Re: [mpls] comments on draft-ietf-mpls-sfc-encapsulation-01

Anoop Ghanwani <anoop@alumni.duke.edu> Wed, 05 December 2018 20:40 UTC

Return-Path: <ghanwani@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 52E92130E6F for <mpls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 5 Dec 2018 12:40:01 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.34
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.34 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, HTTPS_HTTP_MISMATCH=1.989, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no 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 YoZrpgkwg_Vs for <mpls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 5 Dec 2018 12:39:59 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-ua1-f42.google.com (mail-ua1-f42.google.com [209.85.222.42]) (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 EAE43130E58 for <mpls@ietf.org>; Wed, 5 Dec 2018 12:39:58 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-ua1-f42.google.com with SMTP id v24so7596560uap.13 for <mpls@ietf.org>; Wed, 05 Dec 2018 12:39:58 -0800 (PST)
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=AkAYOvpZ7Vx+51xMXHT+vmwTqQfj1tK+4eTkgvczemQ=; b=PXvTyPwQNUGdgKBezf+uXRIKPqDYs4Kwet8jcfgZQRDW8QCh0jVs8uExdmffx1jj8k YdMv+/9Tv4/urRJOeMyLUzuU7PokC4UHiFfLllrsz+FrqOz7hRNecNumdYduembyFMxK RhVNSbJlNrsdaaM3NFjnPIT14rrc0C9aTb9vNfYJiP6WhEl8Yo/O8AWpSBHogyDXdPAc LqFn5krdJ8XmBGtqUSXfBcXd7uKfmJ+W5C7OtOL9F4JODdLRlhT6GkssOwcQe5jyl7sC 84Bv8zi+DiqNGxXYfhMVQEkftA5DVMQGDXQ5qJGw0+yaG/8VHoKt2CfugcRn3eUXRmjh fjVw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AA+aEWZvhN3OE4j9iUnVG86NoON3aSeNfxF7ZFQ5nRTuyRh4jBY7i6hF Xwjtvji7237xxoSugeQ36Q/V9aA7MveqVBz3ONE=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AFSGD/Uyeucds62mJNaxxAuJPttA3EsM2aTy45wVyiZ5niy6t7wy7pAzwXO5sJafTJidb2zx8NTJZJORMEdtOh0n30o=
X-Received: by 2002:ab0:225a:: with SMTP id z26mr9953638uan.100.1544042397962; Wed, 05 Dec 2018 12:39:57 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAA=duU3jt+cf3beJmwfAZQVWDGvCV1wmkQpUjxUqrzKkJVW_og@mail.gmail.com> <b6cc364b-6b03-d222-7320-ecabc1735ef5@pi.nu> <CA+-tSzyt8FG1JDOG0tkfySej3nwxA98T2=v+5LUUL0ZaAaD1AA@mail.gmail.com> <CAA=duU1wvhj8xbOctsTyTStJnSx695VOT8jOHPvmsCDm8H6_MQ@mail.gmail.com> <CA+-tSzyY8avK7iWP-5fSV1wn+TrMBWxxS7-vNwfCOrvGzMPDQA@mail.gmail.com> <BN7PR05MB43549BA39FABBA890341BF0DC7A80@BN7PR05MB4354.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> <CA+-tSzxecfEGds4JEb-e++w9b9jKJDJBPg317kYRVUxfcCjSsA@mail.gmail.com> <BN7PR05MB4354D94B885D37345E15AA08C7A80@BN7PR05MB4354.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
In-Reply-To: <BN7PR05MB4354D94B885D37345E15AA08C7A80@BN7PR05MB4354.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
From: Anoop Ghanwani <anoop@alumni.duke.edu>
Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2018 12:39:44 -0800
Message-ID: <CA+-tSzyhk3dFw8bhbeRFtf4S2f0NptqpDKfXcpcM-TQy1gVE_Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: John E Drake <jdrake@juniper.net>
Cc: mpls@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000a6147d057c4c62e3"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mpls/sHGmquqRTMDUoLDZZIz8AgOSL_0>
Subject: Re: [mpls] comments on draft-ietf-mpls-sfc-encapsulation-01
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: Wed, 05 Dec 2018 20:40:01 -0000

John,

How about:
"using MPLS as a replacement for NSH, covering use cases that do not need
per-packet metadata, is described elsewhere [x]."

