Re: [netext] #4: Logical interface support: Point to point links

[<[e-mail]>]

agreed

> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : Sri Gundavelli [mailto:[e-mail]]
> Envoyé : mercredi 16 mars 2011 02:17
> À : SEITE Pierrick RD-RESA-REN; [e-mail]
> Cc : [e-mail]
> Objet : Re: [netext] #4: Logical interface support: Point to point links
> 
> Hi Pierrick,
> 
> The sentence can be reworded. Agree, the link model between the MAG and
> the
> MN is still a point-to-point link. From 5213 perspective, as long as the
> point-to-point communication semantics are there between the MN and MAG,
> we
> meet the requirement and there is no protocol violation.  How that P2P
> link
> model is achieved, based a tunnel interface, putting the access point in a
> unicast mode, are all the possible options.
> 
> 
> 
> Sri
> 
> 
> 
> On 3/15/11 1:21 AM, "[e-mail]"
> <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> >
> > Hi Sri,
> >
> > If I understand correctly, there is no violation of RFC5213 if all
> physical
> > links are p2p. However the proposed text allows the virtual interface to
> bound
> > physical shared links. If so, I think we may have the issue described in
> > section 4.2 of http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-netlmm-mn-ar-if-03.
> > Maybe, the text should be clarified to restrict to physical p2p links.
> >
> > BR,
> > Pierrick
> >
> >> -----Message d'origine-----
> >> De : [e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]] De la
> part
> >> de Sri Gundavelli
> >> Envoyé : mardi 15 mars 2011 04:04
> >> À : Julien Laganier
> >> Cc : [e-mail]
> >> Objet : Re: [netext] #4: Logical interface support: Point to point
> links
> >>
> >> Julien:
> >>
> >> Lets see, what is the violation here ?
> >>
> >> - We are stating the logical interface appears to the applications as
> an
> >> interface attached to a shared link. For the simple reason, that we
> have
> >> multiple neighbors on different network segments attached through
> >> different
> >> sub-interface of that logical interface. We don't have a single
> >> neighbor/MAG.
> >>
> >> - "Underneath the logical interface ...", there are sub-interfaces
> which
> >> may
> >> be very well attached to different p2p links. As long as the network
> has
> >> the
> >> semantics to send a RA with PIO, exclusively to this node, no other
> node
> >> on
> >> that access link can receive that Prefix set, we are confirming to 5213
> >> link
> >> model. From any of the MAG's perspective, attached to any of the access
> >> links, it can still be kept as a p2p link
> >>
> >> - Exposing the logical interface as a shared link to the applications
> on
> >> the
> >> *mobile node*, is not violating 5213 principles. The path chosen for a
> >> packet through a sub-interface can be still a p2p link and the rules of
> >> link-layer resolution of the peer, or adding l2 headers skipping l2
> >> resolution, is still the approach in use.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Sri
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On 3/14/11 5:20 PM, "Julien Laganier" <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Sri -
> >>>
> >>> 5213 supports only PtP links thus I do not understand how the
> >>> following resolution resolves anything. Please clarify what is the
> >>> issue you' re addressing and how this is addressing it.
> >>>
> >>> --julien
> >>>
> >>> On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 4:24 PM, Sri Gundavelli <[e-mail]>
> >> wrote:
> >>>>> #4: Logical interface support: Point to point links
> >>>>
> >>>>  Clarify the use and
> >>>>> behavior of the logical interface on PtP links.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Folks: Again, reflecting the team's contributions on this topic, the
> >> authors
> >>>> of this document have discussed this and resolve it with the
> following
> >> text.
> >>>> The key points we tried to reflect are around that the logical
> >> interface
> >>>> appears to the application as a shared link. There were thoughts
> around
> >>>> making it appear like a p2p link, given that there are multiple
> >> neighbors on
> >>>> each sub interface, this choice appears reasonable. With respect to
> how
> >> a
> >>>> packet is transmitted, is still based on the chosen link model at
> each
> >> sub
> >>>> interface level. Let us know, if you see any issues with it. This is
> >> proven
> >>>> based on the multiple implementations from some of the co-authors of
> >> this
> >>>> doc.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> ---
> >>>> 6.3.  Supported Link models for a logical interface
> >>>>
> >>>>  The sub-interfaces of a logical interface can be bound to a point-
> to-
> >>>>   point or a shared link (Example: LTE and WLAN).  The logical
> >>>>   interface appears as a shared-link to the applications, and adapts
> to
> >>>>   the link model of the sub-interface for packet communication.  For
> >>>>   example, when transmitting a packet on a sub-interface which is
> >>>>   attached to a p2p link, the transmission conforms to the p2p link
> >>>>   model and when transmitting on a sub-interface attached to a shared
> >>>>   link, the transmission conforms to the shared link model.
> >>>>
> >>>>   Based on the link to which the sub-interface is attached to, the
> >>>>   layer-2 resolutions may or may not be needed.  If the interface is
> >>>>   bound to a P2P link with PPP running, there will not be any link-
> >>>>   layer resolutions in the form of ARP/ND messages.  However, if the
> >>>>   interface is bound to a shared link such as Ethernet, there will be
> >>>>   ND resolutions.  The logical interface implementation has to
> maintain
> >>>>   the required link model and the associated state for each sub-
> >>>>   interface.
> >>>> --
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On 3/3/11 9:17 AM, "netext issue tracker"
> >> <[e-mail]>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> #4: Logical interface support: Point to point links
> >>>>
> >>>>  Clarify the use and
> >>>>> behavior of the logical interface on PtP links.
> >>>>
> >>>> --
> >>>>>
> >>>> ---------------------------------------+-----------------------------
> --
> >> -----
> >>>>
> >>>>>
> Reporter:  basavaraj.patil@Š          |       Owner:  telemaco.melia@Š
> >>>>>
> >>>>     Type:  defect                     |      Status:  new
> >>>>>
> >>>>  Priority:  major                      |   Milestone:
> >>>>>
> >>>> Component:  logical-interface-support  |     Version:
> >>>>>
> >>>>  Severity:  -                          |    Keywords:
> >>>>>
> >>>> ---------------------------------------+-----------------------------
> --
> >> -----
> >>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>> Ticket URL: <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/netext/trac/ticket/4>
> >>>> netext
> >>>>> <http://tools.ietf.org/netext/>
> >>>>
> >>>> _____________________________________________
> >>>>> __
> >>>> netext mailing
> >>>>> list
> >>>> [e-mail]
> >>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> netext mailing list
> >>>> [e-mail]
> >>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext
> >>>>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> netext mailing list
> >> [e-mail]
> >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext