Re: [mpls] Way two progress two mldp draft with an technical overlap

Yakov Rekhter <yakov@juniper.net> Fri, 07 February 2014 17:07 UTC

Return-Path: <yakov@juniper.net>
X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 608191ACCD8 for <mpls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 7 Feb 2014 09:07:34 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.601
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.601 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 Hc3WYsth0dXx for <mpls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 7 Feb 2014 09:07:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: from am1outboundpool.messaging.microsoft.com (am1ehsobe001.messaging.microsoft.com [213.199.154.204]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3761E1ACC89 for <mpls@ietf.org>; Fri, 7 Feb 2014 09:07:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail95-am1-R.bigfish.com (10.3.201.232) by AM1EHSOBE016.bigfish.com (10.3.207.138) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.1.225.22; Fri, 7 Feb 2014 17:07:30 +0000
Received: from mail95-am1 (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail95-am1-R.bigfish.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 731AD1403DF; Fri, 7 Feb 2014 17:07:30 +0000 (UTC)
X-Forefront-Antispam-Report: CIP:66.129.239.16; KIP:(null); UIP:(null); IPV:NLI; H:P-EMF02-SAC.jnpr.net; RD:none; EFVD:NLI
X-SpamScore: -23
X-BigFish: VPS-23(zz98dI936eI1432Izz1f42h2148h208ch1ee6h1de0h1fdah2073h2146h1202h1e76h2189h1d1ah1d2ah21bch1fc6hzz1de098h1033IL17326ah8275dh1de097h186068hz31h2a8h839h944hf0ah1220h1288h12a5h12a9h12bdh137ah13b6h1441h1504h1537h153bh162dh1631h1758h18e1h1946h19b5h1ad9h1b0ah1b2fh224fh1fb3h1d0ch1d2eh1d3fh1dfeh1dffh1fe8h1ff5h2216h22d0h2336h2438h2461h2487h24ach24d7h2516h2545h1155h)
Received-SPF: softfail (mail95-am1: transitioning domain of juniper.net does not designate 66.129.239.16 as permitted sender) client-ip=66.129.239.16; envelope-from=yakov@juniper.net; helo=P-EMF02-SAC.jnpr.net ; SAC.jnpr.net ;
Received: from mail95-am1 (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mail95-am1 (MessageSwitch) id 1391792848909095_27386; Fri, 7 Feb 2014 17:07:28 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from AM1EHSMHS011.bigfish.com (unknown [10.3.201.232]) by mail95-am1.bigfish.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CF826120066; Fri, 7 Feb 2014 17:07:28 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from P-EMF02-SAC.jnpr.net (66.129.239.16) by AM1EHSMHS011.bigfish.com (10.3.207.111) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.16.227.3; Fri, 7 Feb 2014 17:07:28 +0000
Received: from magenta.juniper.net (172.17.27.123) by P-EMF02-SAC.jnpr.net (172.24.192.21) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.146.0; Fri, 7 Feb 2014 09:07:24 -0800
Received: from juniper.net (sapphire.juniper.net [172.17.28.108]) by magenta.juniper.net (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id s17H7NL76696; Fri, 7 Feb 2014 09:07:23 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from yakov@juniper.net)
Message-ID: <201402071707.s17H7NL76696@magenta.juniper.net>
To: Loa Andersson <loa@pi.nu>
In-Reply-To: <52F478A8.1000101@pi.nu>
References: <529F425C.1050808@pi.nu> <201312061405.rB6E5bL25339@magenta.juniper.net> <52A9958B.7040508@pi.nu> <201312121651.rBCGpYL46117@magenta.juniper.net> <52F11FD8.3000000@pi.nu> <201402042158.s14LwnL93027@magenta.juniper.net> <52F1CC6F.1070906@pi.nu> <201402051430.s15EUML50526@magenta.juniper.net> <52F478A8.1000101@pi.nu>
X-MH-In-Reply-To: Loa Andersson <loa@pi.nu> message dated "Fri, 07 Feb 2014 14:09:44 +0800."
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <95450.1391792839.1@juniper.net>
Date: Fri, 07 Feb 2014 09:07:19 -0800
From: Yakov Rekhter <yakov@juniper.net>
X-OriginatorOrg: juniper.net
X-FOPE-CONNECTOR: Id%0$Dn%*$RO%0$TLS%0$FQDN%$TlsDn%
Cc: "mpls@ietf.org" <mpls@ietf.org>, "draft-rekhter-mpls-pim-sm-over-mldp@tools.ietf.org" <draft-rekhter-mpls-pim-sm-over-mldp@tools.ietf.org>, "draft-wijnands-mpls-mldp-in-band-wildcard-encoding@tools.ietf.org" <draft-wijnands-mpls-mldp-in-band-wildcard-encoding@tools.ietf.org>, "mpls-chairs@tools.ietf.org" <mpls-chairs@tools.ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [mpls] Way two progress two mldp draft with an technical overlap
X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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, 07 Feb 2014 17:07:34 -0000

