IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [mpls] Clarification on the motivation of draft-xu-spring-islands-connection-over-ip-05

Xuxiaohu <xuxiaohu@huawei.com> Tue, 12 April 2016 10:08 UTC

Return-Path: <xuxiaohu@huawei.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 A7EA812E55E; Tue, 12 Apr 2016 03:08:02 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.217
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.217 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.996, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 iPDzcOMQ2Bhh; Tue, 12 Apr 2016 03:08:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [194.213.3.17]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F17A812E500; Tue, 12 Apr 2016 03:08:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from 172.18.7.190 (EHLO lhreml702-cah.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.7.190]) by lhrrg02-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.3.7-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id CHE85678; Tue, 12 Apr 2016 10:07:57 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from NKGEML412-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.98.56.73) by lhreml702-cah.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.99) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.235.1; Tue, 12 Apr 2016 11:07:57 +0100
Received: from NKGEML515-MBX.china.huawei.com ([fe80::a54a:89d2:c471:ff]) by nkgeml412-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.98.56.73]) with mapi id 14.03.0235.001; Tue, 12 Apr 2016 18:07:51 +0800
From: Xuxiaohu <xuxiaohu@huawei.com>
To: Uma Chunduri <uma.chunduri@ericsson.com>, Eric C Rosen <erosen@juniper.net>, "spring@ietf.org" <spring@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [mpls] Clarification on the motivation of draft-xu-spring-islands-connection-over-ip-05
Thread-Index: AQHRkBgULgoheUag70W81YSz/dG9Vp985QYAgAI0iT6ABYY/AIAAMR2AgAFUO4A=
Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2016 10:07:50 +0000
Message-ID: <1FEE3F8F5CCDE64C9A8E8F4AD27C19EE0D53933F@NKGEML515-MBX.china.huawei.com>
References: <1FEE3F8F5CCDE64C9A8E8F4AD27C19EE0D538182@NKGEML515-MBX.china.huawei.com> <57057618.8020604@juniper.net> <1FEE3F8F5CCDE64C9A8E8F4AD27C19EE0D538844@NKGEML515-MBX.china.huawei.com> <570BF204.6050301@juniper.net> <1B502206DFA0C544B7A604691520086358022705@eusaamb105.ericsson.se>
In-Reply-To: <1B502206DFA0C544B7A604691520086358022705@eusaamb105.ericsson.se>
Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US
Content-Language: zh-CN
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.111.99.55]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
X-Mirapoint-Virus-RAPID-Raw: score=unknown(0), refid=str=0001.0A020202.570CC8FE.015F, ss=1, re=0.000, recu=0.000, reip=0.000, cl=1, cld=1, fgs=0, ip=0.0.0.0, so=2013-06-18 04:22:30, dmn=2013-03-21 17:37:32
X-Mirapoint-Loop-Id: 6bd99262ea2d76e94853e1e05ac2cff1
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mpls/qRk-bIr9fe_vBH8nyV56hTgj3X4>
Cc: "mpls@ietf.org" <mpls@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [mpls] Clarification on the motivation of draft-xu-spring-islands-connection-over-ip-05
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: Tue, 12 Apr 2016 10:08:02 -0000


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Uma Chunduri [mailto:uma.chunduri@ericsson.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2016 5:47 AM
> To: Eric C Rosen; Xuxiaohu; spring@ietf.org
> Cc: mpls@ietf.org
> Subject: RE: [mpls] Clarification on the motivation of
> draft-xu-spring-islands-connection-over-ip-05
> 
> Hi Eric,
> 
> Quick  response  In-line [Uma]:
> 
> --
> Uma C.
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: mpls [mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Eric C Rosen
> Sent: Monday, April 11, 2016 11:51 AM
> To: Xuxiaohu; spring@ietf.org
> Cc: mpls@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [mpls] Clarification on the motivation of
> draft-xu-spring-islands-connection-over-ip-05
> 
> On 4/7/2016 6:39 PM, Xuxiaohu wrote:
> > [Xiaohu] The FEC associated the above label L is the /32 or 128/ prefix of node
> N. When the IGP next-hop towards that FEC is a non-MPLS node, the LSR
> receiving the above MPLS packet with top label of L is desired to forward that
> MPLS packet towards node N via an IP-based tunnel. In this case, the node N is
> the remote peer for that FEC.
> 
> Yes, in this case, the tunnel's receive endpoint can be regarded as a remote label
> distribution peer of the tunnel's  transmit endpoint.
> 
> However, in the above case I don't think it is obvious that you want to IP-tunnel
> the packet to N.
> You might just want to tunnel it around the
> non-MPLS node.   In that case, the tunnel's receive endpoint can still
> be regarded as a remote label distribution peer of the transmit endpoint, but the
> receive endpoint is not N.
> 
> [Uma]:  Sure, this can be done; if at all if there is a shortest path node towards
> N (supporting MPLS/SR) and if we can tunnel to that node yes, packet can be
> delivered to N eventually.
>                However, this involves (additional computation/adjustment)
> computation by all the boarder nodes to deliver it to the shortest SR node
> towards N.
>                In that case, actually I would have expected operator to put
> that additional node Label as the top label instead of N. If the former has to
> happen operator has to
>                exercise how this should happen through a knob ..(apart from
> the additional work on the boarder node).

Agree with Uma. There is no need to introduce any complexity to the SPF algorithm by taking N as the remote peer.

Best regards,
Xiaohu

> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> mpls mailing list
> mpls@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email