IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Bier] [pim] Q on the congestion awareness of routing protocols

Luigi Iannone <ggx@gigix.net> Tue, 06 December 2022 15:32 UTC

Return-Path: <ggx@gigix.net>
X-Original-To: routing-discussion@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: routing-discussion@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AA206C1522BE for <routing-discussion@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 6 Dec 2022 07:32:50 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.895
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.895 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gigix-net.20210112.gappssmtp.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id mSDJfBvYcQLs for <routing-discussion@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 6 Dec 2022 07:32:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-wr1-x442.google.com (mail-wr1-x442.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::442]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 08098C14CE39 for <routing-discussion@ietf.org>; Tue, 6 Dec 2022 07:32:46 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-wr1-x442.google.com with SMTP id f18so23991975wrj.5 for <routing-discussion@ietf.org>; Tue, 06 Dec 2022 07:32:46 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gigix-net.20210112.gappssmtp.com; s=20210112; h=references:to:cc:in-reply-to:date:subject:mime-version:message-id :from:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=yUbCAyKhQQtRN7y0jNHLzvS3R/yHWH2JtACfHIlaSAw=; b=F+m+ErNk/n+hUS8FzFT8IXOlrimc2/mK+mjP3+Oq6tnOs3VkZ1RTcH/VKnQ1lqgtoj X3D5FZ4i97O9vnLGeY20cu6YEgk+6zZmvcKrlXQ+znWf0ajd/B3OWX4lQrR2oGADoUn/ Db+wPUJkaNBp6hHS1H+vYY9qri6mboSgsLAKlWxZgNkIlPBf1gPdQidZlsQmbGVdeqqA HvAJfP9tYtrM8SO1n088z4lCRORzbAxP5oiN25ckpfNku6gWbd+8+2cQdDYxgFaApZls Sx7DxGGFnN2wSxKh7/Awg97IL0uZDoWQ3GJ3RysNGJOWcjH99i7Qyscmov5TdILCPSMZ R9VQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=references:to:cc:in-reply-to:date:subject:mime-version:message-id :from:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=yUbCAyKhQQtRN7y0jNHLzvS3R/yHWH2JtACfHIlaSAw=; b=DMrNhG6CBmxUZl03bgUecor4f0Wa1Y/lOiICRBzWy4llcOuULolzgkZP8vbyHMHwrP t8psWMLhuSXOEl1FxpxS6HbhFmBnA8CQ04MHzrbtm+Bryl2yvrbujbFMVpvdZZ8JTI5A G7VNCiiQUxnHHHZ1qLEyNtWqhCEXKA//K0fmENzHhLNvHe5OL8ghPl3Z+XoCnYjRkyZM oNsHbe96FRdkL5HC807So4l1E0YY5rEtV9L7sj1xtSPFn6i4TqqCFvtNOCo6RkEZJo8s hN/urarFCV1cP4RgxvdZUyxIH9aoS6uBSHculb2uswM9KYjoskEa3Ro6aPH7l6/Gfvwn 11kQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: ANoB5plhyFf+DelMEmLRpuLgf0J2sI88py0/qilerjzmovWlNdmAXJVD 30EzgL4/VjHuwVljnaOleI03+w==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AA0mqf47bLxeuLzkr8mB/sM0GwUvpWBeRkA9ze6H9yGb6VQCBjmRKDk2T6481p0Trv2jNNiVwKtrCA==
X-Received: by 2002:adf:e2c9:0:b0:241:db86:176d with SMTP id d9-20020adfe2c9000000b00241db86176dmr43116315wrj.40.1670340764699; Tue, 06 Dec 2022 07:32:44 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtpclient.apple ([2a01:e0a:1ec:470:85a1:6730:4af1:58c6]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id a1-20020adffac1000000b0024194bba380sm17404341wrs.22.2022.12.06.07.32.43 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 06 Dec 2022 07:32:43 -0800 (PST)
From: Luigi Iannone <ggx@gigix.net>
Message-Id: <58B97203-FC90-4B88-9E5D-6930CE9C7F16@gigix.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_AE2DF7AB-D540-43D0-B04E-589E550E1942"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3731.200.110.1.12\))
Subject: Re: [Bier] [pim] Q on the congestion awareness of routing protocols
Date: Tue, 06 Dec 2022 16:32:33 +0100
In-Reply-To: <638ee801.170a0220.34962.9940SMTPIN_ADDED_BROKEN@mx.google.com>
Cc: Dino Farinacci <farinacci@gmail.com>, Stewart Bryant <stewart.bryant@gmail.com>, Matt Mathis <mattmathis=40google.com@dmarc.ietf.org>, Jon Crowcroft <Jon.Crowcroft@cl.cam.ac.uk>, BIER WG <bier@ietf.org>, tsv-area <tsv-area@ietf.org>, pim <pim@ietf.org>, routing-discussion <routing-discussion@ietf.org>
To: Dirk Trossen <dirk.trossen=40huawei.com@dmarc.ietf.org>
References: <CAH56bmBnqi4peTWUXOVy0KRRXRc1L7TP+atFfVF6qb_OKBMBwg@mail.gmail.com> <C303F9BF-F96A-4710-A4B5-4228807C07F7@gmail.com> <52907137-CA5A-4042-AB2C-23FD9B032210@gmail.com> <638ee801.170a0220.34962.9940SMTPIN_ADDED_BROKEN@mx.google.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3731.200.110.1.12)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/routing-discussion/igAKkewUOQhMW2DSbDYTfGO7DPY>
X-BeenThere: routing-discussion@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: Routing Area General Discussion list <routing-discussion.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/routing-discussion>, <mailto:routing-discussion-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/routing-discussion/>
List-Post: <mailto:routing-discussion@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:routing-discussion-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/routing-discussion>, <mailto:routing-discussion-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 06 Dec 2022 15:32:50 -0000


