[mpls] Re: Request WG adoption for draft-jags-mpls-ps-mna-hdr-03.txt

[Rakesh Gandhi <[e-mail]>]

Hi Joel,

Thanks for your review comment.

Based on my understanding, some of the main motivations for adding IOAM
direct export data fields in PSD instead of ISD would be:

   1. IOAM data fields such as 32-bit Sequence Number or 32-bit Timestamp
   in an ISD LSE can lead to undesired ECMP behavior on nodes that use labels
   for ECMP hashing
   2. IOAM data field format (32-bit) does not fit well into 32-bit ISD LSE
   due to S bit (e.g., in 31-bit Format D), and it can result in limitations,
   kind of defeats the use of standard IOAM formats
   3. IOAM direct export supports extensibility to optionally add
   “unlimited” number of data fields. When added as ISD, node RLD would make
   it difficult to process the entire label stack
   4. IOAM data fields for direct export (e.g., timestamp, sequence number,
   flow identifier, Namespace-ID, IOAM Option-Type, etc.) represent metadata
   (extra baggage) in the received packets
      - NPU simply exports these metadata (extra baggage) and does not
      really process them, there is not much motivation to place them in ISD.


Based on the discussion, will update draft-gandhi-mpls-mna-ioam-dex-01
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-gandhi-mpls-mna-ioam-dex-01>.

Thanks,
Rakesh



On Wed, Jun 26, 2024 at 10:06 AM Joel Halpern <[e-mail]> wrote:

> Rakesh, I tried to understand the explanation in your draft for why the
> iOAM DEX needs to be post-stack data.  I could not parse it.  Could you
> write an email that explains why you think it is needed?
>
> Thank you,
>
> Joel
> On 6/26/2024 9:12 AM, Rakesh Gandhi wrote:
>
> Thanks Jags.
>
> The PSD solution for MNA defined in draft-jags-mpls-ps-mna-hdr-03 is used
> for IOAM and IOAM DEX in draft-gandhi-mpls-mna-ioam-dex-01:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-gandhi-mpls-mna-ioam-dex-01
>
> IOAM and IOAM DEX use-cases for MNA are defined in
> draft-ietf-mpls-mna-usecases-10:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-mpls-mna-usecases-10
>
> The PSD solution is useful for IOAM and IOAM-DEX, I support the request
> for WG adoption for draft-jags-mpls-ps-mna-hdr-03 (as co-author).
>
> P.S. I understand this email was not the WG adoption poll initiated by the
> chairs.
>
> Thanks,
> Rakesh
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 25, 2024 at 10:52 PM Jaganbabu Rajamanickam (jrajaman)
> <jrajaman=[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>> Hello Chairs,
>>
>>    We would like to request WG adoption for draft-jags-mpls-ps-mna-hdr.
>>
>>    Updated the draft with the initial review comments and the latest MNA
>> header format.
>>
>>
>>
>>   Welcome your review comments and suggestions.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanx,
>>
>> Jags
>> _______________________________________________
>> mpls mailing list -- [e-mail]
>> To unsubscribe send an email to [e-mail]
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> mpls mailing list -- [e-mail]
> To unsubscribe send an email to [e-mail]
>
>