Re: [netext] #7: Logical interface: UL/DL packet processing

["MELIA, TELEMACO (TELEMACO)" <[e-mail]>]

Hell Pierrick, 

Agreed, the policies are node-scoped.
Would folks believe that a sending/updating algorithm would better clarify UL/DL packet handling?

telemaco 

-----Message d'origine-----
De : [e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]] 
Envoyé : mercredi 16 mars 2011 08:34
À : MELIA, TELEMACO (TELEMACO); [e-mail]; [e-mail]
Cc : [e-mail]
Objet : RE: [netext] #7: Logical interface: UL/DL packet processing

Hi Tele,

What is the reason for the flow routing policies entry in the LIF table? IMHO, this entry is useless. I mean, routing policies should be node-scoped and only allow to select the interface, i.e configure the flow table; that's it. 

BTW, when a flow handover is performed, policies should also be updated (In order to select the correct interface for new flow). 

BR,
Pierrick

> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : [e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]] De la 
> part de MELIA, TELEMACO (TELEMACO) Envoyé : mardi 15 mars 2011 16:57 À 
> : netext issue tracker; [e-mail] Cc : [e-mail] 
> Objet : Re: [netext] #7: Logical interface: UL/DL packet processing
> 
> Folks, reflecting the discussions in the team here is the proposed 
> text to solve this issue. Let us know any problem you see with the proposed text.
> 
> =====
> 6.6. Logical Interface Forwarding Conceptual Data Structures
> 
> 
>    The LIF should maintain the LIF and FLOW table data structures
>    depicted in Figure 4
> 
>      LIF TABLE                           FLOW table
>    +===============================+   +===============================+
>    | PIF_ID | FLOW RoutingPolicies |   | FLOW ID |  PIF_ID             |
>    |        | Home Network Prefix  |   +-------------------------------+
>    |        | Link Layer Address   |   | FLOW_ID |  PIF_ID             |
>    |        | Status               |   +===============================+
>    +-------------------------------|
>    | PIF_ID | FLOW RoutingPolicies |
>    |        | Home Network Prefix  |
>    |        | Link Layer Address   |
>    |        | Status               |
>    +-------------------------------+
>    | ....   | ....                 |
>    +===============================+
> 
> 
>                                  Figure 4
> 
>    The LIF table maintains the mapping between the LIF and each PIF
>    associated to the LIF (see P3).  For each PIF entry the table should
>    store the associated Routing Policies, the Home Network Prefix
>    received during the SLAAC procedure, the configured Link Layer
>    Address (as described above) and the Status of the PIF (e.g. active,
>    not active).
> 
>    The method by which the Routing Policies are configured in the UE is
>    out of scope of this document.  It is however assumed that this
>    method is in place and that these policies are configured in the LIF
>    TABLE.
> 
>    The FLOW table allows a LIF to properly route each IP flow to the
>    right interface (see P7).  The LIF can identify flows arriving on its
>    PIFs and can map them accordingly for transmitting the corresponding
>    packets.  For locally generated traffic (e.g. unidirectional outgoing
>    flows, mobile initiated traffic, etc.), the LIF should perform
>    interface selection based on the Flow Routing Policies.  In case
>    traffic of an existing flow is suddenly received from the network on
>    a different PIF than the one locally stored, the LIF should interpret
>    the event as an explicit flow mobility trigger from the network and
>    it should update the PIF_ID parameter in the FLOW table.  Similarly,
>    locally generated events from the PIFs or configuration updates to
>    the local policy rules can cause updates to the table and hence
>    trigger flow mobility.
> 
> 
> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : netext issue tracker 
> [mailto:[e-mail]]
> Envoyé : vendredi 4 mars 2011 00:03
> À : MELIA, TELEMACO (TELEMACO); [e-mail] Cc : 
> [e-mail] Objet : [netext] #7: Logical interface: UL/DL packet 
> processing
> 
> #7: Logical interface: UL/DL packet processing
> 
>  Uplink/downlink packet matching: Draft says the Logical interface 
> should transmit uplink packets on the same physical interface on which 
> the downlink packet was received for the particular prefix/flow. How 
> does the logical interface associates an uplink packet to a downlink packet?
> 
> --
> ---------------------------------------+------------------------------
> ---------------------------------------+--
> ---------------------------------------+----
>  Reporter:  basavaraj.patil@.          |       Owner:  telemaco.melia@.
>      Type:  defect                     |      Status:  new
>  Priority:  major                      |   Milestone:
> Component:  Localized routing          |     Version:
>  Severity:  Active WG Document         |    Keywords:
> ---------------------------------------+------------------------------
> ---------------------------------------+--
> ---------------------------------------+----
> 
> Ticket URL: <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/netext/trac/ticket/7>
> netext <http://tools.ietf.org/netext/>
> 
> _______________________________________________
> netext mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netext