Re: routing area design team on dataplane encapsulation considerations

[Alia Atlas <[e-mail]>]

Hi Andy,

Absolutely true.   I apologize for the oversight.   Psuedo-wires are
another encapsulation that we can learn from.

I expect the design team to be reaching out to get more insight on these
different issues.

Regards
Alia
On Dec 10, 2014 9:27 AM, "Andrew G. Malis" <[e-mail]> wrote:

> Alia,
>
> To hijack this discussion back to your original post, I'm very surprised
> to see no mention of PALS anywhere. We in PALS (and PWE3 before that) have
> plenty of experience with data plane encapsulations, and we already have
> solutions for a number of the issues in your list, including ECMP (RFC
> 6391), packet size and fragmentation (4623), OAM (5085 and others), and a
> draft on congestion considerations just in the process of finishing up. PWs
> have been extremely successful in the marketplace. So I hope the design
> team keeps us in mind as well.
>
> Cheers,
> Andy
>
> On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 5:46 PM, Alia Atlas <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>> I have chartered a Routing Area Design Team to work on data-plane
>> encapsulation considerations.
>>
>> I've bcc'd nvo3, sfc, bier, and rtgwg as the most directly relevant.
>> Please keep any conversation in one place on routing-discussion.
>>
>> Erik Nordmark has kindly agreed to lead this design team.  The members of
>> the design
>> team are:
>>
>>   Albert Tian <[e-mail]>
>>   Erik Nordmark <[e-mail]>
>>   Jesse Gross <[e-mail]>
>>   Jon Hudson <[e-mail]>
>>   Larry Kreeger (kreeger) <[e-mail]>
>>   Pankaj Garg <[e-mail]>
>>   Pat Thaler <[e-mail]>
>>   Tom Herbert <[e-mail]>
>>
>> The mailing list, [e-mail], is closed but
>> the archives are
>> publicly available at:
>>
>> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/rtg-dt-encap-considerations/current/maillist.html
>>
>> The Design Team is chartered as follows:
>>
>> There have been multiple efforts over the years that have resulted in new
>> or modified data plane behaviors involving encapsulations. That includes
>> IETF efforts like MPLS, LISP, and TRILL but also industry efforts like
>> Vxlan and NVGRE.  These collectively can be seen as a source of insight
>> into the properties that data planes need to meet.  The IETF is currently
>> working on potentially new encapsulations in NVO3 and SFC and considering
>> working on BIER. In addition there is work on tunneling in the INT area.
>>
>> This is a short term design team chartered to collect and construct
>> useful advice to parties working on new or modified data plane behaviors
>> that include additional encapsulations.  The goal is for the group to
>> document useful advice gathered from interacting with ongoing efforts.  An
>> Internet Draft will be produced for IETF92 to capture that advice, which
>> will be discussed in RTGWG.
>>
>> Data plane encapsulations face a set of common issues such as:
>>
>>   * How to provide entropy for ECMP
>>   * Issues around packet size and fragmentation/reassembly
>>   * OAM - what support is needed in an encapsulation format?
>>   * Security and privacy.
>>   * QoS
>>   * Congestion Considerations
>>   * IPv6 header protection (non-zero UDP checksum over IPv6 issue)
>>   * Extensibility - e.g., for evolving OAM, security, and/or congestion
>> control
>>   * Layering of multiple encapsulations e.g., SFC over NVO3 over BIER
>>
>> The design team will provide advice on those issues. The intention is
>> that even where we have different encapsulations for different purposes
>> carrying different data, each such encapsulation doesn’t have to reinvent
>> the wheel for the above common issues.
>>
>> The design team will look across the routing area in particular at SFC,
>> NVO3 and BIER. It will not be involved in comparing or analyzing any
>> particular encapsulation formats proposed in those WGs and BoFs but instead
>> focus on common advice.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Alia
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> routing-discussion mailing list
>> [e-mail]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/routing-discussion
>>
>>
>