IETF Logo Mail Archive

Protecting SR policy midpoints (draft-bashandy-rtgwg-segment-routing-ti-lfa)

Muthu Arul Mozhi Perumal <muthu.arul@gmail.com> Wed, 22 November 2017 09:27 UTC

Return-Path: <muthu.arul@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C24E128E00 for <rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 22 Nov 2017 01:27:45 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.699
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.699 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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 p4BO_LNw7H8L for <rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 22 Nov 2017 01:27:43 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-io0-x236.google.com (mail-io0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c06::236]) (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 BB49F128DF6 for <rtgwg@ietf.org>; Wed, 22 Nov 2017 01:27:43 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-io0-x236.google.com with SMTP id s37so11623249ioe.10 for <rtgwg@ietf.org>; Wed, 22 Nov 2017 01:27:43 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=iQFEuOGKlu1NfWrPCpl1YkVKzk4vttX1IKJaPv3qWn8=; b=L/JnNsbUkSTAeqAohpvSiBlqjsuA9A31DuUwltSO0s+QPr8ljSlxTWDV+/0m/FPNcp /MretX3oHtPUuf9fqZ6F0lNIiq4JIuBiqaTxyU9Kqq1FVba/FdEbu8H5u3dqQ8VrqFgs XugY3uikkAUI5PNuKfaP6MsYT8w4JM5Xo1MpuXjvANxVrgdFM+HphGtFyXfJWVt4cl2y P9DtL4A7biA0Wuvn61YfZ11VUSx2R4K3evgRmJJ4CAp+8GCjPL7vVDXesvHi5vhC/+QC iQh/xlMbxddbqYAM1pV4JGmDJuEUyQL4yqDwgFs5rl4k4cQ2vgjgXKCATQ8Ogdsf2cHR 9VmA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=iQFEuOGKlu1NfWrPCpl1YkVKzk4vttX1IKJaPv3qWn8=; b=FmWRYenNilAPVjyR+NdUe1k03OjXX4SNVJ2xHDYrxrj08yHlpfBB2bfJ4iyJn/Am79 0SZwblIiQ5Ulq5U3pyeLC2wXsgTkBJfGQzJp5OSVYWN36A9Lw8vkgjIeQs/AsJDH1nLX z/fUarA1k+SmTrUJJ8AUNCb+6mpKfLjZtQZf/wbtnr3/r3tKB1k+1AIIv+KYUoTz3faH UrxFSexr+4PvR7mMV1w9uWRlDKAnk10SyFilY5OOViWhWM1LIsLsVvCzm+UPSeyFeMss EhZhoIj+F6f86c+q+QGvmDp6BiGB13KVF9IzaXRgFgC0rrhN1cfkQcH3LXIxENMIKB7m SwKA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AJaThX4rM18NoD+jtlS96veGkl8uMh1tzXLGVJLTnXLVZ4OOrqk9Rll2 qSEcF/6ldKjD1RnYL4+7PEgj5JSJa4UXykuo1KM3jA==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGs4zMZPf6aham1J60BRQ2631qgwXegSuE9Cq34y3NjQSsV0HgxkGfLxiAjDL4tTrupor7Qz3/aI9R57X0JMsaHkntk=
X-Received: by 10.107.36.17 with SMTP id k17mr9190871iok.176.1511342862863; Wed, 22 Nov 2017 01:27:42 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.2.134.37 with HTTP; Wed, 22 Nov 2017 01:27:42 -0800 (PST)
From: Muthu Arul Mozhi Perumal <muthu.arul@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2017 14:57:42 +0530
Message-ID: <CAKz0y8wLYjkSO486w5WpSuDYV3Cjvgkv6887o9-Ky9o_ViWMrQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Protecting SR policy midpoints (draft-bashandy-rtgwg-segment-routing-ti-lfa)
To: rtgwg@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a1140345079951e055e8eee6c"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtgwg/BioW8pAxn3JVYwoFSEzPN3PqNtY>
X-BeenThere: rtgwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: Wed, 22 Nov 2017 09:27:45 -0000

Section 5.3 of draft-bashandy-rtgwg-segment-routing-ti-lfa describes
protecting SR policy midpoints against node failure for the case where the
active segment is the prefix or adjacency segment of a neighbor.

I believe the steps described in the procedure is applicable only for a
node steering packets into the SR policy. This could be an ingress PE
steering IP packets into a SR-TE tunnel or an intermediate node steering
labeled packets received with a BSID into a SR-TE tunnel identified by that
BSID.

A transit node that has no idea about the SR policy itself is not expected
to perform the procedure described in that section.

Is my understanding correct?

Regards,
Muthu

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email