Re: [pim] RE: draft-ietf-pim-null-register-packing wglc

"Mankamana Mishra (mankamis)" <mankamis@cisco.com> Thu, 06 February 2020 02:41 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 E46F2120072 for <pim@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 5 Feb 2020 18:41:22 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.397
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.397 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, HTTPS_HTTP_MISMATCH=0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, 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=g4mrnuKC; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.onmicrosoft.com header.b=w42drK3G
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 lYK5YeKmniIA for <pim@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 5 Feb 2020 18:41:19 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rcdn-iport-6.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-6.cisco.com [173.37.86.77]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9EE9D12011A for <pim@ietf.org>; Wed, 5 Feb 2020 18:41:19 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=27814; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1580956879; x=1582166479; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:mime-version; bh=Fv0iYeU+74+g8U4afA/cY0wPK6JnmCYVocu1W/OIkIY=; b=g4mrnuKCuS0oPlqpCz0EY+yh6i8ifAjcdLFnTCw9KYbxN6OB2UIToSp4 UTn1f8QX6HybX6GY+qvEcsXxLUd+mKO6ppBy/yVSeXpJ38ktpoo7Ee4vj joxWb2NFbO9NrXRWQ9oZvFS6llDkNO4/TPZpDLa09HMWvLzoanBHPH6Ii s=;
IronPort-PHdr: =?us-ascii?q?9a23=3A5354ARb8vbUV/3FG6FicTuL/LSx94ef9IxIV55?= =?us-ascii?q?w7irlHbqWk+dH4MVfC4el20gabRp3VvvRDjeee87vtX2AN+96giDgDa9QNMn?= =?us-ascii?q?1NksAKh0olCc+BB1f8KavvZio5FcFDT3du/mqwNg5eH8OtL1A=3D?=
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0BNBQAYfDte/4kNJK1lGwEBAQEBAQE?= =?us-ascii?q?FAQEBEQEBAwMBAQGBe4ElAS4kLAVsWCAECyoKhAuDRgOKe4JfiWKOMIJSA1Q?= =?us-ascii?q?JAQEBDAEBGAEJCwIBAYErOIJdAheCIyQ4EwIDDQEBBAEBAQIBBQRthTcMhWY?= =?us-ascii?q?BAQEBAwEBEC4BASwLAQ8CAQYCEQMBAQEhBwUCAh8GCxQGAwgCBAENBQgagn8?= =?us-ascii?q?EAoF9TQMuAQIMj1eQZgKBOYhibwiBMIJ/AQEFgTMChAEDCguCDAMGgTiFHoE?= =?us-ascii?q?tgWGDdhqBQT+BEUeCTD6CG0kBAQIBGYFLFQkNCYJWNoIsjXAhiCiYbUQKgjq?= =?us-ascii?q?HSopPhEWCSIgPhEiHJIRGjmKIaoIokA0CBAIEBQIOAQEFgWkiDYFLcBU7gmw?= =?us-ascii?q?TPRgNjXkkg3OFFIU/dAIBAQGBJIwWAYEPAQE?=
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.70,408,1574121600"; d="scan'208,217";a="718356501"
Received: from alln-core-4.cisco.com ([173.36.13.137]) by rcdn-iport-6.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA; 06 Feb 2020 02:41:17 +0000
Received: from XCH-RCD-006.cisco.com (xch-rcd-006.cisco.com [173.37.102.16]) by alln-core-4.cisco.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id 0162fH2n010129 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Thu, 6 Feb 2020 02:41:17 GMT
Received: from xhs-rcd-002.cisco.com (173.37.227.247) by XCH-RCD-006.cisco.com (173.37.102.16) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3; Wed, 5 Feb 2020 20:41:17 -0600
Received: from xhs-rcd-002.cisco.com (173.37.227.247) by xhs-rcd-002.cisco.com (173.37.227.247) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3; Wed, 5 Feb 2020 20:41:16 -0600
Received: from NAM02-SN1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (72.163.14.9) by xhs-rcd-002.cisco.com (173.37.227.247) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3 via Frontend Transport; Wed, 5 Feb 2020 20:41:16 -0600
ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=YHzskZ1aLHFJ+GlFNTYI6Yj3s83JbXbFZWe+iNfao9Wqb5RquztoIuNvN4FPefVnkA3U1t5qKDmHxOP6FtZ2ZGw66AUj1JRyjkwXvfz9r8EUv6I7Kq7Foz0KcYls5ueGWGsYRZFE51D9498obRg++Wn1bCQlmnWS2YXtUqBBo/hR2sz7+2F/6scTYGHLI7f+0w+sSCWppgtcG5gcyS9ScjUqYHD/vg5bCFX6mdXe+BaXAl5JGr3Sp7SUM2q6bL63Tv0UX4ROsjgBZq+cyWHylWpOcMBmC0hN9TEZufU1O+bpchRSoUmKma83ufCxUaZRdMXKiNh2rgfzL+ZHY6hW6w==
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=Fv0iYeU+74+g8U4afA/cY0wPK6JnmCYVocu1W/OIkIY=; b=O/KxbvYQlRk52zSnBs6RKepqurRLxScF01F5bsA9PtPpYOKnz5WirnWFRkCH9FauYa373otgOiYFS8SNlKOc8yS7VrqqeX6r+qt2/zy7v7CIlLyfcSzATGsLgiNmZ2wy9unusMlx8hDSxEt9sBX9Gd5IFNF7zwXSKaRkMMv2iRV1op8RJhoeL1wM7yvPAudgaS0CzWM9CSfBHoaCPcmKcq/Cq5sMAo2eJi8xHNshbHCvsdydZwkOIZS6zyucqDFk7ArtVLxEv6R1PPnqi4GL7N3ySBLJz4VGglyYWK6rlIMMUPMm9KjpJdJiILdXkwAaKzoisMaT86nO6aSwlnWR/g==
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=Fv0iYeU+74+g8U4afA/cY0wPK6JnmCYVocu1W/OIkIY=; b=w42drK3G1a58vlgnxfCUOgFzaHOwz4nDmEJxip0xaY5WGREURwmLJZtX/izOiqlI+dxNtrvelI2KzYJKCgsGZcKcqqEXe6D01kmzokjmJepPoSw6KI+q9a2n/YEkPFFmtK4FQgHI1GTgnr9fpfuTisUtwF603Z2CiC334efFwWM=
Received: from SN6PR11MB2654.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (52.135.89.159) by SN6PR11MB2815.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (52.135.96.141) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.2686.27; Thu, 6 Feb 2020 02:41:15 +0000
Received: from SN6PR11MB2654.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::49af:e9cb:d3fe:55c2]) by SN6PR11MB2654.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::49af:e9cb:d3fe:55c2%3]) with mapi id 15.20.2686.035; Thu, 6 Feb 2020 02:41:15 +0000
From: "Mankamana Mishra (mankamis)" <mankamis@cisco.com>
To: Yisong Liu <liuyisong@chinamobile.com>, Michael McBride <michael.mcbride@futurewei.com>
CC: pim <pim@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: =?gb2312?B?W3BpbV0gUkWjuiAgZHJhZnQtaWV0Zi1waW0tbnVsbC1yZWdpc3Rlci1wYWNr?= =?gb2312?Q?ing_wglc?=
Thread-Index: AQHV3JQ/gRUBrnzouUuabBjJ5ILnxKgNdJcJ
Date: Thu, 6 Feb 2020 02:41:15 +0000
Message-ID: <SN6PR11MB265436840741BBA5362E179EDF1D0@SN6PR11MB2654.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
References: 202002061021175233532@chinamobile.com>
In-Reply-To: 202002061021175233532@chinamobile.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=mankamis@cisco.com;
x-originating-ip: [104.129.198.219]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: ab5607d2-6349-4851-b250-08d7aaae0958
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: SN6PR11MB2815:
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <SN6PR11MB2815B1FCD94C0A09956DC6FCDF1D0@SN6PR11MB2815.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:9508;
x-forefront-prvs: 0305463112
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10009020)(4636009)(39860400002)(366004)(396003)(136003)(376002)(346002)(189003)(199004)(316002)(966005)(66574012)(52536014)(81156014)(81166006)(110136005)(5660300002)(33656002)(8936002)(66446008)(66946007)(66476007)(64756008)(66556008)(86362001)(71200400001)(55236004)(76116006)(55016002)(186003)(478600001)(2906002)(26005)(9686003)(6506007)(4326008)(7696005)(53546011); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; SCL:1; SRVR:SN6PR11MB2815; H:SN6PR11MB2654.namprd11.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; LANG:en; PTR:InfoNoRecords; MX:1; A:1;
received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: cisco.com does not designate permitted sender hosts)
x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0;
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: 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
x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata: mDTuON/Hklh/MOC4AFJi5+m8UeuYVGJdaceBxtaNWwQuaMSmQZM0mMJv6YL9r8EPLqmrrCsxw002w05SseuiDERWzX/mkcXnfg2CVgTUTs2QPWnOvemYF2ITpg7kyF6RtVCXFHqSAXlSpwWp8dxn3w==
x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_SN6PR11MB265436840741BBA5362E179EDF1D0SN6PR11MB2654namp_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: ab5607d2-6349-4851-b250-08d7aaae0958
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 06 Feb 2020 02:41:15.2204 (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: HrChoKW7GW6jNZCi800vFoOK8CUzHrIYSOw/cf9RuRfp8PJiTjUaePFqWX2K0D+LcuDvyu9wdV/QkuLyeZZP+A==
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: SN6PR11MB2815
X-OriginatorOrg: cisco.com
X-Outbound-SMTP-Client: 173.37.102.16, xch-rcd-006.cisco.com
X-Outbound-Node: alln-core-4.cisco.com
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/pim/v3Xwro9leWfrRZ3eFVLR3PIr058>
Subject: Re: [pim] =?gb2312?b?UkWjuiAgZHJhZnQtaWV0Zi1waW0tbnVsbC1yZWdpc3Rl?= =?gb2312?b?ci1wYWNraW5nIHdnbGM=?=
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: Thu, 06 Feb 2020 02:41:23 -0000

Support moving this document to next step .

Mankamana
________________________________
From: pim <pim-bounces@ietf.org> on behalf of Yisong Liu <liuyisong@chinamobile.com>
Sent: Wednesday, February 5, 2020 6:21:17 PM
To: Michael McBride <michael.mcbride@futurewei.com>
Cc: pim <pim@ietf.org>
Subject: [pim] RE: draft-ietf-pim-null-register-packing wglc

I support the WGLC, and I think it should be moved forward.

Thanks
Yisong

发件人: Michael McBride<mailto:michael.mcbride@futurewei.com>
时间: 2020/01/31(星期五)08:40
收件人: pim<mailto:pim@ietf.org>;
主题: [pim] draft-ietf-pim-null-register-packing wglc

We are going to start a new wglc for https://www.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-pim-null-register-packing-04.txt which was updated based upon comments during the first wglc (please see below). Since we received only one comment, and really no one showing wglc support, we are issuing a new wglc.



Sometime over the next two weeks please let the wg know if it’s ready to be sent to the iesg for publication.



thanks,

mike



From: pim <pim-bounces@ietf.org> On Behalf Of Ramakrishnan Chokkanathapuram (ramaksun)
Sent: Tuesday, October 15, 2019 11:37 AM
To: Anish Peter <anish.ietf@gmail.com>om>; Mike McBride <mmcbride7@gmail.com>
Cc: pim@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [pim] draft-ietf-pim-null-register-packing wglc



Hello Anish,



Thanks for the comments.. I have my responses inline..



