Re: [OPSAWG] [Lsr] I,Scope of FIT Capability: a node or a link?

Tianran Zhou <zhoutianran@huawei.com> Wed, 08 April 2020 06:51 UTC

Return-Path: <zhoutianran@huawei.com>
X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 50D343A086A; Tue, 7 Apr 2020 23:51:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
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 4qD9Ba_RXriK; Tue, 7 Apr 2020 23:51:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [185.176.76.210]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4BBD23A0866; Tue, 7 Apr 2020 23:51:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lhreml717-chm.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.18.7.107]) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTP id BAC3BCCCD8AB0A1602E9; Wed, 8 Apr 2020 07:51:19 +0100 (IST)
Received: from nkgeml708-chm.china.huawei.com (10.98.57.160) by lhreml717-chm.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.68) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.1913.5; Wed, 8 Apr 2020 07:51:18 +0100
Received: from nkgeml707-chm.china.huawei.com (10.98.57.157) by nkgeml708-chm.china.huawei.com (10.98.57.160) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.1713.5; Wed, 8 Apr 2020 14:51:16 +0800
Received: from nkgeml707-chm.china.huawei.com ([10.98.57.157]) by nkgeml707-chm.china.huawei.com ([10.98.57.157]) with mapi id 15.01.1713.004; Wed, 8 Apr 2020 14:51:16 +0800
From: Tianran Zhou <zhoutianran@huawei.com>
To: "Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee@cisco.com>, Jeff Tantsura <jefftant.ietf@gmail.com>, "Les Ginsberg (ginsberg)" <ginsberg=40cisco.com@dmarc.ietf.org>, Tony Li <tony1athome@gmail.com>
CC: Greg Mirsky <gregimirsky@gmail.com>, "draft-song-opsawg-ifit-framework@ietf.org" <draft-song-opsawg-ifit-framework@ietf.org>, "lsr@ietf.org" <lsr@ietf.org>, "opsawg@ietf.org" <opsawg@ietf.org>, "draft-wang-lsr-ifit-node-capability-advertisement@ietf.org" <draft-wang-lsr-ifit-node-capability-advertisement@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [Lsr] I,Scope of FIT Capability: a node or a link?
Thread-Index: AdYMrIUGWe8h8bS0Rki6HVv232b2lQATRHCAAB2l8KA=
Date: Wed, 08 Apr 2020 06:51:15 +0000
Message-ID: <a9f2fce8c3694471a023882dcc2fc81f@huawei.com>
References: <edb64d47da6a4b2e80b9cc276bce84be@huawei.com> <470F1857-3554-49BE-A212-F3A10F43280F@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <470F1857-3554-49BE-A212-F3A10F43280F@cisco.com>
Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US
Content-Language: zh-CN
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.108.148.172]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_a9f2fce8c3694471a023882dcc2fc81fhuaweicom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/opsawg/tUAsYbdQOiDQhIclrR4tf538-MA>
Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] [Lsr] I,Scope of FIT Capability: a node or a link?
X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List <opsawg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/opsawg>, <mailto:opsawg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/opsawg/>
List-Post: <mailto:opsawg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:opsawg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg>, <mailto:opsawg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 08 Apr 2020 06:51:26 -0000

Hi Acee,

Tracing is of course useful.
Here we  also consider to combine the traffic engineering and monitoring. So the transit nodes are visible.
For the loose TE, the intermediate SR nodes construct the segment monitoring.

Tianran

From: Acee Lindem (acee) [mailto:acee@cisco.com]
Sent: Wednesday, April 8, 2020 4:29 AM
To: Tianran Zhou <zhoutianran@huawei.com>; Jeff Tantsura <jefftant.ietf@gmail.com>; Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) <ginsberg=40cisco.com@dmarc.ietf.org>; Tony Li <tony1athome@gmail.com>
Cc: Greg Mirsky <gregimirsky@gmail.com>; draft-song-opsawg-ifit-framework@ietf.org; lsr@ietf.org; opsawg@ietf.org; draft-wang-lsr-ifit-node-capability-advertisement@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Lsr] I,Scope of FIT Capability: a node or a link?

Speaking as WG member:

With respect to your use case for transit router advertisement… What I was unsuccessfully trying to articulate to you during the interim was that the management system will typically not know the exact path between two endpoints so the use case is flawed. In fact, many times tracing is used by the management system to discover the path – as in traceroute…

