IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Pce] WG Adoption of draft-chen-pce-pcep-ifit-06

Giuseppe Fioccola <giuseppe.fioccola@huawei.com> Mon, 04 July 2022 17:07 UTC

Return-Path: <giuseppe.fioccola@huawei.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 2EA0CC14CF07; Mon, 4 Jul 2022 10:07:31 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.905
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.905 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1JrSyKaqR0rq; Mon, 4 Jul 2022 10:07:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from frasgout.his.huawei.com (frasgout.his.huawei.com [185.176.79.56]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4C7CAC14F741; Mon, 4 Jul 2022 10:07:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from fraeml715-chm.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.18.147.207]) by frasgout.his.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4LcBvG4CvXz67twb; Tue, 5 Jul 2022 01:02:50 +0800 (CST)
Received: from fraeml714-chm.china.huawei.com (10.206.15.33) by fraeml715-chm.china.huawei.com (10.206.15.34) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2375.24; Mon, 4 Jul 2022 19:07:00 +0200
Received: from fraeml714-chm.china.huawei.com ([10.206.15.33]) by fraeml714-chm.china.huawei.com ([10.206.15.33]) with mapi id 15.01.2375.024; Mon, 4 Jul 2022 19:07:00 +0200
From: Giuseppe Fioccola <giuseppe.fioccola@huawei.com>
To: Gyan Mishra <hayabusagsm@gmail.com>, Dhruv Dhody <dd@dhruvdhody.com>
CC: "draft-chen-pce-pcep-ifit@ietf.org" <draft-chen-pce-pcep-ifit@ietf.org>, "pce@ietf.org" <pce@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [Pce] WG Adoption of draft-chen-pce-pcep-ifit-06
Thread-Index: AQHYh6jQNKSAJlnK00OiUI3WP8k0U61psZkAgAS5mJA=
Date: Mon, 04 Jul 2022 17:07:00 +0000
Message-ID: <2b98bddd5e604ad78bab7bec9ec13a53@huawei.com>
References: <CAP7zK5Zp6CWFvBTKHK53B8krYZWgZKvswjfd+hBek=DikVWc-Q@mail.gmail.com> <CABNhwV0ZqEco5LFXSvR-S0mKVu6HBB7MA3b-hOvM_0J7fB3jaQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CABNhwV0ZqEco5LFXSvR-S0mKVu6HBB7MA3b-hOvM_0J7fB3jaQ@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach: yes
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.81.216.216]
Content-Type: multipart/related; boundary="_004_2b98bddd5e604ad78bab7bec9ec13a53huaweicom_"; type="multipart/alternative"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/pce/t597pvnWCb-NgPUM3AGZqLZONvQ>
Subject: Re: [Pce] WG Adoption of draft-chen-pce-pcep-ifit-06
X-BeenThere: pce@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
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, 04 Jul 2022 17:07:31 -0000

Hi Gyan,
Thank you for the support and for sharing your thoughts.
Note that, in draft-chen-pce-pcep-ifit, the term IFIT only denotes IOAM and Alt-Mark together.
For this reason, I think that this draft can be considered independent from the framework since it defines a PCEP extension to distribute IFIT (IOAM and Alt-Mark) information. Therefore, the IFIT attributes defined in this document simply complement the relevant PCEP data plane extensions.
As an example, for Segment Routing, it complements RFC 8664, draft-ietf-pce-segment-routing-ipv6 and draft-ietf-pce-segment-routing-policy-cp to automatically enable IOAM and Alt-Mark behavior when the path is instantiated.
But, as you suggested, since this draft could also be considered as one building block of a whole framework, a reference to draft-song-opsawg-ifit-framework may be added.

Regards,

Giuseppe


From: Gyan Mishra <hayabusagsm@gmail.com>
Sent: Friday, July 1, 2022 7:37 PM
To: Dhruv Dhody <dd@dhruvdhody.com>
Cc: draft-chen-pce-pcep-ifit@ietf.org; pce@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Pce] WG Adoption of draft-chen-pce-pcep-ifit-06

Dear WG

I support adoption by PCE WG and would be willing to work on the draft.

I support IFIT PCE extension to carry the IFIT attributes for in-situ IOAM on path telemetry.  I do agree this would be very useful for operators.

I was looking for a framework draft for IFIT and this is what I found.

I think a framework draft for IFIT solution should be addressed in the draft in the introduction.

I noticed that there are a number of ifit related drafts across many WGs with a variety of authors and it appears no common author across all the documents.

Is there an IFIT framework draft of the overall IFIT architecture and goals?

IFIT is a component of IPPM IOAM but I think it should have its own framework draft.

I did find this IFIT framework draft which I don’t see as informational reference in this document.

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-song-opsawg-ifit-framework/

Of all the IFIT related drafts I do see one adopted.

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-idr-sr-policy-ifit/


Kind Regards

Gyan

On Fri, Jun 24, 2022 at 4:59 AM Dhruv Dhody <dd@dhruvdhody.com<mailto:dd@dhruvdhody.com>> wrote:
Hi WG,

This email begins the WG adoption poll for draft-chen-pce-pcep-ifit-06.

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-chen-pce-pcep-ifit/

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 11th July 2022.

Please be more vocal during WG polls!

Thanks!
Dhruv & Julien
_______________________________________________
Pce mailing list
Pce@ietf.org<mailto:Pce@ietf.org>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce
--

[Image removed by sender.]<http://www.verizon.com/>

Gyan Mishra

Network Solutions Architect

Email gyan.s.mishra@verizon.com<mailto:gyan.s.mishra@verizon.com>

M 301 502-1347

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email