Re: [Pce] draft-chen-pce-sr-policy-ifit-00

Dhruv Dhody <dhruv.ietf@gmail.com> Thu, 26 March 2020 12:35 UTC

Return-Path: <dhruv.ietf@gmail.com>
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 6C7D43A08E7; Thu, 26 Mar 2020 05:35:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.098
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 Gf6NWR_iRReP; Thu, 26 Mar 2020 05:35:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-il1-x132.google.com (mail-il1-x132.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::132]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5D0A73A085B; Thu, 26 Mar 2020 05:35:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-il1-x132.google.com with SMTP id g15so5112691ilj.10; Thu, 26 Mar 2020 05:35:05 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=6Z286Gik0MpchMsOYAnBUlkZ7pU+2i9VT02rG45TfFc=; b=YBNYnjG3iVjEj9eKI5avOLYwifyfuOSLQ5t4PXTtSC1XGtJwOpJziATl/1kc66SZdE kCY9TD843APgorGAcbwTRY1h21DoWG+dS++w02FEwhWpR9a+m8tvyggKqMiAybcW9pJM L/guVt0oTLqxHrA7Nde7NGMOSj4NKsPqvjvrkBkoTrZQvDprAh/cZXkKg86k4fK7S/Mr F+2qVhdh415fo18e7Jqqlc7u++xN867rcUHUqiUuLLVjXm7czolEqTgrRD+JWbWy57WG /qFvSg1aZi94cP18mdITnCFlqnaA3pdQ3+2Sss2857EjeH2HRIJVDJiUp2VcsIM7zREA EGIw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=6Z286Gik0MpchMsOYAnBUlkZ7pU+2i9VT02rG45TfFc=; b=BOXmy10WS1ecAC/S/+xPL711Nn2Hm1LDDj7S29hn2jTuYtbMn+MWMxXk3caRW7Sudc X2/gmhOKvMPSontiXs8SQywcl0v5LLfE0Zy8ZM/oOfzWLp9QvpU0SpmKCOdvmHcLLY3y 30Ch21MLjFOBzicaOne2z/kKqDRPmeKes7ex16Qn+oTRR+VkA8Z+bbrkyPm1tWAGRHLt 7Q/Citek6C1MVfdT9AX11aevzxN1djDh1YzRshg3C9mS5i1Wa9glXuvUwlanQ04JNzcQ 8GRD2onuJXf4FozyXwEZNDJyxg7+aCRuq1vkMMCGI3X0CoWEh67d2AYcI8L4ar4dxzWo MBEQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: ANhLgQ1KX0E67giRn8SY5vS+pJ3tHYXI2BgSkSAdPi1sysdnzjv1olhm 0jBBEONnU8eq9bCoKPFUz5+3MEvP5Yid+MHZAvA=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADFU+vuWfLr7olXdbMm848bAy2agXesy3s5JBO/NO7hYu81Id76p9phYccfprYTUXl2Ja8huphcOT7JfBhIZJqfNRL4=
X-Received: by 2002:a92:96c6:: with SMTP id g189mr8147174ilh.276.1585226104398; Thu, 26 Mar 2020 05:35:04 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <aae9030445bd43e6b867bbb5169c5ad4@huawei.com>
In-Reply-To: <aae9030445bd43e6b867bbb5169c5ad4@huawei.com>
From: Dhruv Dhody <dhruv.ietf@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Mar 2020 18:04:28 +0530
Message-ID: <CAB75xn7THZ9Xm3XLGDQ2ZJZnxGQzvwsq4K8HjkrDZLx4+acHnw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Giuseppe Fioccola <giuseppe.fioccola@huawei.com>
Cc: "pce@ietf.org" <pce@ietf.org>, "draft-chen-pce-sr-policy-ifit@ietf.org" <draft-chen-pce-sr-policy-ifit@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/pce/CWNsR4v2gGyiJQaqb7oxbYyzlo0>
Subject: Re: [Pce] draft-chen-pce-sr-policy-ifit-00
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: Thu, 26 Mar 2020 12:35:08 -0000

Hi Giuseppe,

Thank you for introducing your draft on the mailing list.

A quick high level questions - Could we make this generic: to be
applied for any Path Setup Type (PST) in PCEP - RSVP-TE, SR, PCECC
etc? I agree that SR might be of immediate importance; but from PCEP
point of view, it could be useful to keep this generic so that we
don't have to reinvent it for other PST.

It might be good idea to tackle the need for this extension in PCEP -
which to me is to make sure that the PCC includes IOAM header in the
data packet with fields as specified by the PCE. Correct?

Also suggest to add capability exchange during open messages before a
peer uses this extension.

Thanks!
Dhruv (as a WG contributor)

On Thu, Mar 26, 2020 at 5:38 PM Giuseppe Fioccola
<giuseppe.fioccola@huawei.com> wrote:
>
> Dear All,
>
> We published draft-chen-pce-sr-policy-ifit-00 (https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-chen-pce-sr-policy-ifit/).
>
> This document aims to define the Extensions to PCEP to distribute SR policies carrying In-situ Flow Information Telemetry information.  The scope is to enable automatically data plane on-path telemetry methods, like IOAM and Alternate Marking, when the SR policy is applied.
>
>
>
> We would introduce it during the next virtual meeting, that has been moved to May or June, and meanwhile, we would really appreciate inputs and reviews of the document.
>
>
>
> Best Regards,
>
>
>
> Giuseppe
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pce mailing list
> Pce@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce