrote: > Dear Authors, > > Thank you for initiating the work on Yang Model for LSP Ping and sharing > your draft. I have gone through the document and find it very useful and > important work item. Please see below for some comments on the document. > I’m still a beginner in Yang modeling so I apologize if I’m missing > something obvious or well-understood. > > > > Sec 3.1 – I think the document aims to specify various existing MPLS OAM > targets (including P2MP) through a combination of target-fec-type and > target-fec structure. Is my understanding correct? > GIM>> Yes, you're absolutely correct. > > > Sec 3.1 – I did not find a way to specify some important parameters in the > container control-info that operators can use to control echo request path > or other parameters. Specifically: > > i. Operator should be allowed to specify RSVP interface > by tunnel name as well. For some operators, name may be more meaningful > than tunnel number. > GIM>> I think we may use tunnel-ref and tunnel-p2mp-ref defined in draft-ietf-teas-yang-te. GIM>> And extending your suggestion, should it be for other FECs, for example, static? > ii. A field to provide a destination address in 127/8 > range. > > iii. An option to specify a range of destination addresses > to test e.g. give destination start address 127.0.0.1 and end address > 127.0.0.8, system will initiate 8 echo requests correspondingly. > GIM>> I like the idea to provide optional controls over entropy of LSP Ping. These may be useful not only for LSP Ping but BFD over MPLS LSP. > iv. Given that TTL is a field in the container > control-info, I feel that operator should be given an option to specify > whether or not to use Downstream Detailed Mapping (DDMAP) TLV, or even the > deprecated DSMAP TLV. > > v. Operator should also be allowed to specify DDMAP TLV > sub-TLV fields such as the presence, type, and size of multipath TLV. > GIM>> Agree. And what the defaults could be? > > > Sec 3.3 – I had following questions about the result-info structure. > > i. If the echo reply contains a TLV (e.g. DDMAP TLV for > request to a transit node), how will we communicate that information to the > user? Operator may use LSP Ping to identify downstream path(s) from a > particular downstream node. > > ii. What does probe-index refer to? > GIM>> Index of an LSP ping within a test session. > > > Sec 6 – For target-fec-type, is there a way for operator to specify a > particular control plane or FEC (as defined in RFC-8029 e.g. LDP, Generic > FEC etc.) to be used for echo request? > GIM>> It must be extended, agreed. I think it is r/w. Not? > Does this document only tackle LSP Ping operation? Would other echo > request operations such as LSP Traceroute for LSP path discovery be > documented separately? > GIM>> Great observation! Traceroute should be supported. Path discovery? > > Some minor editorial comments below. > > -“Model presented in [RFC4560];” instead of “Model presented in[RFC4560] > ;” in Section 1.2 > > -Text in Section 3 should read “…and result information for multiple > instances of LSP-Ping test.” Instead of “…and result information for multi > instances of LSP-Ping test.” > > - "IETF Multiprotocol” instead of “"IETF Multiprotocl” in Section 6. > > -Description for enum success should read “The test probe is successful” > instead “The test probe is successed” > > -Description for leaf sum-of-squares in Section 6 should read “replies” > instead of “replys” > GIM>> Thank you, Faisal. Will include in the next update. > > > Regards, > > Faisal Iqbal >
- Re: [mpls] I-D Action: draft-zheng-mpls-lsp-ping-… Faisal Iqbal (faiqbal)
- Re: [mpls] I-D Action: draft-zheng-mpls-lsp-ping-… Greg Mirsky
- Re: [mpls] I-D Action: draft-zheng-mpls-lsp-ping-… Greg Mirsky