> On 6 Dec 2022, at 07:57, Dirk Trossen <dirk.trossen=40huawei.com@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
> 
> Why not doing a series of side meetings and see how it develops? No reason to stick an "operational" name to it, like "shadow RRG" or similar. 

I support this idea. I see that there is “something” to be discussed and a side meeting is a very good idea.

Looks too early to stick a name on it….

Ciao

L.
 


> 
> Happy to see such side meetings to happen and progress. 
> 
> Dirk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From:Dino Farinacci <farinacci@gmail.com <mailto:farinacci@gmail.com>>
> To:Stewart Bryant <stewart.bryant@gmail.com <mailto:stewart.bryant@gmail.com>>
> Cc:Matt Mathis <mattmathis=40google.com@dmarc.ietf.org <mailto:mattmathis=40google.com@dmarc.ietf.org>>;Jon Crowcroft <Jon.Crowcroft@cl.cam.ac.uk <mailto:Jon.Crowcroft@cl.cam.ac.uk>>;BIER WG <bier@ietf.org <mailto:bier@ietf.org>>;tsv-area <tsv-area@ietf.org <mailto:tsv-area@ietf.org>>;pim <pim@ietf.org <mailto:pim@ietf.org>>;routing-discussion <routing-discussion@ietf.org <mailto:routing-discussion@ietf.org>>
> Date:2022-12-05 21:37:32
> Subject:Re: [Bier] [pim] Q on the congestion awareness of routing protocols
> 
> > One thought is that we set up a shadow RRG operating independently of the IETF meeting but meeting concurrently and at the same location. This is what BoFs used to be before the IETF apparatus got hold of them and formalised them. We can still use the draft infrastructure. If we cannot have a IETF list, there is groups.io <http://groups.io/> or similar. All a bit like Internet Routing where we route around damage to the infrastructure.
> 
> I'd be all for this idea.
> 
> Dino
> 
> _______________________________________________
> BIER mailing list
> BIER@ietf.org <mailto:BIER@ietf.org>
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bier

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email