Re: [Rtg-ooam-dt] Design Team on Overlay OAM in Routing is Chartered

Alia Atlas <akatlas@gmail.com> Fri, 18 December 2015 15:16 UTC

Return-Path: <akatlas@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: rtg-ooam-dt@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rtg-ooam-dt@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3EF781B3686 for <rtg-ooam-dt@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 18 Dec 2015 07:16:45 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -101.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.999 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, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] 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 zRPJk2llJe6s for <rtg-ooam-dt@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 18 Dec 2015 07:16:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-oi0-x22b.google.com (mail-oi0-x22b.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c06::22b]) (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 7DF981B3674 for <rtg-ooam-dt@ietf.org>; Fri, 18 Dec 2015 07:16:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-oi0-x22b.google.com with SMTP id o124so61132706oia.1 for <rtg-ooam-dt@ietf.org>; Fri, 18 Dec 2015 07:16:39 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=q8IRRMEBDz+2b/sUt3eh6SuCZJHhCDywlABdGHyeffk=; b=M6zejaPuOAK9YCGYm6yyaICJOlu94uDfaWFGhtrArY+ER+aM6mATOiDQ2OOmTGdWTh /fv2hoRoZ/YVUCPs1KwiG9HT0vY/+LqTBbkmkmnN99nocKKbNAUFxmRlhAq+3vGXcupK YzYUbzpfoEebFphWT8xs7PMFTeS1SmI51ZKd+RrITVVDJCU4eWyoTFSY4P+KwkK6RQLk f623TLYIw3CJx9seW7wi5UlZFjLUHBAQQHdELeSrh2cCZDHzAsOp3tkpuoNPEXEjieCA n9/VMi+tkwSEzgiCkjeLwRx580Vc0jiMNhGhwNLG8IBy25ETpsdAe1qd/Ye+VtvI4PSO eB0w==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.202.94.10 with SMTP id s10mr1477563oib.99.1450451798764; Fri, 18 Dec 2015 07:16:38 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.60.177.103 with HTTP; Fri, 18 Dec 2015 07:16:38 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <5673C89E.4070507@orange.com>
References: <CAG4d1rdLn2s5tkH7e4ievzJMvExCqRTbeFfs5O5ReFv+PRMY0A@mail.gmail.com> <56737AE8.8060701@pi.nu> <5673C89E.4070507@orange.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2015 10:16:38 -0500
Message-ID: <CAG4d1rfh1k1fxtZKBgVsdf3b_rMjHtr1NO1_BNOfB5ZUWW04Nw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Alia Atlas <akatlas@gmail.com>
To: Thomas Morin <thomas.morin@orange.com>, rtg-ooam-dt@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113d5cd23acc4605272da046
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtg-ooam-dt/aMlUE7RNAaDSYhR-qjdXILQbo14>
Subject: Re: [Rtg-ooam-dt] Design Team on Overlay OAM in Routing is Chartered
X-BeenThere: rtg-ooam-dt@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: List is used by the Routing Area Overlay OAM Design team for internal coordination and discussion <rtg-ooam-dt.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/rtg-ooam-dt>, <mailto:rtg-ooam-dt-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/rtg-ooam-dt/>
List-Post: <mailto:rtg-ooam-dt@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rtg-ooam-dt-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtg-ooam-dt>, <mailto:rtg-ooam-dt-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2015 15:16:45 -0000

Hi Thomas,

I think we've set the charter though I certainly agree that MPLS/GRE and
MPLS/UDP are examples of overlay technologies that could benefit from
improved OAM.

My hope is that the DT can come up with a sufficiently generic
extensions/protocol to cover these cases as well, but I need the design
focus to be on the new encapsulations that don't have any
OAM yet.  That's where we have a chance to stop the industry from
diverging.  If the result is suitably generic and the benefits are seen as
useful, then I think it's more likely for industry to adopt and use it for
existing technologies.

It'd be quite helpful if you could articulate in email to the design team
what you see as the existing gaps.

Thanks,
Alia



On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 3:49 AM, Thomas Morin <thomas.morin@orange.com>
wrote:

> Hi everyone,
>
> 2015-12-18, Loa Andersson:
>
>> Let me know if there is any support I can give from the bottom of my
>> mpls well.
>>
>
> This comment is a good opportunity to highlight the fact that MPLS/GRE and
> MPLS/UDP are part of various service layer tunnels used for overlays.
>
> I will go as far as to suggest that these encaps should be explicitely
> called out in the DT charter (more than through "other technologies").
>
> Best,
>
> -Thomas
>
>
>
>
> On 2015-12-17 03:33, Alia Atlas wrote:
>>
>>> Based on the presentation by Greg Mirsky and discussion in rtgwg and
>>> elsewhere, I have decided to charter a fast-moving Routing Area design
>>> team to work on Overlay OAM.
>>>
>>> The charter is below:
>>>
>>>      In the Routing Area, several WGs (e.g. NVO3, BIER, and SFC) are
>>>      working on relatively new encapsulations to create overlays. These
>>>      overlay or service encapsulations are transport-independent since
>>>      they may be over different transports or at different layers in the
>>>      networking stack. Each WG is starting to discuss what OAM and tools
>>>      need to be developed (see draft-ietf-sfc-oam-framework-00,
>>>      draft-ietf-bier-oam-requirements-00, and individual drafts in NVO3).
>>>      With increasing use of overlay and service layer tunnels, extensions
>>>      to traceroute to allow visibility into multiple layers are being
>>>      discussed (e.g. draft-nordmark-nvo3-transcending-traceroute-01).
>>>
>>>      There is an opportunity to propose protocols and methods to provide
>>>      Overlay OAM in a sufficiently generic fashion that they can meet the
>>>      requirements and be applied to at least BIER, NSH, VXLAN-GPE,
>>>      GENEVE, and GUE. A truly successful result would also be applicable
>>>      to other technologies.
>>>
>>>      This Design Team is chartered to first produce a brief gap analysis
>>>      and requirements document to focus its work on protocol extensions.
>>>      This should be published by March 2016. With that basis, this Design
>>>      Team is chartered to rapidly propose extensions to existing IETF OAM
>>>      protocols such as those discussed in [RFC 7276] and new ones to
>>>      support the requirements for OAM from NVO3, BIER, and SFC. The
>>>      Design Team will produce an initial proposal by IETF 95. It is
>>>      expected that the initial proposal will provide guidance to
>>>      additional people who will be interested in working on the details
>>>      and gaps.
>>>
>>>      The Design Team will consider the preliminary OAM requirements from
>>>      NVO3, BIER, and SFC. The Design Team should align with the LIME WG's
>>>      work on common YANG models of OAM.
>>>
>>> The members of the design team are:
>>>      Greg Mirsky (DT lead)
>>>      Ignas Bagdonas
>>>      Erik Nordmark
>>>      Carlos Pignataro
>>>      Mach Chen
>>>      Santosh Pallagatti
>>>      Deepak Kumarde
>>>      David Mozes
>>>      Nagendra Kumar Nainar
>>>
>>> The design team has a private mailing list that will be publicly
>>> archived.
>>> The mailing list is rtg-ooam-dt@ietf.org <mailto:rtg-ooam-dt@ietf.org>.
>>>
>>> The design team will also use a wiki to track some information.  Others
>>> are also welcome to comment and interact there.
>>> The wiki is at: http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/rtg/trac/wiki/RtgOoamDT
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Alia
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> rtgwg mailing list
>>> rtgwg@ietf.org
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg
>>>
>>>
>