Re: Request for WG adoption of draft-bashandy-rtgwg-bgp-pic-02.txt
"Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee@cisco.com> Tue, 10 November 2015 03:21 UTC
Return-Path: <acee@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 71BE81B3000 for <rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 9 Nov 2015 19:21:38 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.51
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.51 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, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, 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 535CoZm_jsKz for <rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 9 Nov 2015 19:21:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com [173.37.86.80]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 91F421B2FFB for <rtgwg@ietf.org>; Mon, 9 Nov 2015 19:21:35 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=19957; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1447125695; x=1448335295; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:mime-version; bh=sQ0rDufDL7RIEewqhR8323FEUzXXpGCJ6bqG/Pr+0OA=; b=d/6AjfiT+e4RTZ6sZ5q1Wd4AcuM10qhvJumz+oO8wxss75qpVvSVOmYM IiJKJ/fWMsXoqRcKMcR2gapqR5AUgSZBgHoUvYT+aYHWqbJHp9dL4o1Hq yCE4v2vNtXHj7bKXM1d1msnBV3YLwA2QzfSAkKWT/ihr9Xj8gX14AU76C 4=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0AFAgCCYUFW/5NdJa1egm5NU28GrmyPTwENgWMjhW0CHIEmOBQBAQEBAQEBgQqENQEBAQQjSwYFDAQCAQgRAQIBAigDAgICMBMBAwYIAgQBDQWIGQMSDbEVkFgBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEYi1KCU4FOCREBNQoeglyBRAWGCwyHBIktAYUdhhqBb4FbSYN3iTWFIodSAR8BAUKEBHIBg2w6gQcBAQE
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos; i="5.20,268,1444694400"; d="scan'208,217"; a="43283085"
Received: from rcdn-core-11.cisco.com ([173.37.93.147]) by rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com with ESMTP; 10 Nov 2015 03:21:34 +0000
Received: from XCH-RTP-019.cisco.com (xch-rtp-019.cisco.com [64.101.220.159]) by rcdn-core-11.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id tAA3LXas001035 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Tue, 10 Nov 2015 03:21:34 GMT
Received: from xch-rtp-015.cisco.com (64.101.220.155) by XCH-RTP-019.cisco.com (64.101.220.159) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1104.5; Mon, 9 Nov 2015 22:21:33 -0500
Received: from xch-rtp-015.cisco.com ([64.101.220.155]) by XCH-RTP-015.cisco.com ([64.101.220.155]) with mapi id 15.00.1104.000; Mon, 9 Nov 2015 22:21:33 -0500
From: "Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee@cisco.com>
To: Jeff Tantsura <jeff.tantsura@ericsson.com>, "Ahmed Bashandy (bashandy)" <bashandy@cisco.com>, Chris Bowers <cbowers@juniper.net>
Subject: Re: Request for WG adoption of draft-bashandy-rtgwg-bgp-pic-02.txt
Thread-Topic: Request for WG adoption of draft-bashandy-rtgwg-bgp-pic-02.txt
Thread-Index: AQHRG05VywkIDWcfxkyuZSg5eQd0xZ6U0J0A///GjgA=
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2015 03:21:32 +0000
Message-ID: <D266CB8D.3CF42%acee@cisco.com>
References: <20151110000559.13326.25820.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <56413977.1060100@cisco.com> <30DB7514-DC23-44B3-A5F6-58532791DEFB@ericsson.com>
In-Reply-To: <30DB7514-DC23-44B3-A5F6-58532791DEFB@ericsson.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [10.116.152.203]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_D266CB8D3CF42aceeciscocom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtgwg/791JMFy7Ts3LN054ebEonFZCp4c>
Cc: Pradosh Mohapatra <mpradosh@yahoo.com>, "rtgwg@ietf.org" <rtgwg@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: rtgwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Routing Area Working Group <rtgwg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/rtgwg>, <mailto:rtgwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/rtgwg/>
List-Post: <mailto:rtgwg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rtgwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg>, <mailto:rtgwg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2015 03:21:38 -0000
I support this document on the Informational track. BGP PIC is a useful mechanism for speeding convergence and this describes many of the use cases in the context of a conceptual forwarding plane implementation. Thanks, Acee From: rtgwg <rtgwg-bounces@ietf.org<mailto:rtgwg-bounces@ietf.org>> on behalf of Jeff Tantsura <jeff.tantsura@ericsson.com<mailto:jeff.tantsura@ericsson.com>> Date: Tuesday, November 10, 2015 at 10:47 AM To: "Ahmed Bashandy (bashandy)" <bashandy@cisco.com<mailto:bashandy@cisco.com>>, Chris Bowers <cbowers@juniper.net<mailto:cbowers@juniper.net>> Cc: Pradosh Mohapatra <mpradosh@yahoo.com<mailto:mpradosh@yahoo.com>>, Routing WG <rtgwg@ietf.org<mailto:rtgwg@ietf.org>> Subject: Re: Request for WG adoption of draft-bashandy-rtgwg-bgp-pic-02.txt Dear RTGWG, The authors have requested the RTGWG to adopt draft-bashandy-rtgwg-bgp-pic-02 as the working group document with Informational intended status. WG expressed support during the last RTGWG meeting (94) in Yokohama. Please indicate support or no-support by November 15, 2015. If you are listed as a document author or contributor please respond to this email stating of whether or not you are aware of any relevant IPR. The response needs to be sent to the RTGWG mailing list. The document will not advance to the next stage until a response has been received from each author and each individual that has contributed to the document. Cheers, Jeff & Chris From: "Ahmed Bashandy (bashandy)" <bashandy@cisco.com<mailto:bashandy@cisco.com>> Date: Monday, November 9, 2015 at 16:25 To: Jeff Tantsura <jeff.tantsura@ericsson.com<mailto:jeff.tantsura@ericsson.com>>, Chris Bowers <cbowers@juniper.net<mailto:cbowers@juniper.net>> Cc: "rtgwg@ietf.org<mailto:rtgwg@ietf.org>" <rtgwg@ietf.org<mailto:rtgwg@ietf.org>>, Clarence Filsfils <cfilsfil@cisco.com<mailto:cfilsfil@cisco.com>>, Pradosh Mohapatra <mpradosh@yahoo.com<mailto:mpradosh@yahoo.com>> Subject: Request for WG adoption of draft-bashandy-rtgwg-bgp-pic-02.txt Hi, This is the latest version of the BGP-PIC draft that was presented on Nov/2/15 during the IETF-94 meeting in Yokohama We have addressed the comments as follows: - Added statements in multiple places, including the abstract, indicating the need for more than one BGP path - Added example in Section 2.3.3 with illustrations in Figure 4,5,6 on how to handle a platform that does not support the required number of hierarchy levels. Section 4.3 explains the gradual degradation of BGP-PIC benefit as a result of the reduced platform support - For handling unlabeled traffic in case PE-CE failure, the last bullet in Section 4.2.2 indicates that an egress PE must always treat a core facing path as a backup path to avoid looping the packet in case of PE-CE link failure. The first statement in Section 5.1 indicates that the draft does not cover the failure of a CE node We would like to request adoption of the draft. Thanks Ahmed -------- Original Message -------- Subject: New Version Notification for draft-bashandy-rtgwg-bgp-pic-02.txt Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2015 16:05:59 -0800 From: <internet-drafts@ietf.org><mailto:internet-drafts@ietf.org> To: Clarence Filsfils <cfilsfil@cisco.com><mailto:cfilsfil@cisco.com>, Ahmed Bashandy <bashandy@cisco.com><mailto:bashandy@cisco.com>, Prodosh Mohapatra <mpradosh@yahoo.com><mailto:mpradosh@yahoo.com>, "Pradosh Mohapatra" <mpradosh@yahoo.com><mailto:mpradosh@yahoo.com> A new version of I-D, draft-bashandy-rtgwg-bgp-pic-02.txt has been successfully submitted by Ahmed Bashandy and posted to the IETF repository. Name: draft-bashandy-rtgwg-bgp-pic Revision: 02 Title: Abstract Document date: 2015-11-09 Group: Individual Submission Pages: 26 URL: https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-bashandy-rtgwg-bgp-pic-02.txt Status: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-bashandy-rtgwg-bgp-pic/ Htmlized: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-bashandy-rtgwg-bgp-pic-02 Diff: https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-bashandy-rtgwg-bgp-pic-02 Abstract: In the network comprising thousands of iBGP peers exchanging millions of routes, many routes are reachable via more than one path. Given the large scaling targets, it is desirable to restore traffic after failure in a time period that does not depend on the number of BGP prefixes. In this document we proposed an architecture by which traffic can be re-routed to ECMP or pre-calculated backup paths in a timeframe that does not depend on the number of BGP prefixes. The objective is achieved through organizing the forwarding chains in a hierarchical manner and sharing forwarding elements among the maximum possible number of routes. The proposed technique achieves prefix independent convergence while ensuring incremental deployment, complete transparency and automation, and zero management and provisioning effort. It is noteworthy to mention that the benefits of BGP-PIC are hinged on the existence of more than one path whether as ECMP or primary-backup. Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. The IETF Secretariat
- Request for WG adoption of draft-bashandy-rtgwg-b… Ahmed Bashandy (bashandy)
- Re: Request for WG adoption of draft-bashandy-rtg… Jeff Tantsura
- Re: Request for WG adoption of draft-bashandy-rtg… Acee Lindem (acee)
- Re: Request for WG adoption of draft-bashandy-rtg… Henderickx, Wim (Wim)
- Re: Request for WG adoption of draft-bashandy-rtg… Henderickx, Wim (Wim)
- RE: Request for WG adoption of draft-bashandy-rtg… Les Ginsberg (ginsberg)
- RE: Request for WG adoption of draft-bashandy-rtg… bruno.decraene
- Re: Request for WG adoption of draft-bashandy-rtg… Loa Andersson
- Re: Request for WG adoption of draft-bashandy-rtg… Jon Mitchell
- Re: Request for WG adoption of draft-bashandy-rtg… Shyam Sethuram
- Re: Request for WG adoption of draft-bashandy-rtg… Robert Hanzl (rhanzl)
- RE: Request for WG adoption of draft-bashandy-rtg… Antoni Przygienda
- Re: Request for WG adoption of draft-bashandy-rtg… Stefano Previdi (sprevidi)
- Re: Request for WG adoption of draft-bashandy-rtg… Jeffrey Haas
- Re: Request for WG adoption of draft-bashandy-rtg… Derek Man-Kit Yeung (myeung)
- Re: Request for WG adoption of draft-bashandy-rtg… Jeff Tantsura
- Re: Request for WG adoption of draft-bashandy-rtg… Ahmed Bashandy (bashandy)
- Re: Request for WG adoption of draft-bashandy-rtg… Jeff Tantsura