IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [PWE3] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-pwe3-endpoint-fast-protection-01

"Stewart Bryant (stbryant)" <stbryant@cisco.com> Sun, 10 August 2014 09:24 UTC

Return-Path: <stbryant@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: pwe3@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: pwe3@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 494181A06A8 for <pwe3@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 10 Aug 2014 02:24:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -15.168
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-15.168 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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.668, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham
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 EFEu7nEn8GhW for <pwe3@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 10 Aug 2014 02:24:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rcdn-iport-8.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-8.cisco.com [173.37.86.79]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E52281A06A2 for <pwe3@ietf.org>; Sun, 10 Aug 2014 02:24:05 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1946; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1407662646; x=1408872246; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:mime-version; bh=vYJ8pPnVx3wnMakVLrLsEf3dTbTzYuARh87O95xXOYA=; b=d8uBUrFYtsxE4Ud6PAHmzG6mEsWov2db+hA/YP9pnEu7knn3eOtFURHH 15wN9GViZg9o85eFHkGbMXdx8davuaI00qcXo3Hvsiro9HCHGMF+IfygZ DxARWFxgmnOpOibEHdYeZcfOOKdTkja5NP1ees8lSyX0iASlBR3EcBoId Q=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AgUFAEw551OtJV2Z/2dsb2JhbABZgw3WFAGBBBZ3hAQBAQQdXBACAQgEAUEyJQIEDohHwRQXj0wHgy+BHQEEkRmLFpR7g1w
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.01,835,1400025600"; d="scan'208,217";a="346402930"
Received: from rcdn-core-2.cisco.com ([173.37.93.153]) by rcdn-iport-8.cisco.com with ESMTP; 10 Aug 2014 09:24:04 +0000
Received: from xhc-aln-x11.cisco.com (xhc-aln-x11.cisco.com [173.36.12.85]) by rcdn-core-2.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id s7A9O4FV022634 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Sun, 10 Aug 2014 09:24:04 GMT
Received: from xmb-rcd-x04.cisco.com ([169.254.8.74]) by xhc-aln-x11.cisco.com ([173.36.12.85]) with mapi id 14.03.0195.001; Sun, 10 Aug 2014 04:24:04 -0500
From: "Stewart Bryant (stbryant)" <stbryant@cisco.com>
To: Alexander Vainshtein <Alexander.Vainshtein@ecitele.com>
Thread-Topic: [PWE3] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-pwe3-endpoint-fast-protection-01
Thread-Index: AQHPqymWveYGLBru1kCsLuzIRj9tdJu3CWCAgAA8XgCAAPc/IIABBtiAgAg4EiaAAOtlgIAAs2DLgAA1qVCAASlTgIAAxW1QgAGWRICAAnyxroAAUUlr
Date: Sun, 10 Aug 2014 09:24:03 +0000
Message-ID: <004289D0-C473-4C1D-8A76-B42757F599A2@cisco.com>
References: <201407251524.s6PFOPn92012@magenta.juniper.net> <53D79504.4050904@cisco.com> <a8d070daae424ec0b9f338edfd0cde7c@AM3PR03MB612.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com> <04f15bedf2be4c7480d3e9ca01bdfd7f@BY2PR05MB728.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> <2597291f7b074922b690e4b06999cf1a@AM3PR03MB612.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>, <30e13900814f41a681151971cbe9ebef@BY2PR05MB728.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> <1407215578702.64387@ecitele.com>, <2280b8e0d5f94a60badab91a2237181b@BY2PR05MB728.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> <1407304503657.72312@ecitele.com> <f8c4d4382dda4f7d94ce61b4b421fe4f@AM3PR03MB612.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com> <046050cb2d254a139b4650b2d7f93075@BY2PR05MB728.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> <09ab595ab24a46a0a4e87ebeb2cd185a@AM3PR03MB612.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>, <2afb5c963e054aef929f38dcb3defa07@BY2PR05MB728.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>, <1407647722694.18724@ecitele.com>
In-Reply-To: <1407647722694.18724@ecitele.com>
Accept-Language: en-GB, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_004289D0C4734C1D8A76B42757F599A2ciscocom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/pwe3/vMZKY3hAMJBsGgCetkgsPtr1emw
Cc: Yakov Rekhter <yakov@juniper.net>, "pwe3@ietf.org" <pwe3@ietf.org>, "Eric Rosen (erosen)" <erosen@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: [PWE3] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-pwe3-endpoint-fast-protection-01
X-BeenThere: pwe3@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Pseudowire Emulation Edge to Edge <pwe3.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/pwe3>, <mailto:pwe3-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/pwe3/>
List-Post: <mailto:pwe3@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:pwe3-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pwe3>, <mailto:pwe3-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 10 Aug 2014 09:24:07 -0000

ECMP paths to xPEs naturally form and disappear in LDP PSNs (they are a fundamental property of that PSN type) and it is entirely normal  to find an ECMP to an xPE.

So, if you have a PW that is load balancing (again quite normal) and one of the attachments to the xPE fails, you can legitimately end  up with some traffic on one egress AC and some on another.

please you confirm that this design works correctly when a PE gets its traffic from both ACs?

Stewart

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email