Loa,

> Yakov,
> 
> 
> On 2014-02-05 22:30, Yakov Rekhter wrote:
> > I agreed to the plan you proposed in your e-mail on Dec 4, 2013.
> > According to this plan
> >
> >     1.  Issue a single poll to adopt both documents together as
> >         working group documents
> >
> > However, what you doing now is*not*  what you proposed in the plan,
> > as now you issued a two week poll on adopting just
> > draft-wijnands-mpls-mldp-in-band-wildcard-encoding as an MPLS working
> > group document.
> >
> > Yakov.
> 
> I found no way to hold the draft-wijnands-mpls-mldp-in-band-wildcard-
> encoding further, it is almost 5 months since that document were ready
> to move.
> 
> However, I'm prepared to go to wg adoption poll on draft-rekhter-
> mpls-pim-sm-over-mldp very quickly if the following update is made.
> 
> OLD
> 
>     This document uses BGP Source Active auto-discovery routes, as
>     defined in [MVPN-BGP]. This document also identifies the deployment
>     scenarios where BGP Source Active auto-discovery routes will not be
>     used.
> 
> NEW
> 
>     This document uses BGP Source Active auto-discovery routes, as
>     defined in [MVPN-BGP].
> 
>     In a deployment scenario where the service provider has
>     provisioned the network in such a way that the RP for a particular
>     ASM group G is always between the receivers and the sources. If the
>     network is provisioned in this manner, the ingress PE for (S,G)
>     is always the same as the ingress PE for the RP, and thus the
>     Source Active A-D routes are never needed.  If it is known a priori
>     that the network is provisioned in this manner, mLDP in-band
>     signaling can be supported using a simplified set of procedures.
>     Specification of the simplified procedures supporting this scenario
>     is outside the scope of the present document.  See [draft-wijnands-
>     mpls-mldp-in-band-wildcard-encoding]. A service provider will
>     provision the PE routers either to use [draft-wijnands] procedures
>     or to use the procedures of this document.

The revised draft (see below) contains the change you suggested above 
(with some minor edits). 

Given that, please do as you proposed in your plan on Dec 4, 2013 - 
issue a *single* poll to adopt *both* documents *together* as working 
group documents.

Yakov.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date:    Fri, 07 Feb 2014 09:01:53 PST
To:      <i-d-announce@ietf.org>
cc:      <mpls@ietf.org>
From:    <internet-drafts@ietf.org>
Subject: I-D Action: draft-rekhter-mpls-pim-sm-over-mldp-08.txt


A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
 This draft is a work item of the Multiprotocol Label Switching Working Group of the IETF.

        Title           : Carrying PIM-SM in ASM mode Trees over P2MP mLDP LSPs
        Authors         : Yakov Rekhter
                          Rahul Aggarwal
                          Nicolai Leymann
                          Wim Henderickx
                          Quintin Zhao
                          Richard Li
	Filename        : draft-rekhter-mpls-pim-sm-over-mldp-08.txt
	Pages           : 12
	Date            : 2014-02-07

Abstract:
   When IP multicast trees created by PIM-SM in Any Source Multicast
   (ASM) mode need to pass through an MPLS domain, it may be desirable
   to map such trees to Point-to-Multipoint Label Switched Paths. This
   document describes how to accomplish this in the case where such
   Point-to-Multipoint Label Switched Paths are established using mLDP.


The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-rekhter-mpls-pim-sm-over-mldp/

There's also a htmlized version available at:
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-rekhter-mpls-pim-sm-over-mldp-08

A diff from the previous version is available at:
http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-rekhter-mpls-pim-sm-over-mldp-08


Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission
until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.

Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/

_______________________________________________
I-D-Announce mailing list
I-D-Announce@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce
Internet-Draft directories: http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html
or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt