Re: [mpls] Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-lag-multipath-06: (with COMMENT)
Mach Chen <mach.chen@huawei.com> Thu, 14 March 2019 01:44 UTC
Return-Path: <mach.chen@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 62AC9131162; Wed, 13 Mar 2019 18:44:09 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 anMniq1dWL9U; Wed, 13 Mar 2019 18:44:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [185.176.76.210]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1F8ED131164; Wed, 13 Mar 2019 18:44:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lhreml706-cah.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.18.7.108]) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTP id 3AA1EE3E6C3E4CBCB0A3; Thu, 14 Mar 2019 01:44:04 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from DGGEML421-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.1.199.38) by lhreml706-cah.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.47) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.408.0; Thu, 14 Mar 2019 01:44:03 +0000
Received: from DGGEML510-MBX.china.huawei.com ([169.254.2.190]) by dggeml421-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.1.199.38]) with mapi id 14.03.0415.000; Thu, 14 Mar 2019 09:44:00 +0800
From: Mach Chen <mach.chen@huawei.com>
To: Mirja Kuehlewind <ietf@kuehlewind.net>
CC: "mpls@ietf.org" <mpls@ietf.org>, Mirja Kühlewind via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>, "mpls-chairs@ietf.org" <mpls-chairs@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-lag-multipath@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-lag-multipath@ietf.org>, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, "loa@pi.nu" <loa@pi.nu>
Thread-Topic: Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-lag-multipath-06: (with COMMENT)
Thread-Index: AQHU2Oy6s520bV8QO0y5RWWbir7qHKYJRALQ//+IqQCAAJatQP//jkSAgAFrBfA=
Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2019 01:43:59 +0000
Message-ID: <F73A3CB31E8BE34FA1BBE3C8F0CB2AE2928FCCA6@dggeml510-mbx.china.huawei.com>
References: <155240641959.16274.10292530156982066442.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <F73A3CB31E8BE34FA1BBE3C8F0CB2AE2928FAF0D@dggeml510-mbx.china.huawei.com> <F4C6A6A4-C40A-41D9-B135-E66EFC9EE06C@kuehlewind.net> <F73A3CB31E8BE34FA1BBE3C8F0CB2AE2928FB194@dggeml510-mbx.china.huawei.com> <33D26DA9-1F43-4C9E-93BD-DA1FC23BC7C0@kuehlewind.net>
In-Reply-To: <33D26DA9-1F43-4C9E-93BD-DA1FC23BC7C0@kuehlewind.net>
Accept-Language: en-US, zh-CN
Content-Language: zh-CN
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.111.194.201]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mpls/rzZbg7Kr6tNaFw1yUbill1Kgx84>
Subject: Re: [mpls] Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-lag-multipath-06: (with COMMENT)
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: Thu, 14 Mar 2019 01:44:10 -0000
Hi Mirja, Thanks for your suggestion, will add to the next revision. Best regards, Mach > -----Original Message----- > From: Mirja Kuehlewind [mailto:ietf@kuehlewind.net] > Sent: Wednesday, March 13, 2019 8:04 PM > To: Mach Chen <mach.chen@huawei.com> > Cc: mpls@ietf.org; Mirja Kühlewind via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>; > mpls-chairs@ietf.org; draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-lag-multipath@ietf.org; The > IESG <iesg@ietf.org>; loa@pi.nu > Subject: Re: Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-lag- > multipath-06: (with COMMENT) > > Hi Mach, > > See below. > > > On 13. Mar 2019, at 11:52, Mach Chen <mach.chen@huawei.com> wrote: > > > > Hi Mirja, > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Mirja Kuehlewind [mailto:ietf@kuehlewind.net] > >> Sent: Wednesday, March 13, 2019 5:51 PM > >> To: Mach Chen <mach.chen@huawei.com> > >> Cc: Mirja Kühlewind via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>; The IESG > >> <iesg@ietf.org>; mpls@ietf.org; draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-lag- > >> multipath@ietf.org; mpls-chairs@ietf.org; loa@pi.nu > >> Subject: Re: Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on > >> draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-lag- > >> multipath-06: (with COMMENT) > >> > >> Hi Mach, > >> > >> Please see below > >> > >>> On 13. Mar 2019, at 10:15, Mach Chen <mach.chen@huawei.com> wrote: > >>> > >>> Hi Mirja, > >>> > >>> Thanks for your comments! > >>> > >>>> -----Original Message----- > >>>> From: Mirja Kühlewind via Datatracker [mailto:noreply@ietf.org] > >>>> Sent: Wednesday, March 13, 2019 12:00 AM > >>>> To: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org> > >>>> Cc: draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-lag-multipath@ietf.org; > >>>> mpls-chairs@ietf.org; loa@pi.nu; mpls@ietf.org > >>>> Subject: Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on > >>>> draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-lag- > >>>> multipath-06: (with COMMENT) > >>>> > >>>> Mirja Kühlewind has entered the following ballot position for > >>>> draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-lag-multipath-06: No Objection > >>>> > >>>> When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to > >>>> all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to > >>>> cut this introductory paragraph, however.) > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Please refer to > >>>> https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html > >>>> for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: > >>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-lag-multi > >>>> pa > >>>> th/ > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------- > >>>> -- > >>>> - > >>>> COMMENT: > >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------- > >>>> -- > >>>> - > >>>> > >>>> I wanted to comment on the same sentence/normative requirement > as > >>>> Alvaro did in his point (2). Given Alvaro's additional information > >>>> that there is actually even a technical conflict with this > >>>> requirement, I think this should be address before publication and > >>>> might even be discuss-worthy. However, I'm really not an expert on > >>>> MPLS and therefore leave the decision to state a discuss ballot > >>>> position to > >> potentially other, more knowledgable ADs. > >>>> > >>>> Thanks for addressing the TSV-ART review comments (and thanks Jörg > >>>> for the review)! I support adding another sentence with a pointer > >>>> to rate-limit requirements in other docs. Thanks for proposing this > >>>> change. Looking forward this see this in the doc! > >>> > >>> Are you suggesting to add a reference, do you have any specific docs > >> suggestion? > >> > >> In your reply to Joerg’s tsv-art review (on Dec 14 already), you > >> proposed to add the following statement: > >> > >> "For an LSP path, it may be over several LAGs. For each LAG, there > >> will be many member links. To exercise all the links, many Echo > >> Request/Reply messages will be sent in a short period. It's possible > >> that those messages may traverse a common path as a burst. Under some > >> circumstances this might cause congestion at the common path. To > >> avoid potential congestion, it is RECOMMENDED that implementations to > >> randomly delay the Echo Request and Reply messages at the Initiating > LSRs and Responder LSRs.” > >> > >> You also said: > >> "RFC8029 (Security Consideration) does recommend the implementation > >> to regulate the ping traffic to the control plane, it applies to > >> this document as well. > >> > >> At the same time, RFC 6425 (P2MP LSP Ping, section 2.2) introduces > >> some ways to limit the message rate. The way of random delay messages > >> would apply to this document as well.” > >> > >> So adding pointer to these two documents/sections would be good as > >> well maybe. > > > > How about adding the below sentence? > > > > "The similar rate limiting paradigm is already adopted in [RFC8029] and > RFC[6425].” > > That works, or, even better, you could say something more similar than what > you said earlier, e.g. > > “Rate limiting of ping traffic is further specified in RFC8092 (secti?n 1) and > RFC6425 (section 2.2) which apply to this document as well.” > > Thanks, > Mirja > > > > > > Best regards, > > Mach > > > >> > >> Thanks! > >> Mirja > >> > >> > >>> > >>> Best regards, > >>> Mach > >>>> > >>> > >
- [mpls] Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on draft-ie… Mirja Kühlewind via Datatracker
- Re: [mpls] Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on draf… Mach Chen
- Re: [mpls] Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on draf… Mirja Kuehlewind
- Re: [mpls] Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on draf… Mach Chen
- Re: [mpls] Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on draf… Mach Chen
- Re: [mpls] Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on draf… Mirja Kuehlewind
- Re: [mpls] Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on draf… Mach Chen