Thanks,
Anoop

On Wed, Dec 5, 2018 at 12:24 PM John E Drake <jdrake@juniper.net>; wrote:

> Hi,
>
>
>
> The point was that “(with some loss of functionality)” is a meaningless
> phrase.
>
>
>
> Yours Irrespectively,
>
>
>
> John
>
>
>
> *From:* Anoop Ghanwani [mailto:anoop@alumni.duke.edu]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, December 5, 2018 3:05 PM
> *To:* John E Drake <jdrake@juniper.net>;
> *Cc:* mpls@ietf.org
> *Subject:* Re: [mpls] comments on draft-ietf-mpls-sfc-encapsulation-01
>
>
>
> Hi John,
>
>
>
> It also allows for per-SFP or per-flow metadata.  Just doesn't allow for
> per-packet metadata.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Anoop
>
>
>
> On Wed, Dec 5, 2018 at 11:47 AM John E Drake <jdrake@juniper.net>; wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
>
>
> Comment inline
>
>
>
> Yours Irrespectively,
>
>
>
> John
>
>
>
> *From:* mpls [mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org] *On Behalf Of *Anoop Ghanwani
> *Sent:* Wednesday, December 5, 2018 2:24 PM
> *To:* mpls@ietf.org
> *Subject:* Re: [mpls] comments on draft-ietf-mpls-sfc-encapsulation-01
>
>
>
> Hi Andy,
>
>
>
> Yes, I agree my comment wasn't complete.  Perhaps this is better:
>
> "using MPLS as a replacement for NSH (with some loss of functionality) is
> described elsewhere [x]."
>
>
>
> *[JD]  Using the MPLS label stack rather than the NSH to carry the Service
> Path Identifier (SPI) and Service Identifier (SI) is described in …*
>
>
>
> Also for the second comment, this may be better.
>
>
>
> "as a part of normal processing, the SFF Label becomes
>
> the top label in the stack."
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Anoop
>
> On Wed, Dec 5, 2018 at 11:14 AM Andrew G. Malis <agmalis@gmail.com>; wrote:
>
> Anoop,
>
>
>
> Thanks, I'll discuss these suggestions with my co-authors. Also, now that
> we've requested WG LC, Loa may want to treat this as a last call comment.
>
>
>
> Your first comment isn't quite correct, since draft-ietf-mpls-sfc only
> replaces some of the functions of the NSH. For example, there's no
> packet-by-packet metadata.
>
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> Andy
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Dec 5, 2018 at 1:57 PM Anoop Ghanwani <anoop@alumni.duke.edu>;
> wrote:
>
> I think it would be useful for this document to reference
>
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-mpls-sfc
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__tools.ietf.org_html_draft-2Dietf-2Dmpls-2Dsfc&d=DwMFaQ&c=HAkYuh63rsuhr6Scbfh0UjBXeMK-ndb3voDTXcWzoCI&r=CRB2tJiQePk0cT-h5LGhEWH-s_xXXup3HzvBSMRj5VE&m=GF5N7QRjSUOtBmx2p0R4gvpBoU5Wyz5nwfbCtE_IUgI&s=db-AmKlTRZlCB0iVIkqVVs9ndN2e-Oo08TNef43l9O8&e=>
>
> in the introduction to say that "using MPLS to replace the function of NSH
> is described elsewhere [x]".
>
>
>
> I think the following:
>
> >>>
>
> the SFF Label will rise to the top of the label stack before
>
> the packet is forwarded to another node and before the packet
>
> is dispatched to a higher layer.
>
> >>>
>
> would be better worded as:
>
>
>
> "as a part of normal processing, the SFF Label will become
>
> the top label in the stack before the packet is forwarded
>
> to another node and before the packet is dispatched to a higher layer."
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Anoop
>
> _______________________________________________
> mpls mailing list
> mpls@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.ietf.org_mailman_listinfo_mpls&d=DwMFaQ&c=HAkYuh63rsuhr6Scbfh0UjBXeMK-ndb3voDTXcWzoCI&r=CRB2tJiQePk0cT-h5LGhEWH-s_xXXup3HzvBSMRj5VE&m=GF5N7QRjSUOtBmx2p0R4gvpBoU5Wyz5nwfbCtE_IUgI&s=SjAIyvNitzG1Hl4Yhw8do0D7ABHmIC0VBmEBSNKSINU&e=>
>
>