Re: [OPSAWG] AD review of draft-ietf-opsawg-large-flow-load-balancing (draft response)

[Benoit Claise <[e-mail]>]

Hi Anoop,

Thanks for the new draft version.
I removed some of the points
>
>
> On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 7:55 AM, Benoit Claise <[e-mail] 
> <mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
>
>     -
>
>         A number of routers support sampling techniques such as sFlow [sFlow-
>         v5, sFlow-LAG], PSAMP [RFC 5475] and NetFlow Sampling [RFC 3954].
>         For the purpose of large flow identification, sampling must be
>         enabled on all of the egress ports in the router where such
>         measurements are desired.
>
>     I don't understand the second sentence.
>     One way to read this is:  sampling must be _enabled _on all of the
>     egress ports where such measurements are desired.
>         Ok, this is an obvious statement. If the measurements are
>     desired, enable them
>
>
> Yes,
>
>     Or maybe you want to say: _sampling _must be enabled on all of the
>     egress ports where such measurements are desired.
>         This is a false statement: if you have the choice between
>     sampling and non sampling, use non sampling measurements.
>     Or maybe you want to say: sampling must be enabled on _all _of the
>     egress ports where such measurements are desired.
>         This is a false statement: if I have ECMP on 2 links, and only
>     one of them can't do non sampling, then we should not force
>         sampling on both links.
>     You see, I'm confused.
>
>     You miss a couple of key messages:
>     - if unsampled measurements are available, use those.
>     - egress means where LAG/ECMP are enabled (this is important for
>     the paragraph starting with "If egress sampling is not available,
>     ingress sampling can suffice since the central management entity use")
>
>
> We were not intending to discuss a mix sampling and non-sampling 
> interfaces in the same router, but this is a reasonable point and it 
> will be clarified (i.e. we will state that it's possible to mix 
> sampled and non sampled interfaces as long as the function of large 
> flow detection/identification can be performed).
You're still missing the point that unsampled measurements is better 
than sampled ones.

Is this what you mean by:

    It is possible that a router may have line cards that support a
    sampling technique while other line cards support automatic hardware
    detection of large flows.

It's not very clear.

>
>
>
>
>
>
>     -  The indentation in section 2 is not correct
>
>
> Will fix.
>
>
>     - "For tunneling protocols like GRE, VXLAN, NVGRE, STT, etc.,"
>     You need to expand and provide references.
>
> Will provide references.
Still to be provided
> What do mean by expand -- just expand the acronyms (already in the 
> acronym section) or something else?
Acceptable acronyms are 
https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc-style-guide/abbrev.expansion.txt
>
>     - a PBR rule
>     Expand.
>
> OK
to be done.

Regards, Benoit