[pim] PIM yang model counter 64/32 bit

Anish Peter <anish.ietf@gmail.com> Wed, 07 March 2018 16:27 UTC

Return-Path: <anish.ietf@gmail.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 56A3412D877 for <pim@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 7 Mar 2018 08:27:11 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.699
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.699 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-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 RgV73u7mvhju for <pim@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 7 Mar 2018 08:27:10 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-vk0-x231.google.com (mail-vk0-x231.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400c:c05::231]) (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 DBE3B12D7E6 for <pim@ietf.org>; Wed, 7 Mar 2018 08:27:09 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-vk0-x231.google.com with SMTP id z130so1677469vkd.0 for <pim@ietf.org>; Wed, 07 Mar 2018 08:27:09 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=pfaswtYN9Fyy3WMDzgnNj2WFk4bf6O9mI4NwQ4NKOw4=; b=sM/7gAOoas7T1LWTqmQ5wBEjmBtMSlvRLmtEl9d2gDxEKwXMM4Px/nJCIDLAts24gd 5eRA9RNqN29D2lU8d7HO08XI1VpMc/5kAVD8sbksW/f1x5s3obuQ9MKxLAy5loVmlwc0 RrtKEonyQYdVPP3bURIzuHMC4rZwXe4+X3DngqLNygIAJDiwWfo7btXarb5rq381fkZa pI2GntGSO+iZd+DH6FKPnW+yv8GNPuOvzciG8C5wgivcu1lPZqlBNtnCgoxZ+AWHfWYl /XcnU+xnHPT7RQms+b63uKz6kioJ8jcUUJM0GIwnnr3sZ4naYR7cFSEl8kxXC9nagoH9 X6bg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=pfaswtYN9Fyy3WMDzgnNj2WFk4bf6O9mI4NwQ4NKOw4=; b=VyvZzSEL9sR1vXZWhB6tWJ+UokecnvGjywYbgFWfMoxHsnZIQL/hwhXPWsPIhx8iff gIedo1o4pEebAB7K9j4NJ2/JqhkN+TLtA5eye9gLoITySB/nePzTSoVM9gLRtY4zr+Ll jStW9MpH1W1IaRTLctm3SpFFVoVtoeL1cX8aKwXCUD4UFJAAep+eK+DPAjIZwU0crZmf Aa4rcIZgx/wxYXwH0EwBfKhiKGadNiqIVIAteq6ACgVwtW3gah0tQ29x5v3K89X60baC f5eeIy0xo3RUTwigB5m7IawPQI1ArJWcFMgw0znRr3udxRytJKjwuwC8KHWwNnIl+xeP 3Fig==
X-Gm-Message-State: AElRT7FuSD/aoRj5DkAT/JNm7EDn42m1E547IQ24DL4QlzEYubRiwLAJ XkDtzTi9yZ/8GoXmGRF2uBwdQbphYhGtxLpfzaFNqA==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AG47ELsay+pYFlHWjgMVzsHTcYUgTUG0peMTF031Jx70Xk1xLM5j1R40OHcSpQki53hfV+rt4lbdBQgG0DliV7Trrms=
X-Received: by 10.31.173.209 with SMTP id w200mr16029469vke.179.1520440028650; Wed, 07 Mar 2018 08:27:08 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.176.112.17 with HTTP; Wed, 7 Mar 2018 08:27:08 -0800 (PST)
From: Anish Peter <anish.ietf@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 07 Mar 2018 21:57:08 +0530
Message-ID: <CAA6qS9oJe7tmmx0__=Lkq7=MnxQ+eeUxpR09ZW8u8MAHmrgXkQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: pim@ietf.org
Cc: Xufeng Liu <xufeng.liu.ietf@gmail.com>, Stig Venaas <stig@venaas.com>, anpeter@infinera.com, "Mahesh Sivakumar (masivaku)" <masivaku@cisco.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a11438136cf83420566d507fd"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/pim/voK_uPFKk--lIdq7tM4JdpDkg9c>
Subject: [pim] PIM yang model counter 64/32 bit
X-BeenThere: pim@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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, 07 Mar 2018 16:27:11 -0000

Hello PIM group,
 We are doing pim yang model and came across this question of whether to
use a 64/32 bit counter for packet statistics. To the best of our knowledge
all the vendor models support 32bit counters.
 But given that we are having more scalable implementations, we had a
feeling that a 32bit counter may rollover too fast. To give some examples.

Right now now we have routers with more than 10K pim interfaces supported.
In such case even if we consider them to be p2p always, then it would mean
10K pim nbrs. In this case even if an aggressive hello timer of 10 seconds
is configured then it would transmit and receive about 60K pim hellos per
minute. This leads to about 86.4million hello per day. This way a 32bit counter
could roll over in less than 50 days. Half a decade back I had tested pim
for 4K interfaces with 1s hello interval. With this the same counter may
roll over in about 12 days time.

Similarly a pim null register and register stop too for a scale of 15K
group could easily roll over in less than 198 days.

The vendor counters are 32 for historic reasons and may not directly get
impacted by a stats model supporting 64bit.

 Please share your opinion.

Thanks,
pim yang model authors