IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [mpls] Opsdir last call review of draft-ietf-mpls-egress-protection-framework-05

Yimin Shen <yshen@juniper.net> Tue, 25 June 2019 14:13 UTC

Return-Path: <yshen@juniper.net>
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 421D01202DB; Tue, 25 Jun 2019 07:13:49 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.7
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=juniper.net
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 RueL731SZezA; Tue, 25 Jun 2019 07:13:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx0b-00273201.pphosted.com (mx0b-00273201.pphosted.com [67.231.152.164]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 32BA41202D7; Tue, 25 Jun 2019 07:13:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pps.filterd (m0108162.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-00273201.pphosted.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id x5PE3iJ1029875; Tue, 25 Jun 2019 07:11:51 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=juniper.net; h=from : to : cc : subject : date : message-id : references : in-reply-to : content-type : content-id : content-transfer-encoding : mime-version; s=PPS1017; bh=TUNRdkhxHZNFLmtMDIvoU7ZHW9uKJGpI1AWWnE+E3rs=; b=dlt70hlYITAy3yBYHLMHInytAZpXErdmErhDUmm8iSUETouzMOowFrY/LkoySxgVHGcN YB2ywqNdKTg7cZwGBSqRHokOVh7hsXzS25adhqT52e96Z1t/S1iIsa3jSyykFdi7Dyjk r2zVbrXijeCYqECpY2977xnyw0bkk9qRcrXreIUBk718IQ1JPKs5TtiDi8z7y/XMoVjn 56hrVqleWw03GNP89llrtecqv3GSRFQWAJVGpbb2BZ9olZ0Rd/JMoSiwjroXVFbMWp6G buCH9DYQGO+4q7tSgBIiJaDGxj7f/GFzr7euugs443H5am0BxjfvwqADp8jh3w4ifkOn +A==
Received: from nam05-by2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-by2nam05lp2053.outbound.protection.outlook.com [104.47.50.53]) by mx0b-00273201.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2tbhby8eng-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 25 Jun 2019 07:11:50 -0700
Received: from BYAPR05MB5256.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (20.177.231.94) by BYAPR05MB6646.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (20.178.235.76) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.2032.12; Tue, 25 Jun 2019 14:11:49 +0000
Received: from BYAPR05MB5256.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::9888:79c2:fa09:2995]) by BYAPR05MB5256.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::9888:79c2:fa09:2995%7]) with mapi id 15.20.2008.007; Tue, 25 Jun 2019 14:11:48 +0000
From: Yimin Shen <yshen@juniper.net>
To: Scott Bradner <sob@sobco.com>, "ops-dir@ietf.org" <ops-dir@ietf.org>
CC: "draft-ietf-mpls-egress-protection-framework.all@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-mpls-egress-protection-framework.all@ietf.org>, "ietf@ietf.org" <ietf@ietf.org>, "mpls@ietf.org" <mpls@ietf.org>, "BRUNGARD, DEBORAH A" <db3546@att.com>
Thread-Topic: [mpls] Opsdir last call review of draft-ietf-mpls-egress-protection-framework-05
Thread-Index: AQHVJK533BZ2GZxukE2jJhp44T+fsKasM26A
Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2019 14:11:48 +0000
Message-ID: <2865A83C-3DF9-4543-9BFB-81F27D0E430A@juniper.net>
References: <156073596605.8311.3687141912546256519@ietfa.amsl.com>
In-Reply-To: <156073596605.8311.3687141912546256519@ietfa.amsl.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/10.10.a.190512
x-originating-ip: [66.129.241.12]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 4a2bf0fa-862e-4419-2066-08d6f9771051
x-ms-office365-filtering-ht: Tenant
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(2390118)(7020095)(4652040)(8989299)(4534185)(4627221)(201703031133081)(201702281549075)(8990200)(5600148)(711020)(4605104)(1401327)(4618075)(2017052603328)(7193020); SRVR:BYAPR05MB6646;
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: BYAPR05MB6646:
x-ms-exchange-purlcount: 1
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <BYAPR05MB664633CA6B04F88EDBDFABEDBDE30@BYAPR05MB6646.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:9508;
x-forefront-prvs: 0079056367
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(39860400002)(366004)(136003)(396003)(376002)(346002)(189003)(199004)(58126008)(7736002)(6246003)(186003)(76176011)(53936002)(6486002)(26005)(99286004)(81166006)(81156014)(6512007)(8936002)(102836004)(305945005)(2906002)(478600001)(229853002)(86362001)(6436002)(6506007)(966005)(6306002)(8676002)(66476007)(25786009)(66574012)(64756008)(71190400001)(66446008)(66946007)(73956011)(14454004)(66556008)(36756003)(76116006)(33656002)(71200400001)(91956017)(4326008)(2501003)(68736007)(5660300002)(6116002)(3846002)(66066001)(316002)(476003)(2616005)(486006)(256004)(54906003)(110136005)(11346002)(446003); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:BYAPR05MB6646; H:BYAPR05MB5256.namprd05.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; LANG:en; PTR:InfoNoRecords; MX:1; A:1;
received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: juniper.net does not designate permitted sender hosts)
x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: vhy8s+wf7SkJU7daUNk4d5jhK3zWYQB+ek8Wihw9s+fjz3AzZPZ0BHm43JK1mLj3yqb10YT338voJ3rmFaay/n87v1GmBHmDHCzc00P/8RZ7n6kyZe3vUrF6LtfvSEjAbiLyw/g0jBs2aRSaYDP2vFYa9eSO6YITOaqAp3kx7tCyDJ/pOVFj9q+Yx7/MdgJUzVeEnebAouD13+0ENwE07crc6eSFQQgiqYwjNA4CxJ7TWWBkA82pvFLwZUuAMbiKoYksefNHJ2607JAgZTIekJ5my/3fPmpD41rIl1DJO9LlsJLrIUApGdldGcOfPUprV9qCleehScyaUsn6SXdh0xFeBb30hKzYuTVg3vmmo0pQTaF8fM02rPTVx7gN9XmePLJzHopFbab6+yvaayvBzq6dW6WJs7q2FsS/XLYEnFA=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-ID: <925CA7CC05B3954F9F32948038750BEF@namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: juniper.net
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 4a2bf0fa-862e-4419-2066-08d6f9771051
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 25 Jun 2019 14:11:48.8421 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: bea78b3c-4cdb-4130-854a-1d193232e5f4
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: yshen@juniper.net
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BYAPR05MB6646
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:, , definitions=2019-06-25_10:, , signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_spam_notspam policy=outbound_spam score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1011 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 impostorscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1810050000 definitions=main-1906250111
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mpls/mB1nM3a0TqQ6zacgqzFhoK_z7LI>
Subject: Re: [mpls] Opsdir last call review of draft-ietf-mpls-egress-protection-framework-05
X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Tue, 25 Jun 2019 14:13:49 -0000

