Re: [pim] Sticky PIM DR, should it be added to PIM DR improvements or different draft

"Mankamana Mishra (mankamis)" <mankamis@cisco.com> Wed, 06 January 2021 19:29 UTC

Return-Path: <mankamis@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E5433A11A0 for <pim@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 6 Jan 2021 11:29:07 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -9.62
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.62 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, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.com header.b=XABC6K3P; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.onmicrosoft.com header.b=ZCd2/lz6
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 5TYmPsrnacI1 for <pim@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 6 Jan 2021 11:29:04 -0800 (PST)
Received: from alln-iport-4.cisco.com (alln-iport-4.cisco.com [173.37.142.91]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6B2873A1137 for <pim@ietf.org>; Wed, 6 Jan 2021 11:29:04 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=2124; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1609961344; x=1611170944; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-id:content-transfer-encoding: mime-version; bh=JPPhyjHJYVruKuEFvCkXi7N1uqqkb1xMh58UJohyYG8=; b=XABC6K3PAmL82Nb3E7cRTymQst3zbtS6mEH79C8LTIjvpkNO0AhqP7D4 PFRl3+ixIXiLd4Zvvyzfo43er24fYLFoCeMKfMKAJcoicDBCMQAdKIdDI LHG3azzjURfsO7nznUZ7wEWcdJuNz+Z0J4aEBCy2fJRAsR4RWvq1PuO4G I=;
X-IPAS-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0CIAgBdDfZfmI0NJK1iHgEBCxIMQIFEC4FTUYFYLy4Kh?= =?us-ascii?q?DWDSAONRSiKG450gS6BJQNUCwEBAQ0BAS0CBAEBhEoCF4FYAiU0CQ4CAwEBA?= =?us-ascii?q?QMCAwEBAQEFAQEBAgEGBBQBAQEBAQEBAYY2DIV0AQEDARIREQwBATAHAQ8CA?= =?us-ascii?q?QgODAImAgICHxEVEAIEAQ0FGweDBIJWAw4gAaNkAoE8iGl2gTKDBAEBBoUOD?= =?us-ascii?q?QuCEAmBDiqCdYN8gkiDciYbgUE/gREnDBCCKC4+ghuCI4MYNIIsgygBA4FOY?= =?us-ascii?q?TSTRZNekGdYCoJ2lj+FHQMfgymfLpQOggWMBpMvAgQCBAUCDgEBBoFWOIFZc?= =?us-ascii?q?BVlAYI+UBcCDY4hGh2DOopYdDcCBgEJAQEDCXyLBwGBEAEB?=
IronPort-PHdr: =?us-ascii?q?9a23=3AwMRnXRO7WmGWqEwZGdQl6mtXPHoupqn0MwgJ65?= =?us-ascii?q?Eul7NJdOG58o//OFDEvKwx3lDMVITfrflDjrmev6PhXDkG5pCM+DAHfYdXXh?= =?us-ascii?q?AIwcMRg0Q7AcGDBEG6SZyibyEzEMlYElMw+Xa9PBtaHc//YxvZpXjhpTIXEw?= =?us-ascii?q?/0YAxyIOm9E4XOjsOxgua1/ZCbYwhBiDenJ71oKxDjpgTKvc5Qioxneas=3D?=
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.79,327,1602547200"; d="scan'208";a="623810702"
Received: from alln-core-8.cisco.com ([173.36.13.141]) by alln-iport-4.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA; 06 Jan 2021 19:29:03 +0000
Received: from XCH-RCD-004.cisco.com (xch-rcd-004.cisco.com [173.37.102.14]) by alln-core-8.cisco.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id 106JT3Sf013921 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Wed, 6 Jan 2021 19:29:03 GMT
Received: from xhs-aln-003.cisco.com (173.37.135.120) by XCH-RCD-004.cisco.com (173.37.102.14) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1497.2; Wed, 6 Jan 2021 13:29:02 -0600
Received: from xhs-rtp-002.cisco.com (64.101.210.229) by xhs-aln-003.cisco.com (173.37.135.120) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1497.2; Wed, 6 Jan 2021 13:29:02 -0600
Received: from NAM12-DM6-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (64.101.32.56) by xhs-rtp-002.cisco.com (64.101.210.229) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1497.2 via Frontend Transport; Wed, 6 Jan 2021 14:29:02 -0500
ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=GjHcWhBuNazf1Ie4r4RrdElu3ceGobOFQ8h1ZO9FZlQ0jnyXRx3H+6RPcAl0MkUP0Xg3MZmF3hLAcfYRcSCMHlyn0Nr42gKKbm9xljiozPN72TaapoZJ4KfiFRs8OHp6r4TQ8edvjKrg3wHJ0m+fVoCvkI+AI0y4EGuR1SN+vmEYIWWt63aGCpbq3xguP/6vSg8++j3UfSM8Kzei1O2SS0+E/aqqsZJPaQIyCSx+zaLLmO2lQtM15Q5JjeWhYNFbSOA/ExjvYgujGSa5Qei4K9wEnr3lDJjvBKcb81g33lZeWkRSwCn2FEnvxbH5xnUhOdreBvJuhb4tFnr+zqJTeg==
ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=JPPhyjHJYVruKuEFvCkXi7N1uqqkb1xMh58UJohyYG8=; b=Nf9z/VLxEyTFDrHxEoJ+CuSsvhSa/Or7Q7vkdCNE+wtnmeAIDzQAqlbGO5DCOnTU6DosNlO7Ea/hLxJqQIQzdSDDL+dq2ySXgGY6zYXDBgxO8Cn/ZmN7xGn3TDgTnrh/yLGIWaQHuF8a6tbLWwCFR71QDNShXYul5DVtQOJWhP9WzXORb9zUtjo8G+pJPM9ZOdm5AdORYhMbR0CvhUp+4OCor5BPU4SeJlRTuo0PdFhLLOaY8DgfsoTgP+eMIP3f5RdoKO34h7JQdl5ZkrlJa6WeKRW7bg+/TUY2KzMJBjnrziAjIA1ZqqO6rN6JlImw4ua7k8HaQtLJITPCpp4Fdg==
ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=cisco.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=cisco.com; dkim=pass header.d=cisco.com; arc=none
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cisco.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector2-cisco-onmicrosoft-com; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=JPPhyjHJYVruKuEFvCkXi7N1uqqkb1xMh58UJohyYG8=; b=ZCd2/lz6VrGUc0GqW1DNxZ6wD4ct51OPO9L0/yseBp3hreJGHx8FXubMAsdIb7x9c32QwcdwI7lqD650FIfOKFIRcbjjYfkfHHcv9s4zfw22STCwvUmoSVKygsWlvZAqAbMXXL8MlD1Z7wmQEO+ctjkm0Cd1ae1BpjRQedtVC0s=
Received: from BYAPR11MB2725.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:a02:c5::25) by SJ0PR11MB4846.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:a03:2d8::24) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.3742.6; Wed, 6 Jan 2021 19:29:00 +0000
Received: from BYAPR11MB2725.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::b50a:f4b9:8fea:b87e]) by BYAPR11MB2725.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::b50a:f4b9:8fea:b87e%3]) with mapi id 15.20.3721.024; Wed, 6 Jan 2021 19:29:00 +0000
From: "Mankamana Mishra (mankamis)" <mankamis@cisco.com>
To: Alvaro Retana <aretana.ietf@gmail.com>, "zhang.zheng" <zhang.zheng@zte.com.cn>, Stig Venaas <stig@venaas.com>
CC: "pim@ietf.org" <pim@ietf.org>, "Sridhar Santhanam (sridsant)" <sridsant@cisco.com>
Thread-Topic: [pim] Sticky PIM DR, should it be added to PIM DR improvements or different draft
Thread-Index: AQHW5GIvNONR+aosmkeeJ/UeaU5HCQ==
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 2021 19:29:00 +0000
Message-ID: <0113EC72-6977-41C2-8196-C9222BEC6D19@cisco.com>
References: <CAHANBt+0gd2BsTFxUw8DGSnh+dEXJXeRFLKyUg=KaefHQ35mSw@mail.gmail.com> <202012041133107131056@zte.com.cn> <CAHANBt+Xt+5R01yJUTa7Cgw+VE9b1VQtBKc8jCrSW3BWTB9LHQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAMMESsweN3dBLzdtOsvLG4z+nPZrywrTo7FmrAWkDmKzCaWpmQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAMMESsweN3dBLzdtOsvLG4z+nPZrywrTo7FmrAWkDmKzCaWpmQ@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/16.44.20121301
authentication-results: gmail.com; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;gmail.com; dmarc=none action=none header.from=cisco.com;
x-originating-ip: [73.92.34.200]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 28354ff8-654b-409a-f8f1-08d8b27951ff
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: SJ0PR11MB4846:
x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <SJ0PR11MB48465D1ED872A4E75A4F8964DFD00@SJ0PR11MB4846.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:8882;
x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0;
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: sKq3ufjPCTX9et4/d+8o6y3xczYFCbKHR+dfaC9pBSGfsn6RbmtegKiIDRR5R4VNOiQXrx6uaquSfyKIGbZxmUDOfiOenws3b8y01v/HQltMblwNjKmkXQbe2EGUvTkMOmOoiF1OWnPoFfJX2wz/Lg7J+R7sjmdQV+bK/CCcTRcUZTFIooFUw2iQTQXHSHA9Zg5+g0NjczJxy0PwUuLdHc3oGCVw8uRHcJTV5xh+p0G4UnR02ZYcLG+Zmcu5ElMR8f2T1S2VVYqST+OW9203pBDWIfWrJLPjjoK+JYKwDrKNxPurKzWWY83A2Os6whpfO0Dpx2w4Wd9qmTm3mc74LqB2WDv61g9IYkWmyYcO8gVmEvSi0XGEnCjgIPsIc24fY68bKDPiSdkay1Mv7r5tCBkx99rtD1D9fYJWyZKVelvRGLoGQIZXlWO5TYgqpEzz
x-forefront-antispam-report: CIP:255.255.255.255; CTRY:; LANG:en; SCL:1; SRV:; IPV:NLI; SFV:NSPM; H:BYAPR11MB2725.namprd11.prod.outlook.com; PTR:; CAT:NONE; SFS:(366004)(346002)(376002)(396003)(39860400002)(136003)(6506007)(36756003)(478600001)(66574015)(110136005)(316002)(186003)(4326008)(54906003)(83380400001)(76116006)(6486002)(86362001)(107886003)(66946007)(66556008)(66476007)(66446008)(64756008)(8936002)(26005)(2906002)(5660300002)(6512007)(8676002)(33656002)(71200400001)(2616005)(45980500001); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101;
x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata: =?utf-8?B?TGg5Y0ZyMVBaT2dQTzE1SmZGMlpYV0tXMDNyTkNRY3IwTU93VWx3YW1qdDA1?= =?utf-8?B?MEhRNnBvcUh0UkxOWmwrdUVuQ3QrTi9xZmRtNHA0S2I1eUwrVTVvR1VXZEc2?= =?utf-8?B?UjVpbitWZFFWM21LZGtYNFJreE0zeG92K2wzTlJiUU45SHNMcjEvNmUrTnQ3?= =?utf-8?B?ZkdDTEpKN2NuZi9YeXJFNWIrS3hrajFVbUhORTFDTUlCUHcvSGVFTHllK2xr?= =?utf-8?B?LzBKM1NnTmNYNmpoTXc5QWFGZnV2N004RlBVRDZpQWdPMy9qRE9FVVRaUmJT?= =?utf-8?B?cHhwUzRhYXM4cGVwUXFUSXdVdThnK3ZpZ1Z0MUwxZ0RRcm1zVE1vUDJmUWFS?= =?utf-8?B?MEZ1R0pQMUVyQnRDaUs1eVdGUTNXem85WkVSUE1NblVWeDdCQjh1cjNTd01K?= =?utf-8?B?eGl1dndMQzZrNnlUaHBkMFZDZEUvTStzMm9hQTlPKzVBU3Y1MHcwR0RHRk1Z?= =?utf-8?B?eUxZWWUveVZ5Vk1yYW4wNzBUOXdIdUp4WnFlVTg3ZEhpYjBrN2lkWTRjTE9u?= =?utf-8?B?Ry9pYkpqa3kzWjFpNFVGNWluSmNMVE9pMmR1Y2hVMzd1OTZ6VGd2UWpkeDlS?= =?utf-8?B?WHNPOUZpZmVRWFZCeE9Fa0ZsRk9RM1ZGam5QZ0k5ejJhem11L21iTC80ZUgw?= =?utf-8?B?WFNvVVVZYXp3bnRGTXNCMll0Wm9tNEdLU0gxVUo4eHZkWnlrY2t5NVlaOFdH?= =?utf-8?B?aU5NYWpUczJ5M3lOMi9hUkZjZ0dxblM1dGo0TktzVFRPSE9pZy9YU1gydURG?= =?utf-8?B?b1pRR3dKY2tEdFdLbGdRbXNOU1FhKytzQ28xaDZzZmhoeEIzSlBGdndYaFdw?= =?utf-8?B?Q3JoQnVYOWFzWlpHWDNqQnQ5ckhlYUxRTUo4YmhsZ3BFZitTVUlNdWRNY0NG?= =?utf-8?B?RXZ2aHcwKzQxY1BFeExyVGtuVmgrRG8wNkFQN1VnM0FHcEF2VDlKMWtaUTl3?= =?utf-8?B?Wm5OMVR1UlJRZWpBNEdMaCtRa2hMaDJENXNSZnVaSG9rcDdDRWk5S0RBSVB0?= =?utf-8?B?SDlmcjFEV1kxTUdyeGJraHljTEV2Q2JSSUJPYzdBbHJwYnp3d0RDMGkySDZI?= =?utf-8?B?QVhxWStyam1ZRFN6Sm5MTTRmNFhoYjVWaU13MlFyYjNNUEdHUEJuSUk0RkJY?= =?utf-8?B?eWRRbEFoUnpFMEtwMEUxZGxVdmw0MlhmV1NQZXZPcDYrb3kzQ2JYc0QzNERR?= =?utf-8?B?d1dxdlNLclZrTyt2K2ZsclpJMmwwcWJaMUp5MmVnR2ZoS2lNYWdMN1ZpY1Vn?= =?utf-8?B?eVdKa1RTdmJlZllzZi8xS2lQTzZ6T2dCc3g1Y3hwQlFTVFlOUlNtSWtyc2tv?= =?utf-8?Q?EQI0f93uFvZQUWcIwDkbvK1C0tMI6GAOIa?=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-ID: <0871944E4B7F294395CF9F8CF23E0397@namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthAs: Internal
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthSource: BYAPR11MB2725.namprd11.prod.outlook.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 28354ff8-654b-409a-f8f1-08d8b27951ff
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 06 Jan 2021 19:29:00.7792 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 5ae1af62-9505-4097-a69a-c1553ef7840e
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: ipYH/X94vZsNeS3o2nRttO8wp52fvytVvMfisSbcubVobmJKz9zuyF78d/bkNNMfgpB0p2K2HZZQAFda42S9tQ==
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: SJ0PR11MB4846
X-OriginatorOrg: cisco.com
X-Outbound-SMTP-Client: 173.37.102.14, xch-rcd-004.cisco.com
X-Outbound-Node: alln-core-8.cisco.com
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/pim/Ky9DxlUnvD-PaY7VlCYrUhLqMVU>
Subject: Re: [pim] Sticky PIM DR, should it be added to PIM DR improvements or different draft
X-BeenThere: pim@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Protocol Independent Multicast <pim.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/pim>, <mailto:pim-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/pim/>
List-Post: <mailto:pim@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:pim-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pim>, <mailto:pim-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 06 Jan 2021 19:29:07 -0000

