Re: [mpls] 2nd Working Group Last call on draft-ietf-mpls-mna-requirements
Igor Malyushkin <gmalyushkin@gmail.com> Tue, 02 April 2024 13:32 UTC
Return-Path: <gmalyushkin@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 6D32EC14F6E2; Tue, 2 Apr 2024 06:32:53 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.994
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.994 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, HTTPS_HTTP_MISMATCH=0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=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 ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id PWA7c3-iaw8k; Tue, 2 Apr 2024 06:32:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-yw1-x1134.google.com (mail-yw1-x1134.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::1134]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9C4A5C14F6BB; Tue, 2 Apr 2024 06:32:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-yw1-x1134.google.com with SMTP id 00721157ae682-6150670d372so12505097b3.1; Tue, 02 Apr 2024 06:32:44 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1712064764; x=1712669564; darn=ietf.org; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=Zti3xug7l2k6Op6dRiOmk6DAbsUd3rB6tne3HN99tC0=; b=fGF4+uLciDWAv5OrI2PeT3wr8cwg0HSB2f66bh2PjWF+yv22j5kNjv8F66zKouv2eJ hIvyOSCEoo1BMPdziKjnZFd7VY01LT/jUpudSDWUuTkuRlhN6q6RGnpFNcNl+gXorPJH NKIH2+v3OkqKYisZWwmxPdgWgCKNJm8wy2Gdg09HTNdcJnJCcgHbPVpB5YSv1QsfCuSk WytZgwpADv2NAZBfpGczWwpykgN5XVoxoIsi+MdjrNLkdCQU6XiG7D579Kp27CRd6tkg pC7ntzRhyLTwQK2zWnfBAa5ejfvXxxSBiyHj8iyKVBgQmP7X2JDuACo4EhBXKa/fH89R TYhg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1712064764; x=1712669564; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=Zti3xug7l2k6Op6dRiOmk6DAbsUd3rB6tne3HN99tC0=; b=tWGQD1t0qANjxodile/+SZrXfMeFNa0qg/nSuyDSl2Pp+sQBSp7SePA7VhcpVehPAf GTSNwnKP5/I4wwtImVFd0pt+3nigus+VR//RIoa/EXIknv5ijciUZ9fnLTCLStpcmgAv 11dnSIQ9e9EXZ2njjEZEIdFeBS4RAls+2T5gvsYr+4fyhItkhtYt0vFh8Uajbtmve9Z8 AJXXEMIpKHXXREq1O3nFzq31QicvYWuIYKCX1vU7dfpa3VlU2KhWmEABgDuVvjSkei1h lIE8Df/1aV9bPsxXhgVsfM5OXcPixuOvS4N2MpLP2P5wdMoU2LVzQcrgq05XMFbuZohv rx1w==
X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCXVLYbAhcQZgtr615jWFhv22dB1+M0Khxcv+FJUcS0p8wrw/K/DPW+b5Bfa+27/EXWxTCF1D7LKjUyLsYoe5aEmdvn7wh47sd/H42FbcxpPq+92jNLwx7H+ERZB7d6KibXAVmzB/dwDCw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yy8r0aZXLANJRWn65YHJfx6quyqHXsSSTWAomdvOsW7PN/T+L2T oTqwegIzl0p2Ri4f6L0Y3ildhZa+e2HvzlLiPbhL+zSQd2lgmmQEhuNW/X9WDzOqPtLDwUzqNIs qCtYfWGx5Rs4zHGNT/CidhnC5Cgs=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IFIsX7Vd6Obnrdu0iq1m5/+Ua387Yooh0tPN3R3ZpzJdYB05D6CFgThuG47a5K7e0Bz/JaEuE7iuhl+EaVfxqw=
X-Received: by 2002:a0d:df91:0:b0:615:ecc:91c0 with SMTP id i139-20020a0ddf91000000b006150ecc91c0mr3279701ywe.20.1712064762202; Tue, 02 Apr 2024 06:32:42 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <071e01da749c$d219b030$764d1090$@olddog.co.uk> <076301da7ba3$673652b0$35a2f810$@olddog.co.uk> <049FBC62-8BB2-4DB1-88EC-2CA1C45B5989@tony.li> <040f6174c9d544a6bf39b9586dbcd8e7@huawei.com> <DU5PR03MB10563A2CBAAF35D184682AB00EE3E2@DU5PR03MB10563.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com> <1380049846.3607113.1712064038559@mail.yahoo.com>
In-Reply-To: <1380049846.3607113.1712064038559@mail.yahoo.com>
From: Igor Malyushkin <gmalyushkin@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 02 Apr 2024 20:32:30 +0700
Message-ID: <CAEfhRrw6k1O++NuHiC5d18nsqyiLiQ2HgfTkddNzoT3yHtZf2A@mail.gmail.com>
To: John Drake <je_drake=40yahoo.com@dmarc.ietf.org>
Cc: Tianran Zhou <zhoutianran=40huawei.com@dmarc.ietf.org>, Tony Li <tony.li@tony.li>, Adrian Farrel <adrian@olddog.co.uk>, Andrew Alston <andrew.alston@liquidtelecom.com>, mpls <mpls@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-mpls-mna-requirements@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-mpls-mna-requirements@ietf.org>, "Zhukeyi(Kaiyin,Datacom Standard&Patent)" <zhukeyi@huawei.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000fbd4da06151d23cc"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mpls/mknOWiu5sowvnnouWrsSjFXiH8g>
