Re: [mpls] Comments on draft-gandhi-spring-ioam-sr-mpls

Rakesh Gandhi <rgandhi.ietf@gmail.com> Sun, 17 November 2019 23:05 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 7261D120116; Sun, 17 Nov 2019 15:05:27 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.997
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.997 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, 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=gmail.com
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 HmN0domiuCWr; Sun, 17 Nov 2019 15:05:26 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-lf1-x136.google.com (mail-lf1-x136.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::136]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B269C12010F; Sun, 17 Nov 2019 15:05:25 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-lf1-x136.google.com with SMTP id v8so12188679lfa.12; Sun, 17 Nov 2019 15:05:25 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=+JZJVkyKsWZTGnXQmd/MpLDq0th92yodOdrkJzrYLPA=; b=ecteRnwFw0xB5CwgLJ4LE2DAoRJVDVd40e8Cpas3lfFsUbj/Od7PIlLgXh9YpQA8og WGlDBjdQuJZ/Xgq8o7K0hIC4TAhetHOmmvkMRuxIh9TxEmtCcyUlUG/1deZp75vkNj2x L9zrSn/5KwKn/ouysdOg2qm6XPuvUiriYlbeLUnwAmpYg/De2fGPQm4IIhMl9N8dO8EN srfHqXYfVheu4tgUEEIRqyF2f2Kg7KAo/aYv7HQsssTV/ngLq14GSaLc/psdMuulzroa HA0cwpXvIBuiDaHi0F97GaSra/tvyRB3hLqrZ02n0wHNxd1xOdY6LcL80FRGXRJQV77F wtRQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=+JZJVkyKsWZTGnXQmd/MpLDq0th92yodOdrkJzrYLPA=; b=ibPiHW6QahA1yqYun92yHypeL9+Pw3Wft2W7B51obMzf49oIq8ybc7cuwU8G1DA2yG 48dtHATSkVEtwldvZ8nCV7dyQ0Ssv8rLrMUjG3A7oys7JbHCYJfS1xgn/Dyez1PMSfz9 YStt13i3fsT9i0BdubUWR9RFLpD3VVOIFgIzClFY9lgj59OgXE0M6ck338UZ51ygW3P9 mOxw2r0+BIF0V6K9JQ4eCw4NfobJI6bzEyATtbaOHeGNdCXsN+7nnRLb/bw07o0++ZRx 9wadOhyrTNUVOI3at6GNd74BMYk1WH9Vo/lfSbkwN6yzMkBfAjTWcP/oNScUTAo7f65/ 9URw==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAX7nKGEmpbyT18PjegCmP1x0ButrnLNmG110kQI3Pd56wIvvfZV xrsE6fwoF6qdvuv9xVbYl+34sd/xPxBGyusBDw==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwgZ5xPInullA4H73rqDSi3N7M+dXFLQTUK+kX+i9FwkSwg6s7OlaKU58nZx7pVNX31p3t798TlD77TNz9gSLo=
X-Received: by 2002:a19:f811:: with SMTP id a17mr18065441lff.132.1574031923935; Sun, 17 Nov 2019 15:05:23 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <DM6PR19MB3689BEA8FC0775D7420D805DFC720@DM6PR19MB3689.namprd19.prod.outlook.com>
In-Reply-To: <DM6PR19MB3689BEA8FC0775D7420D805DFC720@DM6PR19MB3689.namprd19.prod.outlook.com>
From: Rakesh Gandhi <rgandhi.ietf@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2019 07:05:12 +0800
Message-ID: <CAMZsk6cWjRcswFzMYe6NKwzNwG4ECbWudo+f1DU9-56uabUWvg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Tarek Saad <tsaad.net@gmail.com>
Cc: "draft-gandhi-spring-ioam-sr-mpls@ietf.org" <draft-gandhi-spring-ioam-sr-mpls@ietf.org>, "mpls@ietf.org" <mpls@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000b0fdb1059792dd45"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mpls/r6jZ_pnR7N2Yl-iCEfMYFKnI8kc>
Subject: Re: [mpls] Comments on draft-gandhi-spring-ioam-sr-mpls
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: Sun, 17 Nov 2019 23:05:27 -0000

Hi Tarek,
Thanks for your review comments. Please see replies below:
1) Yes, there is no need to add multiple indicator/special labels. We will
clarify in the draft.
2) Fig 3 is showing the location of the Path Segment wrt Indicator/special
label (this was a comment on the list).

Thanks,
Rakesh




On Mon, Nov 18, 2019 at 12:21 AM Tarek Saad <tsaad.net@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi authors,
>
>
>
> Having read through this draft, I have the following comments:
>
>
>
>    1. Is it possible that more than one IOAM encapsulating node tries to
>    insert IOAM header into same packet – e.g. consider hierarchical MPLS
>    LSP(s).. If so, how to handle multiple encapsulating node(s) trying to add
>    IOAM option/data after end of MPLS label stack? If not possible (or not
>    supported), it’d be good to explicitly state this
>    2. It is not clear what Figure 3 is serving in section 4?
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Tarek
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> mpls mailing list
> mpls@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls
>