Hi Scott,

Thanks very much for your OPS-DIR review for this draft!

As you already mentioned, when a local repair takes an effect on the router of PLR (point of local repair), the router should generally produce a message, event or alert, and the operator at a management station can be notified. This is generic, and also applicable to the egress protection in this draft. The mode (e.g. push vs. pull), channel, and protocol used by the PLR to communicate with the management station may vary depending on vendors, and hence it is out of the scope of this draft. We will add some text to clarify this in the next version.

Thanks,

-- Yimin Shen

On 6/16/19, 9:46 PM, "mpls on behalf of Scott Bradner via Datatracker" <mpls-bounces@ietf.org on behalf of noreply@ietf.org> wrote:

    Reviewer: Scott Bradner
    Review result: Has Nits
    
    I did an OPS-DIR review of MPLS Egress Protection Framework
    (draft-ietf-mpls-egress-protection-framework) – The document describes a
    protection mechanism for the egress links of an MPLS network.  The function
    described looks quitter useful (at least for multi homed sites that are using
    MPLS services)
    
    I did not find any operational issues of note and consider the document ready
    for publication except for one ops-related observation.  I did not see any
    discussion of how a management station would be notified if a protection
    circuit were to be utilized.  It seems to me that is something that a network
    operation would like to know. I admit to not knowing how a network operator
    knows when any of the fast reroute techniques are engaged so I may be missing
    some basic fact about how MPLS networks are operated and monitored but some
    words of guidance would seem to be useful or some alert function added to the
    node that does the switching would be helpful
    
    
    _______________________________________________
    mpls mailing list
    mpls@ietf.org
    https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.ietf.org_mailman_listinfo_mpls&d=DwIGaQ&c=HAkYuh63rsuhr6Scbfh0UjBXeMK-ndb3voDTXcWzoCI&r=2-nT7xvtgxYac4wpYxwo_jh5rZM2uwTLxgRhaObwYug&m=XVV33QA8GH14GrK9u4qYyBRqJIfC4hhDd1z9SkOtlUk&s=_JQ8Ij7tM0t_F4m1l8PfwScUCfoOSNN8-uVDFZF3uGk&e=

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email