Re: [Pce] WG Adoption of draft-tokar-pce-sid-algo-05
Ketan Talaulikar <ketant.ietf@gmail.com> Tue, 08 February 2022 17:39 UTC
Return-Path: <ketant.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 5899F3A0DE7;
Tue, 8 Feb 2022 09:39:06 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.498
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.498 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,
HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001,
URIBL_SBL=0.5, URIBL_SBL_A=0.1] autolearn=no 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 uC5UZxkBnhtE; Tue, 8 Feb 2022 09:39:02 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-ua1-x934.google.com (mail-ua1-x934.google.com
[IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::934])
(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 F11043A0CC0;
Tue, 8 Feb 2022 09:38:42 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-ua1-x934.google.com with SMTP id b37so25362459uad.12;
Tue, 08 Feb 2022 09:38:42 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112;
h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to
:cc; bh=1iq7ST+7RuLBDpcxkUwUyB2TGe2UEwT3SGCdSrvtRIo=;
b=MhbRnVVBFCFkjcvd19YYOq8ipW4UvlYH/PPsJ35I+gDVib1ixV6qlvMLgj5PzY7qCl
wRn7K4jXpgckC1mfeI9m7seZVXmZa8kVe4WK3zx9IF6edxvmW3lSbYEbSjXYpZQEl4rq
AnGNbQpNHDlM1EaLfJdO514in4QS579Amj89TnDVHlSS6tfF2Pqzly9A4370Xx4TILQ7
0PMF3KaRF0voMQpkEv5Il4IW4EEbMgfuhWAOEsEvB7PXtNHBiM2ynvUrZfJm0XUqM03o
C0wJkSI85ZKQOoZnTlo/1DNQIdn521nC6H3Tg9bM0Xc5paCBPhDV+TcxWm1qBdkNuNX1
yCdg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20210112;
h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date
:message-id:subject:to:cc;
bh=1iq7ST+7RuLBDpcxkUwUyB2TGe2UEwT3SGCdSrvtRIo=;
b=YuAn8E8UHy0ClFrqb0AW0gBCRInRY52KgJxyhWnMjsKKVxVI1SfgQr7fN4hg1jj2xh
5MvW36nzghyfJgZHpls7VM/yHuUM0g/8HRZdjyzvcZy1n9fpMBRWfImvtf4QLnQlCWRF
bWboj7zsGDLbK+SAg52hyAs65xfbUUXdUAwrkL2XdpNWjEegpj6jeX6KpAdYBKQ0GPCP
eHvSgex9aJizAMUKUa6nLN9B3aiMwUx3i+lbLe0Gf6eodazmeV0yJ3rhUDoG/gBu4dOi
lAlXkf8UVm35BbyDCoA9nf77icCGhFqq7nNysvQiTsjjKWDv0Vk2oLXSPQpcPgZvi0lO
X6Gw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531Ykolxr3mAtnDwqDyHpMzxLTQ7j40cLsDfBzpqIdPsf8gDNFbm
gxLYQpmNhKp5MiwNqy6sCBJKBr99xOW8liCYcGxQ92y+cSo=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyu/uERYMTuc6onavo0RYzbmLsYfzGx2b1jtifWnaI5pJJ20F4ZIxWxtbo+VxM2N9pj6OMQjXHgQv2/DVVCZyA=
X-Received: by 2002:ab0:130b:: with SMTP id g11mr2021537uae.110.1644341920842;
Tue, 08 Feb 2022 09:38:40 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAP7zK5Z4-B9j+cbcu_hvbNSzpQCWUKdAFLR=09bMLBROsARgVQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAP7zK5Z4-B9j+cbcu_hvbNSzpQCWUKdAFLR=09bMLBROsARgVQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Ketan Talaulikar <ketant.ietf@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2022 23:08:29 +0530
Message-ID: <CAH6gdPw4oEooC20sG-B9Yq2JfSV0fMxRHXNp49C-ZyT1o3wSvw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Dhruv Dhody <dd@dhruvdhody.com>
Cc: pce@ietf.org, draft-tokar-pce-sid-algo@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000014c75405d785300a"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/pce/U07lz2THdN3CuP9fl-DRLL64t-8>
Subject: Re: [Pce] WG Adoption of draft-tokar-pce-sid-algo-05
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: Tue, 08 Feb 2022 17:39:07 -0000
