[mpls] Comments on draft-kompella-larp
Stewart Bryant <stbryant@cisco.com> Thu, 06 March 2014 09:11 UTC
Return-Path: <stbryant@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D31011A01AB for <mpls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 6 Mar 2014 01:11:06 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.048
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.048 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.547, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham
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 y2wwQp0z-Dke for <mpls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 6 Mar 2014 01:10:59 -0800 (PST)
Received: from aer-iport-1.cisco.com (aer-iport-1.cisco.com [173.38.203.51]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3E40F1A01A9 for <mpls@ietf.org>; Thu, 6 Mar 2014 01:10:35 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1751; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1394097031; x=1395306631; h=message-id:date:from:reply-to:mime-version:to:cc:subject: content-transfer-encoding; bh=eXDLPX98qCEf1dILo53u8Vf2klkvtWWrf3oVIqAVd/o=; b=HToiHbpUM8rU9HSXJQDPE6glyoSaebiKJFevCHISNxwSZRKXZuk9jRK6 hEys+tVEtRvud8wPRVGj1Cxq/RBASLlz9fB2qgaDAR8rmr1VlbMR5j6Zj m/Rr3Bj7uDnt95JuuySgZNvnizjGY3WUheY59DkEjGqlzuOFqVf7QNuyL U=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AgEFAL86GFOQ/khM/2dsb2JhbABagwbCLoEbFnSCZEABPBYYAwIBAgFLDQEHAQEXh16mI41fmxMXjlGEPwSYPZIrgy0
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.97,598,1389744000"; d="scan'208";a="7409084"
Received: from ams-core-3.cisco.com ([144.254.72.76]) by aer-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 06 Mar 2014 09:10:30 +0000
Received: from cisco.com (mrwint.cisco.com [64.103.70.36]) by ams-core-3.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id s269AUFG032208 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 6 Mar 2014 09:10:30 GMT
Received: from [IPv6:::1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cisco.com (8.14.4+Sun/8.8.8) with ESMTP id s269AS6o015670; Thu, 6 Mar 2014 09:10:28 GMT
Message-ID: <53183B84.8070100@cisco.com>
Date: Thu, 06 Mar 2014 09:10:28 +0000
From: Stewart Bryant <stbryant@cisco.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.3.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Kireeti Kompella <kireeti@juniper.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mpls/nNak10z8ejULKAg9AOn6xKeI-Yc
Cc: Dan Frost <frost@mm.st>, "mpls@ietf.org" <mpls@ietf.org>
Subject: [mpls] Comments on draft-kompella-larp
X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
Reply-To: stbryant@cisco.com
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Thu, 06 Mar 2014 09:11:07 -0000
Kireeti, This is an interesting problem and we are pleased that you have brought discussion of this topic to the IETF MPLS WG. The proposal on the table however is a point solution and it may be worth considering the wider problem of host to network MPLS interfaces (UNIs). In particular whilst the majority of traffic is IPv4 today, the stated policy of the IETF is to recognize the need to deliver IPv6 solutions and thus not to design IPv4 only solutions. Whilst it is true that everyone does ARP, and ARP can in principle be extended, the reality of the situation is that the majority of ARP implementations are optimized IPv4 specific, and thus in most cases extending ARP would require a similar effort to deploying a new IPv4/IPv6 agnostic protocol for the UNI. Given that Ethernet, whilst the most popular server network interface, is not the exclusive interface and recognizing that new link types may emerge, particularly in the IOT space, it may serve us better to take an approach that is MPLS specific but data-link neutral. A further consideration is that whilst it may be possible to extend ARP for other address families, it is not a protocol that is well suited to the transport of other necessary UNI information, for example, metrics, QOS information, MTU, authentication, integrity, spectral information etc. An alternative approach that is worth considering as a starting point is described in draft-ietf-mpls-gach-adv (in the RFC Editor's queue). When we wrote this draft we were attempting to define a general UNI approach for MPLS with a focus on simplicity. If you are interested in exploring this with us further we would be pleased to work with you on this. Dan and Stewart
- [mpls] Comments on draft-kompella-larp Stewart Bryant
- Re: [mpls] Comments on draft-kompella-larp Stewart Bryant
- Re: [mpls] Comments on draft-kompella-larp Kireeti Kompella
- Re: [mpls] Comments on draft-kompella-larp Stewart Bryant (stbryant)