Re: [PWE3] [mpls] 1+1 linear LSP protection and MPLS-TP data plane:are they compatible?

Alexander Vainshtein <Alexander.Vainshtein@ecitele.com> Sun, 19 June 2011 18:13 UTC

Return-Path: <Alexander.Vainshtein@ecitele.com>
X-Original-To: pwe3@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: pwe3@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD8C011E80AB; Sun, 19 Jun 2011 11:13:59 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.723
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.723 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.120, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_53=0.6, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=1.396]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id L18CKZ5+u1jB; Sun, 19 Jun 2011 11:13:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ilptbmg01.ecitele.com (ilptbmg01-out.ecitele.com [147.234.242.234]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3163911E80D2; Sun, 19 Jun 2011 11:13:57 -0700 (PDT)
X-AuditID: 93eaf2e7-b7c82ae0000020ff-1d-4dfe3c5da4bd
Received: from ilptexch01.ecitele.com ( [172.31.244.40]) by ilptbmg01.ecitele.com (Symantec Messaging Gateway) with SMTP id D2.B3.08447.D5C3EFD4; Sun, 19 Jun 2011 21:13:49 +0300 (IDT)
Received: from ILPTMAIL02.ecitele.com ([147.234.244.213]) by ilptexch01.ecitele.com ([172.31.244.40]) with mapi; Sun, 19 Jun 2011 21:13:55 +0300
From: Alexander Vainshtein <Alexander.Vainshtein@ecitele.com>
To: "davarish@yahoo.com" <davarish@yahoo.com>, "mpls-bounces@ietf.org" <mpls-bounces@ietf.org>, Greg Mirsky <gregimirsky@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 19 Jun 2011 21:13:55 +0300
Thread-Topic: [mpls] [PWE3] 1+1 linear LSP protection and MPLS-TP data plane:are they compatible?
Thread-Index: Acwt+GKfP7ICXhYOQty4JE+eqpbXyAAPF4qMAB2hhpo=
Message-ID: <A3C5DF08D38B6049839A6F553B331C76E9C21266AA@ILPTMAIL02.ecitele.com>
References: <A3C5DF08D38B6049839A6F553B331C76E9BD80C97E@ILPTMAIL02.ecitele.com>, <BANLkTim=0LAmsft=JnqFQYODfa17nfirDg@mail.gmail.com><A3C5DF08D38B6049839A6F553B331C76E9BD80C97F@ILPTMAIL02.ecitele.com>, <1398490709-1308429804-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-749160581-@b4.c27.bise6.blackberry>, <A3C5DF08D38B6049839A6F553B331C76E9BD80C980@ILPTMAIL02.ecitele.com>
In-Reply-To: <A3C5DF08D38B6049839A6F553B331C76E9BD80C980@ILPTMAIL02.ecitele.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA2VTf0wTVxzfu7u2R+XcUcA+ycwuNzBBV0eji6dQZrJkYVlAIpIlywy7Xh/t be216R0ETIxNh5KgYRqIy25b6GYxys9ANAGd2ayLATLdJvsVxBmjlQDGTWJYKALeccowvr8+ 730+n+/nvZfvl8RtDZYcUpQUFJZ4P2u2Ei1TM48c+4oWSwuSXZu4SxNRwM2eSJq4C9//ZuHG 2s+YuOaZswR3LfkV2GUuaZ3vM5UMqjctJfH4HFaiqpexcuKDCCjiJSmo8ApiPEgWXGx5WKzl hXqWET0u1skyIT8voACSFBfLh0JI8rDFVuaFVaTJRIlBkhD0iJLXxb5bsdvBcW/ucDjZ4o2v ObcWWvf6RJlBjgAv+pkAkmXeixjt5KOzuK+7519z6EtYd+72ZRABn2Y1gTQS0ttga/wHzMDr 4C9/95qbgJW00YMANvX/jhmbVgDPT5wz6Soz7YL9nTfNOs6iDwF4pCFDF+H0Txicmb1h0QmC zoMdCw8JHWfSbtjTHsUMgwD/iCyZDLwTDjVe1wqRJEXvhqM3HEbYPxhMnZ5fDkijy2H8645l DLTr/TfStVwHp+1w7G7b02vTMP7dz7iBs+HknUWToc+G4429wNC/DmMXZswG3gxPfTO9rKfo DDj8xV3C8K6Hl07/RRwDdnVVhLrKrq6yq6vsMUB0gGzRH1LcAW+BcwsSRAX50RYhGOgHRg9N DIBUW24C0CRg0ymfY7HUZuJr5fpAAqwnMTabKt+pHa11Bz31Pl72VYVr/EhOAEjibBa1kK9x lIev34/CwWcUp/3ycTxnjRDUulVSqrYWFDy3Ye1UUrhfaqO9Wtt9glAIhZ9ZXyFJFlJ9hVrV jDDyorpq0a/8T2Nkmp6criXbdQ0lh/iALHoNfgQ4yG+7JxPARkhBCeXYqWZdROsiX420Ukcf noNLS0tTwK69OZOSdFW6Nlorlaa0EEwLWUyl9BBtPFaonAi4V7cu+s6O1gUm7+iQ58dOt9JV bS/ero50mdtiVJybtn3+8nA0v+zh4TuWNc63XqoeU+8/qBj6+NU3Tg6knancFSt7r2X0s/ff zv3wwPza8ck527Ge1HH84obmmG/6UUMClSXbq0Yfj+dXKTX3+q5eSe+INKl5j2d/rfwzemsP 2XI9yBKyj3duwsMy/wSCHEv3FwQAAA==
Cc: "mpls@ietf.org" <mpls@ietf.org>, Vladimir Kleiner <Vladimir.Kleiner@ecitele.com>, Mishael Wexler <Mishael.Wexler@ecitele.com>, pwe3 <pwe3@ietf.org>, Oren Gal <Oren.Gal@ecitele.com>, John Shirron <John.Shirron@ecitele.com>, Rotem Cohen <Rotem.Cohen@ecitele.com>, "Stewart Bryant (stbryant@cisco.com)" <stbryant@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: [PWE3] [mpls] 1+1 linear LSP protection and MPLS-TP data plane:are they compatible?
X-BeenThere: pwe3@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Pseudo Wires 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, 19 Jun 2011 18:14:00 -0000

Shahram, Greg and all,
After some thought:
One way to model selection in 1+1 linear protection architecture could be to define a "special" internal interface in the box and to define the ILM action on the tunnel label of an inactive LSP as "Pop and forward to special interface".

The special interface then would then forward resulting labeled packets with a reserved top label to control and discard all the rest. This behavior would not be part of "normal" MPLS data plane hence no contradictions with its architecture.

I assume that this is roughly the formal model for what Shahram and Greg have said.

Regards,
     Sasha





________________________________________
From: Alexander Vainshtein
Sent: Sunday, June 19, 2011 7:04 AM
To: davarish@yahoo.com; mpls-bounces@ietf.org; Greg Mirsky
Cc: mpls@ietf.org; Vladimir Kleiner; Mishael Wexler; pwe3; Oren Gal; John Shirron; Stewart Bryant (stbryant@cisco.com) Rotem Cohen
Subject: RE: [mpls] [PWE3] 1+1 linear LSP protection and MPLS-TP data plane:are they compatible?

Shahram,
The problem IMHO is in the combination of two points :

- At the LSP level both LSP OAM and PW traffic look exactly the same (after popping the Tunnel label a labeled packet remains). You can only differentiate between them when you look up the next label in the stack

- When you look at the next label after having popped the tunnel label, PW packets received from both active and inactive LSPs look exactly the same with the same label from the per-platform label space.

IMO this means that you cannot describe the desired behavior in the terms of RFC 3031 and 3032.

Hopefully this clarifies my question.

Regards,
     Sasha



________________________________________
From: davarish@yahoo.com [davarish@yahoo.com]
Sent: Saturday, June 18, 2011 11:43 PM
To: Alexander Vainshtein; mpls-bounces@ietf.org; Greg Mirsky
Cc: mpls@ietf.org; Vladimir Kleiner; Mishael Wexler; pwe3; Oren Gal; John Shirron; Stewart Bryant (stbryant@cisco.com) Rotem Cohen
Subject: Re: [mpls] [PWE3] 1+1 linear LSP protection and MPLS-TP data plane:are they compatible?

Sasha

All traffic except LSP OAM traffic from protection LSP must be discarded in Rx. So what is the issue?

Thx
Shahram
Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T

-----Original Message-----
From: Alexander Vainshtein <Alexander.Vainshtein@ecitele.com>
Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org
Date: Sat, 18 Jun 2011 21:58:41
To: Greg Mirsky<gregimirsky@gmail.com>
Cc: mpls@ietf.org<mpls@ietf.org>; Vladimir Kleiner<Vladimir.Kleiner@ecitele.com>; Mishael Wexler<Mishael.Wexler@ecitele.com>; pwe3<pwe3@ietf.org>; Oren Gal<Oren.Gal@ecitele.com>; John Shirron<John.Shirron@ecitele.com>; Stewart Bryant \(stbryant@cisco.com\)<stbryant@cisco.com>; Rotem Cohen<Rotem.Cohen@ecitele.com>
Subject: Re: [mpls] [PWE3] 1+1 linear LSP protection and MPLS-TP data plane:
 are they compatible?

_______________________________________________
mpls mailing list
mpls@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls

This e-mail message is intended for the recipient only and contains information which is CONFIDENTIAL and which may be proprietary to ECI Telecom. If you have received this transmission in error, please inform us by e-mail, phone or fax, and then delete the original and all copies thereof.