Thanks every one for input. So I would update Sticky PIM DR without capability option in draft-mankamana-pim-bdr. Will ask for adoption in coming IETF. 

Mankamana 

On 12/4/20, 9:04 AM, "Alvaro Retana" <aretana.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:

    On December 4, 2020 at 11:03:22 AM, Stig Venaas wrote:


    Stig:

    Hi!

    > Thoughts? Do you see this differently?

    I'm ok with whatever the WG decides, as long as the relationship and
    interaction between multiple potential solutions is clear.

    This is what I wrote in my review of draft-ietf-pim-dr-improvement-09:

    ===
    (2) As far as I can see draft-mankamana-pim-bdr has not been adopted yet.
        Assuming that is the plan, how would the two mechanisms interact?  Given
        that draft-mankamana-pim-bdr doesn't add options, and §5 says that if no
        options are received then the routers MUST use rfc7761, how does a router
        implementing this specification tell the difference?

        I realize that some of these questions may be better directed at
        draft-mankamana-pim-bdr, but because the WG agreed that a statement
        relating the two should be included in this document [1], then I'm
        asking now.  I would really like to understand what the WG expects.
    ===

    The WG is already aware of both drafts.  Assuming
    draft-mankamana-pim-bdr is adopted, I would prefer it if both
    solutions are progressed together (one or two documents is ok with
    me).

    Thanks!

    Alvaro.