[Pce] Comments on draft-dhs-spring-pce-sr-p2mp-policy
Tarek Saad <tsaad@juniper.net> Mon, 10 June 2019 20:44 UTC
Return-Path: <tsaad@juniper.net>
X-Original-To: pce@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: pce@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EDC571200F1; Mon, 10 Jun 2019 13:44:54 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.709
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.709 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=juniper.net
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 vvFtFvaQNhMU; Mon, 10 Jun 2019 13:44:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx0b-00273201.pphosted.com (mx0b-00273201.pphosted.com [67.231.152.164]) (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 9845C1200DE; Mon, 10 Jun 2019 13:44:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pps.filterd (m0108162.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-00273201.pphosted.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id x5AKYH04003559; Mon, 10 Jun 2019 13:34:51 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=juniper.net; h=from : to : cc : subject : date : message-id : content-type : mime-version; s=PPS1017; bh=zXSL0x0WFtItAZ2Q04J6VhuMfga/7lJbVHWHOOfesXo=; b=IJaEKKfFTrA7fm1a3pxDUlKMym9IcYZyV8Dsh3ErxGpWGoO6XFrZqaKkMzJ6myGNcz/E IpiQuNCYKer0he6skzuvfjQQZy18FLboBu1liZmSNFkxM/5HZsJxXIfINKAs9J89Z3ta MwlZpXsKi0E3EdtIJQZJmN+dTVRaUw8b73fpV9RNrtD6FKx6ginNM/eStYhI06c1GQIK QAYWiE//4B1KEC28Ebj9EelpMHpLgLIFuI4l0+5K27Ix3gZAwMQa4Qf9nIpnipwvCTw1 btr0GRL+mtdiAzT2HiGQXev9X0kUPj7BhtGVVXP0v9Ej6eFF3olUFK6iTwd2OlZ+Eh0H uA==
Received: from nam01-by2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-by2nam01lp2053.outbound.protection.outlook.com [104.47.34.53]) by mx0b-00273201.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2t1wf502tm-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Mon, 10 Jun 2019 13:34:51 -0700
Received: from BN7PR05MB4337.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (52.133.223.28) by BN7PR05MB4434.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (52.133.223.161) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.1987.9; Mon, 10 Jun 2019 20:34:49 +0000
Received: from BN7PR05MB4337.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::605b:45a8:570d:a22d]) by BN7PR05MB4337.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::605b:45a8:570d:a22d%5]) with mapi id 15.20.1987.010; Mon, 10 Jun 2019 20:34:49 +0000
From: Tarek Saad <tsaad@juniper.net>
To: "draft-dhs-spring-pce-sr-p2mp-policy@ietf.org" <draft-dhs-spring-pce-sr-p2mp-policy@ietf.org>
CC: "pce@ietf.org" <pce@ietf.org>, "spring@ietf.org" <spring@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: Comments on draft-dhs-spring-pce-sr-p2mp-policy
Thread-Index: AQHU8Ka3GY3krhC4b0uPMF1Z3NNIpA==
Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2019 20:34:49 +0000
Message-ID: <8598DC54-F2C8-4A28-9696-D4C808129E83@juniper.net>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
msip_labels: MSIP_Label_154c1852-7526-40a8-86a6-f35479dab509_Enabled=true; MSIP_Label_154c1852-7526-40a8-86a6-f35479dab509_SetDate=2019-04-11T20:26:04-0500; MSIP_Label_154c1852-7526-40a8-86a6-f35479dab509_Method=Standard; MSIP_Label_154c1852-7526-40a8-86a6-f35479dab509_Name=Juniper Internal; MSIP_Label_154c1852-7526-40a8-86a6-f35479dab509_SiteId=bea78b3c-4cdb-4130-854a-1d193232e5f4; MSIP_Label_154c1852-7526-40a8-86a6-f35479dab509_Enabled=true; MSIP_Label_154c1852-7526-40a8-86a6-f35479dab509_ActionId=ebbc13ca-85cb-4f86-bd4a-00006e58d7fd;
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/10.19.0.190512
x-originating-ip: [66.129.241.10]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 86c61fc0-7a41-4324-a802-08d6ede3157e
x-ms-office365-filtering-ht: Tenant
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(2390118)(7020095)(4652040)(8989299)(4534185)(4627221)(201703031133081)(201702281549075)(8990200)(5600148)(711020)(4605104)(1401327)(4618075)(2017052603328)(7193020); SRVR:BN7PR05MB4434;
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: BN7PR05MB4434:
x-ms-exchange-purlcount: 2
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <BN7PR05MB4434B2FD88D441A48DB23ADBB7130@BN7PR05MB4434.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:5516;
x-forefront-prvs: 0064B3273C
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(396003)(39860400002)(136003)(346002)(366004)(376002)(189003)(199004)(37854004)(66446008)(486006)(66556008)(64756008)(256004)(476003)(66476007)(91956017)(76116006)(6116002)(3846002)(790700001)(66946007)(53936002)(73956011)(14444005)(2906002)(2616005)(6306002)(33656002)(99286004)(102836004)(81166006)(186003)(81156014)(6512007)(54896002)(6916009)(8676002)(6486002)(6436002)(5640700003)(8936002)(6506007)(5660300002)(54906003)(2351001)(66066001)(2501003)(58126008)(7736002)(316002)(4326008)(36756003)(478600001)(71190400001)(26005)(71200400001)(82746002)(14454004)(68736007)(86362001)(83716004)(25786009)(450100002); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:BN7PR05MB4434; H:BN7PR05MB4337.namprd05.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; LANG:en; PTR:InfoNoRecords; MX:1; A:1;
