IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [mpls] Poll 2: New SPL vs re-purposed ELI for carrying Network Action Indicators

Robert Raszuk <rraszuk@gmail.com> Fri, 17 June 2022 15:37 UTC

Return-Path: <rraszuk@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 C622DC15BE8B; Fri, 17 Jun 2022 08:37:21 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.107
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.107 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_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01] 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 scpq8Iviav1F; Fri, 17 Jun 2022 08:37:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qk1-x72d.google.com (mail-qk1-x72d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::72d]) (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 05BB4C14F692; Fri, 17 Jun 2022 08:37:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qk1-x72d.google.com with SMTP id d23so3423006qke.0; Fri, 17 Jun 2022 08:37:17 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=LvOtWbmUf8bnP9trqG1hgtVcS6odA20QEyu+B5mVOlI=; b=oHu2xcMeEFqi+P0zmr0QPcsozEXEPn1hfAHnpL6IBuB0eVMWHGpdBJFQA4DaHNJFoV i9grCja0XzcNhYf8gdqtzqXJa+R1Q7oq+QOZhyTPZFdZkKi75HwdneIwludpvRaN1LR2 kJwE0R3StXq/Tf1HZZo8XMv3m75x2JJhzayBcr0rPvwprEHk4h82Z/39bd4QmGYkdpjP P8vt4UoH1cf7BMBocAd2ZgTiOYpjAX4tSQw7C7G3JKHGMv23/u8DaVpmSc9ddUOyVdCl AqvWPu250BiEWGwbrl1xbv+Tcg0/iXTCqpoxCbQwTq5xIJrSm4Q3bWYkfmJvW/y/jFaF ncDg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=LvOtWbmUf8bnP9trqG1hgtVcS6odA20QEyu+B5mVOlI=; b=6t7p4kqQ9rv9ov9Y0ovnBnXitXz1fpYlmpddhBdIqNqPKGqMOkBxD1zDh9cm5fr9Rm +pBSa4q6qun8fYX42ttFQI+C8bw6ZuCI4Y9Ea0ARgPP7H/zXGeAHVAUI4kVerrFcq5Hy tHym4p4QcrYZ2WSsrGiZYld/aVwoIfhQI9qm2qpzgOxAldWx0x+56K8Cp8mfSaKTCPrq yt6OvDs/pbQ5mgFDjQW+iOebu+3Df+omM91G/FhYvfTLuAUEqwmCOt1kr+9DdIbOpLMw kvr1mArZMHNWJCjwOlTLYCQCEBd0OPWNWM3xiIw0za9HB7v3Axng0W2OFc7HxcWxp0r1 HMqw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AJIora+arEdzqlq1XGNVFEPDCK/46DwsoErYlTecPLDJP6ct0Jc2IhfS EgHaJz49aFwPYvSuGuxIW41tl1pXx99rrSSuAXw=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGRyM1vbWdb+lvg1JVBgpzLVebciM68k9fgIlySOzFiN46UyLSsuD48MwRia9zVDO8Ssf8B/hwa9vy4+6mRO/7UPkAU=
X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:44ca:b0:6a6:fd36:12a with SMTP id y10-20020a05620a44ca00b006a6fd36012amr7580004qkp.664.1655480236781; Fri, 17 Jun 2022 08:37:16 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <6e5c6fa9-539f-80c3-7c92-5b97ad67560c@pi.nu> <447_1654704927_62A0CB1F_447_309_1_1f59cd955500419a988e2218a3f2246e@orange.com> <9F79E3D5-7ACE-4D15-83D7-8BF3FF60F671@gmail.com> <C9D1FD4A-2549-49C0-8904-84E3F559E85C@cisco.com> <988F5CAF-1A12-4209-92B5-B9AE75477B5C@tony.li> <4D3BA352-6E89-489D-A849-2B72A5D0DC1F@cisco.com> <1F0A4345-C258-4BE6-92D4-C846C0B77048@tony.li> <CA+b+ER=A3R3s-=8gFZKNxs2oXkY52iy4EBFHZKzjxvnQ=buu6Q@mail.gmail.com> <19982EDE-E56A-4EC3-9113-7CFED4012189@tony.li>
In-Reply-To: <19982EDE-E56A-4EC3-9113-7CFED4012189@tony.li>
From: Robert Raszuk <rraszuk@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2022 17:37:05 +0200
Message-ID: <CA+b+ERkXFBA=_=q=UdeObTq4cG5qznh8OjKUYTJ3csifCnJDXw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Tony Li <tony.li@tony.li>
Cc: "Zafar Ali (zali)" <zali@cisco.com>, "mpls@ietf.org" <mpls@ietf.org>, "mpls-chairs@ietf.org" <mpls-chairs@ietf.org>, "pals-chairs@ietf.org" <pals-chairs@ietf.org>, DetNet Chairs <detnet-chairs@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000072344a05e1a68788"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mpls/tGydpX7K35I2WnzwCQ-EYB4utNw>
Subject: Re: [mpls] Poll 2: New SPL vs re-purposed ELI for carrying Network Action Indicators
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, 17 Jun 2022 15:37:21 -0000

Hi Tony,



> I understand you are proposing to encode functions and actions immediately
> after the MNA indicator, but this is just a possibility - not sure WG
> agrees as the best one or clearly not a killer argument IMO.
>
> The alternatives are to shove it all to PSD or the control plane. Neither
> of those is compelling.
>

I am highly surprised you think using a control plane to disseminate
control information on how to handle packet processing in transit nodes "is
not compelling" to you.

To me inserting the same bunch of octets to each packet at high rates is
much less compelling.

In my opinion MNA as is being defined here is not boosting MPLS switching
,,, it looks to me like the last significant nail to the MPLS coffin.

Best,
Robert

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email