IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [mpls] Comments on draft-gandhi-mpls-stamp-pw

Rakesh Gandhi <rgandhi.ietf@gmail.com> Fri, 03 November 2023 12:16 UTC

Return-Path: <rgandhi.ietf@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 BF5F2C15155E; Fri, 3 Nov 2023 05:16:37 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.105
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.105 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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, 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 dXgeRlfGnXxR; Fri, 3 Nov 2023 05:16:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-oi1-x229.google.com (mail-oi1-x229.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::229]) (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 22B19C14CF1A; Fri, 3 Nov 2023 05:16:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-oi1-x229.google.com with SMTP id 5614622812f47-3b3e7f56ca4so1086458b6e.0; Fri, 03 Nov 2023 05:16:37 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1699013796; x=1699618596; 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=e4pnU2KXu190060tUw5vTwxGtElpy6s99bWteyDRzEs=; b=YuloTKE+S4tFXWcRWHTlUulr7KRj7URg8JQHgO0gATaj2p/nFyZr4eKsZCEKs2ZBS7 nX1fX/NLaeuNu+Qbw0nWGTef+6YYQoSlZ0KS/M+OYohoYXBl6f1iRGHU0VWeGM/HRUoV cSH5DIOZDRb4hBUeFw1/K/BWda7fQojGVoNwn2TaKAY39a7JFzzlxPWiilrIJMsyHvFv S68y9NZdFShS1sAoKoRdIV2ACRAaGtnm4VbJdw7Nwy3OMVrglN69vGfC+pL8F8XDRZW+ kaRxzzFnhbpDndIvHwfNYxbgVTTf29qttOfP7qIBUrRcG0MYXFUJ2MsPQP9dk/6f3Vk9 DZbw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1699013796; x=1699618596; 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=e4pnU2KXu190060tUw5vTwxGtElpy6s99bWteyDRzEs=; b=MrvHDsBu5AgMSpwLLHcXdpFQL3txpphFHZGVFARLlWm89T9c3xUvbKP2OAgrFeVdxt WAWhJAZNR4NvC7WJbEsfXe6BIF/Fviic00eXYVm1ClAN8djGhR801XQacSEKnfYpJl0X q5pbY4SjWNPGBlG1of78c85ReQfi3WeBnPjPRmkrceZJML+SWVKU9/idpRVUodixdqH8 AT1g1gBLRl9HlAbGEDgXVljDhDrlJ8oXOrtedoArlsW1+NmGJYJ+gBj3H1PEuIzyY42/ 1oX++150yR+PIl/zlZZ2cfIJnecNLpM3qYCi4ny9QFco9D625dhCpTM2GBfVXnna7hxw hHlA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yy7+m89c3ZF9XlAZNOwDcx13vTXG2loCptFqVyYU8bYEC9n1hXh yUUDGvtty+HndSYa38YKYzOW3O5QldT84dkI1bAuY+L62Cka
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IHqTlknPcV3pmM6rfsuFgvjqmsnxr9ggVhocTImW4Ci5T0+o5TtXBoIJs6aOPfs/iB7hy8GUAr0TQXI5WtdwTc=
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6358:7e4a:b0:169:9586:9195 with SMTP id p10-20020a0563587e4a00b0016995869195mr8624243rwm.31.1699013795777; Fri, 03 Nov 2023 05:16:35 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <202311031456472738856@zte.com.cn>
In-Reply-To: <202311031456472738856@zte.com.cn>
From: Rakesh Gandhi <rgandhi.ietf@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 03 Nov 2023 08:16:24 -0400
Message-ID: <CAMZsk6d5rpU7Dk8RCCuQcJebRL1Us7wpDNeB3GxMAskfZ3QUqQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: xiao.min2@zte.com.cn
Cc: draft-gandhi-mpls-stamp-pw@ietf.org, mpls@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000c4104d06093e797f"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mpls/qTDR8r4AxXkUPzOW_RlG2Yb88qI>
Subject: Re: [mpls] Comments on draft-gandhi-mpls-stamp-pw
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: Fri, 03 Nov 2023 12:16:37 -0000

Hi Xiao Min,

Thanks for your review comments. Please see replies inline with <RG>..

On Fri, Nov 3, 2023 at 2:57 AM <xiao.min2@zte.com.cn> wrote:

> Dear Authors,
>
>
> I've read draft-gandhi-mpls-stamp-pw-04 and found it's valuable.
>
> In Section 4 and 5, two different packet formats are defined for STAMP
> Session-Sender Test Packet and STAMP Session-Reflector Test Packet
> respectively, a list of PW types on the application of each packet format
> may be helpful, e.g., for Ethernet PW, I think the STAMP Test Packet
> without IP/UDP Header should be used.
>
<RG> Yes, that's a good suggestion, we can include Ethernet PW in the next
revision.


> The idea is to require only one packet format for a specific PW type.
>
<RG> Yes, we could add a table for PW type and STAMP format to be used in
the next revision. For example, the following PW could use STAMP packet
without IP/UDP header.

   1. MPLS Ethernet PW Data Traffic [RFC4448]
   2. L2-Specific Sublayer (L2SS) used in L2TPv3 PW Data Traffic [RFC3931]
   3. Private Line Emulation [draft-ietf-pals-ple] Data Traffic
   4. TDM over IP [RFC5087] Data Traffic (no IP Header case)




> Besides, RFC 5085 defines three types of VCCV Control Channel, it's
> helpful if this draft can provide some analysis on how and why a specific
> type of VCCV Control Channel is choosed for STAMP over PW encapsulation,
> and I believe fate sharing between the PW data packet and the STAMP-over-PW
> test packet is an important argument behind the selection.
>

<RG> Yes, that's a good point. There are three types defined in RFC 5085.
The scope of the draft is type 3 (TTL expiry). We can add some text for
other types for completeness.


> Although the current version of this document focuses on STAMP over PW
> only, I don't see a reason why STAMP over LSP can't be included, I believe
> one document covering both STAMP over PW and STAMP over LSP is preferable.
>

<RG> Yes, agree. We can include MPLS LSP in the next revision.

thanks,
Rakesh



>
> Best Regards,
>
> Xiao Min
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> mpls mailing list
> mpls@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email