Thanks,

Ramki



From: pim <pim-bounces@ietf.org<mailto:pim-bounces@ietf.org>> on behalf of Anish Peter <anish.ietf@gmail.com<mailto:anish.ietf@gmail.com>>
Date: Wednesday, September 4, 2019 at 7:20 AM
To: Mike McBride <mmcbride7@gmail.com<mailto:mmcbride7@gmail.com>>
Cc: "pim@ietf.org<mailto:pim@ietf.org>" <pim@ietf.org<mailto:pim@ietf.org>>
Subject: Re: [pim] draft-ietf-pim-null-register-packing wglc



Hi all,

 Read through the draft. Have a few comments.

  1.  Section 2: The P bit can be taken as the LSB on the reserved ones. This would help this get inline with recommendations from PIM draft-ietf-pim-reserved-bits.

       ##Ramki##  Not sure if using LSB or MSB has an advantage here. I am not sure if the pim-reserved-bits mandates such thing.

  1.  Instead of taking two new pim message types, the same pim register and register stop messages may be used. if this procedure can be followed.

##Ramki## It will be good to have a new type.. If we overload the same type it could happen that a router receives a message and think its malformed.

a. RP discovers FHR capable of register bulking from the P bit.

b. When RP responds to this register, it can set set a P bit in R-S message.

c. Once FHR knows peer has bulking capability it can register packets with bulking

d. For bulked register messages, RP can respond with bulked R-S messages.

e. Packet format.. I suggest overloading existing register and R-S packet can be done with out using two new packet formats.

Register

    0                   1                   2                   3

    0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1

   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   |PIM Ver| Type  |   Reserved    |           Checksum            |

   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   |B|N|P|                     Reserved2             |  S-g-count  |

   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   |                                                               |

   .                     Multicast data packet                     .

   |                                                               |

   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+



Register-stop



    0                   1                   2                   3

    0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1

   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   |PIM Ver| Type  |  s-g-count  |P|           Checksum            |

   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   |             Group Address (Encoded-Group format)              |

   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   |            Source Address (Encoded-Unicast format)            |

   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

3.. Anycast RP



In my opinion, anycast RP procedures must be defined. Protocols typically should not

ask for any kind of specific configurations or features on its peers.

##Ramki## PIM Anycast RP is based on configuration. So not sure if this is a problem.



4. Restart / feature disable

An RP/FHR may restart or may have bullking turned on/off. In these scenarios the behavior must be defined.

##Ramki## Yes. In such scenarios if an RP is downgraded from a version that was supporting packing to one that doesn’t support it, then RP will not respond to the packed registers. In such cases one could send an unpacked  register to RP to check if the RP supports it or fallback to data register and then discover the RP capability.



Thanks,

Anish





On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 6:58 AM Mike McBride <mmcbride7@gmail.com<mailto:mmcbride7@gmail..com>> wrote:

PIMers,

Today begins a two week wglc for draft-ietf-pim-null-register-packing
which was presented at 105 and hasn't changed since April. Please give
it a read (it's a quick read) and provide feedback to this wg with
support/no support of it's progressing to iesg.

thanks,
mike

https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-pim-null-register-packing-03<https://nam03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ftools.ietf.org%2Fhtml%2Fdraft-ietf-pim-null-register-packing-03&data=02%7C01%7Cmichael.mcbride%40futurewei.com%7Cc817a6aa05fd4fc3f50208d7519eb3d6%7C0fee8ff2a3b240189c753a1d5591fedc%7C1%7C1%7C637067614378147075&sdata=U4DlCfyCEacllFZQ6Hi8pIqzwhRvy2N2P2OcjYRRX9A%3D&reserved=0>

_______________________________________________
pim mailing list
pim@ietf.org<mailto:pim@ietf.org>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pim<https://nam03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ietf.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fpim&data=02%7C01%7Cmichael.mcbride%40futurewei.com%7Cc817a6aa05fd4fc3f50208d7519eb3d6%7C0fee8ff2a3b240189c753a1d5591fedc%7C1%7C1%7C637067614378147075&sdata=NAHGy5MAsL4MB9XT%2Bw2pEfegIgTkOYRm4dFbqtnDpwI%3D&reserved=0>