Re: [mpls] Two new drafts on (micro-)BFD over MC-LAG interfaces
Manav Bhatia <manavbhatia@gmail.com> Fri, 08 April 2016 15:04 UTC
Return-Path: <manavbhatia@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 D8DDB12D930; Fri, 8 Apr 2016 08:04:52 -0700 (PDT)
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 nWi7JV1lPD6L; Fri, 8 Apr 2016 08:04:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-yw0-x231.google.com (mail-yw0-x231.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c05::231]) (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 21BBB12D92F; Fri, 8 Apr 2016 08:04:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-yw0-x231.google.com with SMTP id i84so131528944ywc.2; Fri, 08 Apr 2016 08:04:46 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc; bh=T3aQixiktqeCUJ/2KLCpuz9XYc5tbFgJPVvauTBE7oQ=; b=m0GjA4/lo2G/D/qgI7R9W+RPqTZWsSM29e3O5BZWdwK09klW2OLyTCeQxKqefHRpof YN2rcOFkcE1WHgaC55N3lNSn66E9XqFXbVy+SIlY2C4a3QZSdhNhmq3Pc4vKPkpbvFsO eVSN5sSJFAi1HQQRrysBJROZ7gkUgYKKiXqW/ZMaEHrI/Tjq/rDliLErwnrAOmahfqfD 9juaKvNAqWoHOolOVRSLDVkH/GjSj40FzLPMfZf5W6DugW7dxfC5R5z+ujPHw884ISQH DbDZv+HdZ/KVSz67YVXH2/E2OKCDjdssN626CFOa5PiqtXzCVUpGSidnyRH8Wg8n+r4b eRQg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc; bh=T3aQixiktqeCUJ/2KLCpuz9XYc5tbFgJPVvauTBE7oQ=; b=KY0px3kVWu/6IMbFK5Rpznr/kknVvigVhh1zpIYVI+w3J38hKReXSMITYQXhtpktln pokaKFdTQ9fahm/MuyU3zCO43clj33pgJOaIP7ISJ8jmh67CM4wKdFTmFNfkvUbkM5lx EYD6lp1vPXzsfNE5y6dEuRowwaChGTJxGy4c8PjyZPllWBED/h0ZuXNBg4oho2vvJde4 6QemvifqVBlBri5WGHDznYlGb9wTcVUdILXkwH9kQ9c0Cgx+2FumUdfF2gSH4eWIlAnL ns90hKkLITYcVORl6nCOWd5fkkNx9yPmKQjrMqv0QTX/r/yX006lTETf2grnE+wSptPa PzBw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AD7BkJKw9hv2qAfn2q7lA5GD6DkLfl60TzJLLSgm9pAyJNZ+yqe6+p/ndOqq84Xwb9wxzjSn2xPycNzAaE4n9w==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.37.32.136 with SMTP id g130mr4888962ybg.45.1460127885285; Fri, 08 Apr 2016 08:04:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.13.216.3 with HTTP; Fri, 8 Apr 2016 08:04:45 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <7347100B5761DC41A166AC17F22DF11221A40584@eusaamb103.ericsson.se>
References: <7347100B5761DC41A166AC17F22DF11221A3CCED@eusaamb103.ericsson.se> <F73A3CB31E8BE34FA1BBE3C8F0CB2AE28C1F040F@SZXEMA510-MBX.china.huawei.com> <CAG1kdojp7Km16YDiwjvPKwRNjbvBWOkqpccRsEDCn8Q8BuV0Qg@mail.gmail.com> <7347100B5761DC41A166AC17F22DF11221A40584@eusaamb103.ericsson.se>
Date: Fri, 08 Apr 2016 20:34:45 +0530
Message-ID: <CAG1kdoibVBWsga3K88MGbZAFSbD_2q0efea_8aEKd_hN+CV53w@mail.gmail.com>
From: Manav Bhatia <manavbhatia@gmail.com>
To: Gregory Mirsky <gregory.mirsky@ericsson.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a1143e5deede1d7052ffa8350"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mpls/hG28NWXwtd8960XZxJ37itbnBI4>
Cc: "draft-tanmir-rtgwg-bfd-mc-lag-ip@tools.ietf.org" <draft-tanmir-rtgwg-bfd-mc-lag-ip@tools.ietf.org>, "mpls@ietf.org" <mpls@ietf.org>, "mpls-chairs@ietf.org" <mpls-chairs@ietf.org>, "rtg-bfd@ietf.org" <rtg-bfd@ietf.org>, "rtg-bfd-chairs@ietf.org" <rtg-bfd-chairs@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [mpls] Two new drafts on (micro-)BFD over MC-LAG interfaces
X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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, 08 Apr 2016 15:04:53 -0000
Hi Greg, Why cant different micro-BFD packets use the IP address of the MC-LAG end points? Ones going to router 1 will all carry the same unicast IP address. The ones going towards the other router will all carry some other IP address, which would be configured along with the MC-LAG configs. In fact i would argue that the u-bfd packets going to different routers must use different IP addresses so that you can actually verify the data plane liveliness. Whats the point in sending a contrived IP address if the path that it takes is different from the other regular packets? Cheers, Manav On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 6:09 PM, Gregory Mirsky <gregory.mirsky@ericsson.com> wrote: > Hi Manav, > > thank you for sharing insight view of discussions around RFC 7130, > extremely helpful. > > We believe, and Jeff is co-author of RFC 7130 too, that MC-LAG presents > different case and the compromise that you’ve pointed too is justified. We > will add more details on the potential differences between unicast and > multicast fast paths in the next update. > > We are open to the discussion and always welcome comments and alternative > proposals. > > > > Regards, > > Greg > > > > *From:* Manav Bhatia [mailto:manavbhatia@gmail.com] > *Sent:* Thursday, April 07, 2016 7:39 PM > *To:* Mach Chen > *Cc:* Gregory Mirsky; rtg-bfd@ietf.org; mpls@ietf.org; > draft-tanmir-rtgwg-bfd-mc-lag-ip@tools.ietf.org; rtg-bfd-chairs@ietf.org; > mpls-chairs@ietf.org; Alia Atlas (akatlas@gmail.com) > *Subject:* Re: Two new drafts on (micro-)BFD over MC-LAG interfaces > > > > I believe it had to do with multicast datapath (especially link local) > being different from the unicast datapath in most routers. Using link local > multicast IP addresses may not necessarily guarantee Unicast IP > reachability. > > > > When writing 7130 we spent quite a bit of time ensuring that we dont carve > out a special data path for the micro-BFD packets. Using link local would > have made it a lot simpler. > > > > And this is where i think the current proposal is flawed -- they use link > local multicast to ensure IP unicast reachability which is incorrect. > > > > Cheers, Manav > > > > On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 11:16 PM, Mach Chen <mach.chen@huawei.com> wrote: > > Hi Greg and all, > > > > I just have quick review on the drafts. If my understanding is correct, > the idea is to use multicast destination address other than unicast address > when sending BFD packets over LAG links. And actually this idea has been > proposed in https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-chen-bfd-interface-00 (the > predecessor of RFC 7130). And at that time, the co-authors of RFC 7130 did > discuss the idea of using multicast destination address, but for some > reason I forget now(I may need to reiterate the discussions on the > archive), the idea was abandoned, although I still think multicast > destination address is a smart idea. > > > > Best regards, > > Mach > ------------------------------ > > *From:* Rtg-bfd [rtg-bfd-bounces@ietf.org] on behalf of Gregory Mirsky [ > gregory.mirsky@ericsson.com] > *Sent:* Tuesday, April 05, 2016 6:16 > *To:* rtg-bfd@ietf.org; mpls@ietf.org > *Cc:* draft-tanmir-rtgwg-bfd-mc-lag-ip@tools.ietf.org; > rtg-bfd-chairs@ietf.org; mpls-chairs@ietf.org; Alia Atlas ( > akatlas@gmail.com) > *Subject:* Two new drafts on (micro-)BFD over MC-LAG interfaces > > Dear All, > > two new drafts, related to RFC 7130, were published before the meeting: > > · BFD on MC-LAG interfaces in IP network > <https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-tanmir-rtgwg-bfd-mc-lag-ip-00> > > · BFD on MC-LAG interfaces in IP/MPLS network > <https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-tanmir-rtgwg-bfd-mc-lag-mpls-00> > > > > Greatly appreciate your reviews, comments, questions and suggestions. > > > > Regards, > > Greg > > >
- [mpls] Two new drafts on (micro-)BFD over MC-LAG … Gregory Mirsky
- Re: [mpls] Two new drafts on (micro-)BFD over MC-… Jeffrey Haas
- Re: [mpls] Two new drafts on (micro-)BFD over MC-… Gregory Mirsky
- Re: [mpls] Two new drafts on (micro-)BFD over MC-… Jeff Tantsura
- Re: [mpls] Two new drafts on (micro-)BFD over MC-… Jeffrey Haas
- Re: [mpls] Two new drafts on (micro-)BFD over MC-… Shah, Himanshu
- Re: [mpls] Two new drafts on (micro-)BFD over MC-… Gregory Mirsky
- Re: [mpls] Two new drafts on (micro-)BFD over MC-… Mach Chen
- Re: [mpls] Two new drafts on (micro-)BFD over MC-… Manav Bhatia
- Re: [mpls] Two new drafts on (micro-)BFD over MC-… Gregory Mirsky
- Re: [mpls] Two new drafts on (micro-)BFD over MC-… Gregory Mirsky
- Re: [mpls] Two new drafts on (micro-)BFD over MC-… Mach Chen
- Re: [mpls] Two new drafts on (micro-)BFD over MC-… Manav Bhatia
- Re: [mpls] Two new drafts on (micro-)BFD over MC-… Reshad Rahman (rrahman)
- Re: [mpls] Two new drafts on (micro-)BFD over MC-… Gregory Mirsky
- Re: [mpls] Two new drafts on (micro-)BFD over MC-… Gregory Mirsky
- Re: [mpls] Two new drafts on (micro-)BFD over MC-… Reshad Rahman (rrahman)
- Re: [mpls] Two new drafts on (micro-)BFD over MC-… Manav Bhatia
- Re: [mpls] Two new drafts on (micro-)BFD over MC-… Greg Mirsky
- Re: [mpls] Two new drafts on (micro-)BFD over MC-… Greg Mirsky
- Re: [mpls] Two new drafts on (micro-)BFD over MC-… Manav Bhatia
- Re: [mpls] Two new drafts on (micro-)BFD over MC-… Gregory Mirsky
- Re: [mpls] Two new drafts on (micro-)BFD over MC-… Manav Bhatia
- Re: [mpls] Two new drafts on (micro-)BFD over MC-… Gregory Mirsky
- Re: [mpls] Two new drafts on (micro-)BFD over MC-… Jeffrey Haas
- Re: [mpls] Two new drafts on (micro-)BFD over MC-… Gregory Mirsky
- Re: [mpls] Two new drafts on (micro-)BFD over MC-… Glen Kent
- Re: [mpls] Two new drafts on (micro-)BFD over MC-… Gregory Mirsky