Hi All, I support the adoption of this document and have the following comments (not blocking adoption) for the consideration of the authors & the WG. 1) While the algorithm was originally introduced for Prefix-SID in RFC8402, it has since been also extended to cover Adjacency SID. I hope the text in the draft can reflect that better. Also, some reference to IGP flex-algo would be helpful since that is perhaps one of the key drivers for this work. 2) I would suggest using the "A" flag in the capabilities for Algorithm than the currently used "S". 3) For the ERO encoding, we seem to be getting into problematic territory as also indicated by Andrew. I would suggest that the ordering of optional fields strictly follow the order in which flags are being introduced (i.e. their bit position). This way, we at least don't get into random scenarios. I am not sure if the ordering in the ASCII art is considered normative. In the future, it would be best if we follow pure TLV/sub-TLV based encoding at all times - i.e. always introduce capabilities for sub-TLVs even though there might be none foreseen at the time of defining a new TLV. 4) For the LSPA Object, I presume the L (loose) flag is actually indicating a "non-strict" adherence to the algo constraint. Somehow the "loose" term may give a different impression. There is the preference for an algo and then a strict requirement for an algo to be followed (e.g. for flex-algo). Also, some clarity on the use of Adj-SIDs that don't have an associated algo with them would be helpful. Thanks, Ketan On Fri, Feb 4, 2022 at 10:45 PM Dhruv Dhody <dd@dhruvdhody.com> wrote: > Hi WG, > > This email begins the WG adoption poll for draft-tokar-pce-sid-algo-05. > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-tokar-pce-sid-algo/ > > Should this draft be adopted by the PCE WG? Please state your reasons - > Why / Why not? What needs to be fixed before or after adoption? Are you > willing to work on this draft? Review comments should be posted to the list. > > Please respond by Monday 21st Feb 2022. > > Have a great weekend. > > Thanks! > Dhruv & Julien > _______________________________________________ > Pce mailing list > Pce@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce >
- [Pce] WG Adoption of draft-tokar-pce-sid-algo-05 Dhruv Dhody
- Re: [Pce] WG Adoption of draft-tokar-pce-sid-algo… Stone, Andrew (Nokia - CA/Ottawa)
- Re: [Pce] WG Adoption of draft-tokar-pce-sid-algo… Ketan Talaulikar
- Re: [Pce] WG Adoption of draft-tokar-pce-sid-algo… Samuel Sidor (ssidor)
- Re: [Pce] WG Adoption of draft-tokar-pce-sid-algo… Mike Koldychev (mkoldych)
- Re: [Pce] WG Adoption of draft-tokar-pce-sid-algo… xiong.quan
- Re: [Pce] WG Adoption of draft-tokar-pce-sid-algo… Dhruv Dhody
- Re: [Pce] WG Adoption of draft-tokar-pce-sid-algo… Mahendra Negi
- Re: [Pce] WG Adoption of draft-tokar-pce-sid-algo… peng.shaofu
- Re: [Pce] WG Adoption of draft-tokar-pce-sid-algo… olivier.dugeon
- Re: [Pce] WG Adoption of draft-tokar-pce-sid-algo… Dongjie (Jimmy)
- Re: [Pce] WG Adoption of draft-tokar-pce-sid-algo… Samuel Sidor (ssidor)
- Re: [Pce] WG Adoption of draft-tokar-pce-sid-algo… Dongjie (Jimmy)
- Re: [Pce] WG Adoption of draft-tokar-pce-sid-algo… Dhruv Dhody
- Re: [Pce] WG Adoption of draft-tokar-pce-sid-algo… Samuel Sidor (ssidor)
- Re: [Pce] WG Adoption of draft-tokar-pce-sid-algo… Dongjie (Jimmy)
- Re: [Pce] WG Adoption of draft-tokar-pce-sid-algo… Gyan Mishra
- Re: [Pce] WG Adoption of draft-tokar-pce-sid-algo… Samuel Sidor (ssidor)
- Re: [Pce] WG Adoption of draft-tokar-pce-sid-algo… Dongjie (Jimmy)