Subject: Re: [mpls] 2nd Working Group Last call on draft-ietf-mpls-mna-requirements
X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
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, 02 Apr 2024 13:32:53 -0000
Hi all, I support the publication. I agree with Andrew on what was stated about SRv6, this is not a silver bullet at all. вт, 2 апр. 2024 г. в 20:21, John Drake <je_drake=40yahoo.com@dmarc.ietf.org >: > Andrew, > > A very thoughtful note. > > John > > On Tuesday, April 2, 2024 at 06:05:32 AM PDT, Andrew Alston < > andrew.alston@liquidtelecom.com> wrote: > > > Hi Tianran, > > > > I find this email to be a little… confusing. > > > > Firstly it is very well documented that there are multiple operators that > do not want – and will not deploy – srv6 (particularly with its divergence > from Ipv6 standards and potential security flaws.). These operators are > free to make a choice in technologies – and the IETF does not prohibit the > creation of multiple solutions to the same problem. Indeed RFC7221 deals > with competing design goals by citing > http://dl.acm.org/ft_gateway.cfm?id=966726 – specifically it states > “Helicopters are great, and so are submarines. The problem is that if you > try to build one vehicle to perform two fundamentally different jobs, > you’re going to get a vehcile that does neither job well.” > > > > You therefore need to acknowledge that operators may have different use > cases and different environments, and may choose to decide to use one > technology over another. Yes, there are times when we want a single > solution, but at the end of the day, the operators, who are your employers > customers, should be the ultimate determinants of what they choose to run, > and there is no requirement in any IETF process to state that there can > only be a single solution to a problem. > > > > Secondly, you refer to reinventing the wheel – it can be strongly argued > that parts of SRv6 did indeed reinvent the sr-mpls wheel, while reinventing > various other competing technologies. By way of example, it is entirely > possible to create L3VPN’s – and has been for years – without the use of > SRv6. So in this sense, you are correct that we sometimes reinvent the > wheel – for various reasons and various purposes – and to meet operator > requirements. This is exactly what happened in the case of SRv6, and it is > part and parcel of what the ietf does, to create solutions that cater to > the needs of the internet in general, not a single vendor, not a single > operator. SRv6 does NOT meet the requirements of all operators, and to > insist that it does is to disregard potential customers. > > > > You are also correct in stating that many people do not care about MNA – > because they are quite happy with what they are running and are happy to > continue using their currect technologies. However, the statement seems > predicated on the fact that everyone cares about SRv6 – let me 100% assure > you that is not the case. Indeed – if you watch the MSR6 BOF (which should > be available on youtube), a particular individual from a large operator > directly stated (slightly paraphrased) “This presentation is predicated on > the fact that we all care about SRv6 – I am here to tell you we don’t” So > while your statement is accurate – it is not in any way an argument against > the adoption of MNA. > > > > I would STRONGLY suggest you read RFC7282 as well – which heavy refers to > technical objections and even deals with a situation where one thing is > considered a more elegant and clean solution, yet consensus is still found > (Please see section 3 of the aforementioned RFC) > > > > In this particular case, on the specific grounds that there are operators > who wish to have extended network functionality – but are not comfortable > with SRv6 and do not believe in its security compromises – I fully support > the advancement of MNA. > > > > I am curious however if you have any substantive technical issues with the > document – that go beyond “There is something else to do this” (which as > stated – some operators do not agree with and do not want – and will never > run until outstanding issues have been resolved) > > > > Thanks > > > > Andrew > > > > > > > > > Internal All Employees > From: mpls <mpls-bounces@ietf.org> on behalf of Tianran Zhou <zhoutianran= > 40huawei.com@dmarc.ietf.org> > *Date: *Saturday, 30 March 2024 at 03:29 > *To: *Tony Li <tony.li@tony.li>, Adrian Farrel <adrian@olddog.co.uk> > *Cc: *mpls <mpls@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-mpls-mna-requirements@ietf.org < > draft-ietf-mpls-mna-requirements@ietf.org>, Zhukeyi(Kaiyin,Datacom > Standard&Patent) <zhukeyi@huawei.com> > *Subject: *Re: [mpls] 2nd Working Group Last call on > draft-ietf-mpls-mna-requirements > > Hi Adrian, > > IMO, this document still cannot address the question why the industry or > operators need the MNA, given there is already SRv6. > >From the very beginning, we just reinvent a wheel. > There is no surprise many people do not care about MNA. > I do not support. > > Tianran > > -----Original Message----- > From: mpls [mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org <mpls-bounces@ietf.org>] On > Behalf Of Tony Li > Sent: Friday, March 29, 2024 11:35 PM > To: Adrian Farrel <adrian@olddog.co.uk> > Cc: mpls <mpls@ietf.org>; draft-ietf-mpls-mna-requirements@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [mpls] 2nd Working Group Last call on > draft-ietf-mpls-mna-requirements > > > [WG chair hat: off] > > Looks good, ship it, modulo Greg’s comments. > > T > > > > On Mar 21, 2024, at 8:21 AM, Adrian Farrel <adrian@olddog.co.uk> wrote: > > > > Hi all, > > > > I know it is IETF week and you all have other things to do (nice > > meals, sight-seeing, combatting jet-lag), but I just wanted to remind > > you to look at this document and make your comments about the last call. > > > > With last calls, silence generally means no support! > > > > Best, > > Adrian > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: mpls <mpls-bounces@ietf.org> On Behalf Of Adrian Farrel > > Sent: 12 March 2024 16:46 > > To: 'mpls' <mpls@ietf.org> > > Cc: draft-ietf-mpls-mna-requirements@ietf.org > > Subject: [mpls] 2nd Working Group Last call on > > draft-ietf-mpls-mna-requirements > > > > This email starts a second MPLS working group last call on > > draft-ietf-mpls-mna-requirements. > > > > (You may recall that the first last call produced a lot of discussion > > and issues that Matthew, as editor, has worked valiantly to resolve.) > > > > Please re-review the document (it has changed a lot since last time) > > and express an opinion on the list. > > - Is the document complete? > > - Does it contain any errors? > > - Is it ready to move forward for publication as an Informational RFC? > > > > There is no IPR disclosed against this document or its predecessors. > > All authors, contributors, and active working group participants are > > reminded of their responsibilities under BCP 79. > > > > This last call will run for three weeks (covering the IETF period). It > > will end at 17.00 UTC on Tuesday 2nd April (narrowly avoiding ending > > on 1st April and confusing us all). > > > > Thanks, > > Adrian (for the MPLS chairs) > > > > _______________________________________________ > > mpls mailing list > > mpls@ietf.org > > > https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ietf.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fmpls&data=05%7C02%7CAndrew.Alston%40liquidtelecom.com%7Cb97d64aadac747b8099308dc50507d32%7C687926120f0e46cbb16afcb82fd80cb1%7C0%7C0%7C638473553836866595%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=wNHRWK%2BXX%2FYGEkpi6HOtobZ2VE808UwNI6HPskoWv7M%3D&reserved=0 > <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls> > > > > _______________________________________________ > > mpls mailing list > > mpls@ietf.org > > > https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ietf.