received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: juniper.net does not designate permitted sender hosts)
x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: OTjX9p4rrVOrhMrizVeFOae1f4Dtnr58alBiplzm9BTI2zd+ZYw3agloxM/r/vDVa1ou3+ki0ZLM2/haIf4SoXpdRaXfYmrezY3XvNSTTE4LGbr3OjfPVlJZLgz2R5E3M4X8+TiVK5YqheN/wQR3uH6zWIPkLdAmwQYufpYv/eDfIEgxn8qqrAK4pGagbCD3E5Gk13L9O1gj7dZgRyK8x6tdfu3O42oWjQf2a8YZE3GjPmtcV5psZRrhNnyL8NLcUgd5f1eFwjA4dZGPrtshqLw/DPWY1vHwaHBHEOOEl4yvkSYlcOUr2XgH1WMV7Ja0ZW8NFZqTILYSzoy6GQZesZWLe1Mu7clBoVd3uc2SfcmSq6mWwbqhlVDna8Lp862/6VIBV2GdTPnnTAaOOBKE3F6OHEd3cMpL7jMndlGvjrM=
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_8598DC54F2C84A289696D4C808129E83junipernet_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: juniper.net
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 86c61fc0-7a41-4324-a802-08d6ede3157e
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 10 Jun 2019 20:34:49.1806 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: bea78b3c-4cdb-4130-854a-1d193232e5f4
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: tsaad@juniper.net
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BN7PR05MB4434
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:, , definitions=2019-06-10_09:, , signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_spam_notspam policy=outbound_spam score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1011 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 impostorscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1810050000 definitions=main-1906100139
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/pce/9_UrrDU7gHw23D5dRihQ8JunO-U>
Subject: [Pce] Comments on draft-dhs-spring-pce-sr-p2mp-policy
X-BeenThere: pce@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Path Computation Element <pce.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/pce>, <mailto:pce-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/pce/>
List-Post: <mailto:pce@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:pce-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce>, <mailto:pce-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2019 20:44:55 -0000
Hi authors, I have the following comments on your draft: 1. Support for multiple candidate-paths, segment-list, etc. The procedures defined here are not aligned to those in “draft-barth-pce-segment-routing-policy-cp” for unicast SR policies– for example: 1. Ability to instantiate multiple candidate path, or 2. Using SR Candidate Path Association Group to associate the multiple candidate-path(s) for the same SR policy, or 3. Ability of having multiple Segment-list(s) per endpoint (with equal/unequal weights) What are your plans to align to draft-barth-pce-segment-routing-policy-cp? 2. Path selection when instantiating using different protocols (e.g. BGP SRTE, PCEP, or NETCONG/config) For unicast SR policies, it is possible have multiple candidate paths (for the same SR policy) instantiated via BGP, PCEP, or NETCONG/config. In such case, a preference-based selection and tie-breaking criteria to select from amongst the candidate path(s) was defined, but those cannot be applied using approach defined in this ID. Any plans to address this? 3. SR-IPV4-P2MP-LSP-IDENTIFIER TLV, LSP-ID and P2MP-ID If 1) and 2) above are sorted out, I believe LSP-ID would not be needed and can be removed. I prefer to completely replace P2MP-ID by “color” to 1) aligned to the ‘color’ for used in unicast SR Policies, and 2) avoid the confusion since P2MP ID is set by the ingress in RSVP-TE – noting `color` is usually carried in service routes as ext-com so that the ingress can use it as a service selector. 4. New SR-P2MP-CCI Object: I understand you are inheriting this object from “draft-ietf-pce-pcep-extension-for-pce-controller-00”, however, it is not clear to me how one can program a P2MP Tree-SID (e.g. having an In-label cross-connected to multiple next-hops – where each next-hop having its own label stack)? If the assumption is multiple CCI Objects (Type MPLS Label) will be downloaded for each out-label in the stack? If so, what defines the position in the label of the stack? How can I specify an out-label stack with repeated same label, e.g. next-hop=NH, and out-label-stack-{L1, L1, L1}? Noting, could downloading the same SR-P2MP-CCI with same outgoing label multiple times be interpreted as redundant? 5. Programing new/reopt p2mp SR LSP When setting up the LSPs, a sequential order of visiting nodes starting from egress back ingress is desirable (for example see Figure 2: Basic PCECC LSP setup in draft-ietf-pce-pcep-extension-for-pce-controller).. I did not see it explicitly highlighted in your draft. Regards, Tarek