IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [mpls] [sfc] Working Group adoption of draft-farrel-mpls-sfc

Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net> Mon, 02 April 2018 11:35 UTC

Return-Path: <rraszuk@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 A063A127444; Mon, 2 Apr 2018 04:35:20 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.1
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.249, 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 MRud48DqpmqM; Mon, 2 Apr 2018 04:35:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wm0-x235.google.com (mail-wm0-x235.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c09::235]) (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 EA6421250B8; Mon, 2 Apr 2018 04:35:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wm0-x235.google.com with SMTP id i3so2671061wmf.3; Mon, 02 Apr 2018 04:35:18 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc; bh=SsO/6j3Yp+dRwyB0RiekBk150H4Cijwq9jcM9colKh0=; b=nD6znXfvfW3rTahlC/C+OELX7C+dd8xtrqLa84+cgdoDNLX43lAjF9gMU+1q2OpG6S dzmFBwIMDelZHpzdrSMKfLCbrAl6tubryaYYn9p3EtdeBcx4BvBkA/3YUSbRP+e/cq0K MSbqgvN2a6lIWlH/nZ23YFQlGT4zPeY7y2IcPNYpztl/q8Qrrq1atagE8aztnHz8ZWzq 4yOAJK+JJoer+izUXeDD0KAZdVFCMkTkIer87AdJggCI7fODPqzUn6kb7/rOB0/h6TOL KXlF3pFArfYliyG51+RRlEnBaw2/8ERz7ziJKdR3QjypdN5Aw8sa9w1RagSN/P1RF5w/ ihSQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=SsO/6j3Yp+dRwyB0RiekBk150H4Cijwq9jcM9colKh0=; b=idv+iY7w4+VI4Jm0s50m3YGP4WHxCYsZUDRAc1ypieM1EZxV3Q9LWLWDUZR+8haoMM NM7A9dYxgSymxygnyPohjf/Ry2Rq/ITlzE5e0920g4987C3wW/idJdvzuHYenEYqA01r Taih+kVmZ5ufwTTtBUu+b2+1nKZ/uCKSEmJwu+mYpWAs6cHDv17jZ9zwi07Kt177J32+ U7MQA9ijoHHx0xI9skDWHkHRjDYJTBVbaCRnIyvMyOPn8Pbs6xMRJB0UY34PLo0MXNWq EsvkShoPvytl+6DRP3elD2q0HtkZ0XjZv3KtIjW7NAR4+5pReI4G5YNRfpwHvgk8Y6fa /p9g==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALQs6tDDD3VwM+YL7mZtsl7Mam4HktjATHd2C1bsFnuxdS6SaD4JYb/3 U0n+kZ6ACEtPodSnaq81MAPoX9kx0NgXgA4LUDzUrQ==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AIpwx4/TffdGTG+Mf2spyjAhJqiZ5HarIYpW+EuTpBZrYfY9p2hXrSbH22B6by2MHpKxEhaZMVSPxijzJ21FVow5fzg=
X-Received: by 10.28.195.67 with SMTP id t64mr695550wmf.113.1522668917182; Mon, 02 Apr 2018 04:35:17 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: rraszuk@gmail.com
Received: by 10.28.222.197 with HTTP; Mon, 2 Apr 2018 04:35:16 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <1522554645079.8864@bell.ca>
References: <2ac6b61d-3a38-1aaf-62ae-d923f1ad7468@pi.nu> <a392880f-6b86-4406-a348-42398e24285a.xiaohu.xxh@alibaba-inc.com> <DB5PR07MB158998C7FAAB4831C243D88D83A30@DB5PR07MB1589.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com> <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>
From: Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net>
Date: Mon, 02 Apr 2018 13:35:16 +0200
X-Google-Sender-Auth: -Zilh-14-XbcIJsQcTBbk0iwsYs
Message-ID: <CA+b+ERmzFPZRyrCnBvnRVhK5F25RMc8+Wt-n6NXKrONWy9G+_g@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Bernier, Daniel" <daniel.bernier@bell.ca>
Cc: "mpls@ietf.org" <mpls@ietf.org>, "sfc@ietf.org" <sfc@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a114a1082eb54460568dbfbff"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mpls/lDH5O_BkI-xhi11dZOzVyC5Quw8>
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: Mon, 02 Apr 2018 11:35:21 -0000

Daniel,

I actually don't think that removal of SR references is a good thing here.
The draft still uses source based label stacking as well as global (domain
wide) meaning of a label. So even without calling it SR it is still based
on SR architecture.

Best,
R


On Sun, Apr 1, 2018 at 5:50 AM, Bernier, Daniel <daniel.bernier@bell.ca>
wrote:

> +1,
>
> As explained on the list, with the SR reference removed from
> draft-barrel-mpls-sfc, I have no opposition for it to progress that is IF
> the WG actually believes it needs to. I did question it's need as an label
> based implementation of RFC7665 while we already
> draft-bess-service-chaining to do chain services on existing MPLS platforms.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Daniel Bernier
>

v2.46.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status