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fmpls&data=05%7C02%7CAndrew.Alston%40liquidtelecom.com%7Cb97d64aadac747b8099308dc50507d32%7C687926120f0e46cbb16afcb82fd80cb1%7C0%7C0%7C638473553836873706%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=39TEbGr0J4zPapoOtN2u1%2FDWSnZm2plQGFVmixEQS1g%3D&reserved=0 > <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls> > > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > > https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ietf.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fmpls&data=05%7C02%7CAndrew.Alston%40liquidtelecom.com%7Cb97d64aadac747b8099308dc50507d32%7C687926120f0e46cbb16afcb82fd80cb1%7C0%7C0%7C638473553836876881%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=7zspvfKxxD%2FrHudXHqGZto5E%2BoRcdr5PQ4E6KXFjolI%3D&reserved=0 > <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls> > > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > > > https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ietf.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fmpls&data=05%7C02%7CAndrew.Alston%40liquidtelecom.com%7Cb97d64aadac747b8099308dc50507d32%7C687926120f0e46cbb16afcb82fd80cb1%7C0%7C0%7C638473553836879980%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=e5QppspRhNVRmd%2FV%2BmYqbnG0ZZb%2F3vb2zuMZ2Nip7Bs%3D&reserved=0 > <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls> > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls >
- [mpls] 2nd Working Group Last call on draft-ietf-… Adrian Farrel
- Re: [mpls] 2nd Working Group Last call on draft-i… Adrian Farrel
- Re: [mpls] 2nd Working Group Last call on draft-i… Matthew Bocci (Nokia)
- Re: [mpls] 2nd Working Group Last call on draft-i… Adrian Farrel
- Re: [mpls] Do you care about MNA? [Was: 2nd Worki… Greg Mirsky
- [mpls] Do you care about MNA? [Was: 2nd Working G… Adrian Farrel
- Re: [mpls] Do you care about MNA? [Was: 2nd Worki… Acee Lindem
- Re: [mpls] 2nd Working Group Last call on draft-i… Tony Li
- [mpls] * abbreviations in the RFC Editors list (w… loa
- Re: [mpls] Do you care about MNA? [Was: 2nd Worki… Joel Halpern
- Re: [mpls] 2nd Working Group Last call on draft-i… Joel Halpern
- Re: [mpls] * abbreviations in the RFC Editors lis… Stewart Bryant
- Re: [mpls] * abbreviations in the RFC Editors lis… Acee Lindem
- Re: [mpls] * abbreviations in the RFC Editors lis… loa
- Re: [mpls] * abbreviations in the RFC Editors lis… Acee Lindem
- Re: [mpls] Do you care about MNA? [Was: 2nd Worki… Stewart Bryant
- Re: [mpls] 2nd Working Group Last call on draft-i… Rakesh Gandhi
- Re: [mpls] 2nd Working Group Last call on draft-i… Tianran Zhou
- Re: [mpls] Do you care about MNA? [Was: 2nd Worki… loa
- Re: [mpls] Do you care about MNA? [Was: 2nd Worki… Stewart Bryant
- Re: [mpls] Do you care about MNA? [Was: 2nd Worki… Loa Andersson
- Re: [mpls] * abbreviations in the RFC Editors lis… loa
- Re: [mpls] 2nd Working Group Last call on draft-i… Tianran Zhou
- Re: [mpls] 2nd Working Group Last call on draft-i… Tony Li
- Re: [mpls] Do you care about MNA? [Was: 2nd Worki… Andrew Alston
- Re: [mpls] Do you care about MNA? [Was: 2nd Worki… John Drake
- Re: [mpls] 2nd Working Group Last call on draft-i… Igor Malyushkin
- Re: [mpls] 2nd Working Group Last call on draft-i… Gyan Mishra
- Re: [mpls] 2nd Working Group Last call on draft-i… Igor Malyushkin
- Re: [mpls] Do you care about MNA? [Was: 2nd Worki… Matthew Bocci (Nokia)
- Re: [mpls] 2nd Working Group Last call on draft-i… John Drake
- Re: [mpls] 2nd Working Group Last call on draft-i… Tianran Zhou
- Re: [mpls] 2nd Working Group Last call on draft-i… Stewart Bryant
- Re: [mpls] Do you care about MNA? [Was: 2nd Worki… Greg Mirsky
- Re: [mpls] 2nd Working Group Last call on draft-i… Andrew Alston