Thanks,
Acee



From: Tianran Zhou <zhoutianran@huawei.com<mailto:zhoutianran@huawei.com>>
Date: Tuesday, April 7, 2020 at 3:22 AM
To: Acee Lindem <acee@cisco.com<mailto:acee@cisco.com>>, Jeff Tantsura <jefftant.ietf@gmail.com<mailto:jefftant.ietf@gmail.com>>, "Les Ginsberg (ginsberg)" <ginsberg=40cisco.com@dmarc.ietf.org<mailto:ginsberg=40cisco.com@dmarc.ietf.org>>, Tony Li <tony1athome@gmail.com<mailto:tony1athome@gmail.com>>
Cc: Greg Mirsky <gregimirsky@gmail.com<mailto:gregimirsky@gmail.com>>, "draft-song-opsawg-ifit-framework@ietf.org<mailto:draft-song-opsawg-ifit-framework@ietf.org>" <draft-song-opsawg-ifit-framework@ietf.org<mailto:draft-song-opsawg-ifit-framework@ietf.org>>, "lsr@ietf.org<mailto:lsr@ietf.org>" <lsr@ietf.org<mailto:lsr@ietf.org>>, "opsawg@ietf.org<mailto:opsawg@ietf.org>" <opsawg@ietf.org<mailto:opsawg@ietf.org>>, "draft-wang-lsr-ifit-node-capability-advertisement@ietf.org<mailto:draft-wang-lsr-ifit-node-capability-advertisement@ietf.org>" <draft-wang-lsr-ifit-node-capability-advertisement@ietf.org<mailto:draft-wang-lsr-ifit-node-capability-advertisement@ietf.org>>
Subject: RE: [Lsr] I,Scope of FIT Capability: a node or a link?

Hi Acee,

About the “IFIT specific information channel”, as in https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-qin-idr-sr-policy-ifit/
we propose to use bgp enabled sr-policy for IFIT auto deployment.
It’s reasonable to incorporate both traffic engineering and monitoring.

Thanks,
Tianran

发件人: Acee Lindem (acee) [mailto:acee@cisco.com]
发送时间: 2020年4月7日 2:54
收件人: Jeff Tantsura <jefftant.ietf@gmail.com<mailto:jefftant.ietf@gmail.com>>; Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) <ginsberg=40cisco.com@dmarc.ietf.org<mailto:ginsberg=40cisco.com@dmarc.ietf.org>>; Tony Li <tony1athome@gmail.com<mailto:tony1athome@gmail.com>>
抄送: Greg Mirsky <gregimirsky@gmail.com<mailto:gregimirsky@gmail.com>>; draft-song-opsawg-ifit-framework@ietf.org<mailto:draft-song-opsawg-ifit-framework@ietf.org>; lsr@ietf.org<mailto:lsr@ietf.org>; opsawg@ietf.org<mailto:opsawg@ietf.org>; Tianran Zhou <zhoutianran@huawei.com<mailto:zhoutianran@huawei.com>>; draft-wang-lsr-ifit-node-capability-advertisement@ietf.org<mailto:draft-wang-lsr-ifit-node-capability-advertisement@ietf.org>
主题: Re: [Lsr] I,Scope of FIT Capability: a node or a link?

Speaking as WG member – It seems that additional IFIT-specific information is required to make this useful and the IGPs are certainly not the case. Additionally, the point was made that an IFIT specific information channel would anyway be required to provision the telemetry generation.
Thanks,
Acee

From: Lsr <lsr-bounces@ietf.org<mailto:lsr-bounces@ietf.org>> on behalf of Jeff Tantsura <jefftant.ietf@gmail.com<mailto:jefftant.ietf@gmail.com>>
Date: Monday, April 6, 2020 at 2:33 PM
To: "Les Ginsberg (ginsberg)" <ginsberg=40cisco.com@dmarc.ietf.org<mailto:ginsberg=40cisco.com@dmarc.ietf.org>>, Tony Li <tony1athome@gmail.com<mailto:tony1athome@gmail.com>>
Cc: Greg Mirsky <gregimirsky@gmail.com<mailto:gregimirsky@gmail.com>>, "draft-song-opsawg-ifit-framework@ietf.org<mailto:draft-song-opsawg-ifit-framework@ietf.org>" <draft-song-opsawg-ifit-framework@ietf.org<mailto:draft-song-opsawg-ifit-framework@ietf.org>>, "lsr@ietf.org<mailto:lsr@ietf.org>" <lsr@ietf.org<mailto:lsr@ietf.org>>, "opsawg@ietf.org<mailto:opsawg@ietf.org>" <opsawg@ietf.org<mailto:opsawg@ietf.org>>, Tianran Zhou <zhoutianran@huawei.com<mailto:zhoutianran@huawei.com>>, "draft-wang-lsr-ifit-node-capability-advertisement@ietf.org<mailto:draft-wang-lsr-ifit-node-capability-advertisement@ietf.org>" <draft-wang-lsr-ifit-node-capability-advertisement@ietf.org<mailto:draft-wang-lsr-ifit-node-capability-advertisement@ietf.org>>
Subject: Re: [Lsr] I,Scope of FIT Capability: a node or a link?

+1
Please do not take my comments about link vs node capabilities, as support for the solution, they are semantical.

Cheers,
Jeff
On Apr 6, 2020, 8:58 AM -0700, Tony Li <tony1athome@gmail.com<mailto:tony1athome@gmail.com>>, wrote:


This discussion is interesting, but please do not ignore the considerable feedback from multiple folks indicating that this advertisement does not belong in the IGP at all (regardless of scope).
My opinion on that has not changed.


+1

IS-IS is not the correct place to implement Service Discovery mechanisms. The management plane already has ample mechanisms for service and capability discovery.

Tony


_______________________________________________
Lsr mailing list
Lsr@ietf.org<mailto:Lsr@ietf.org>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr