Re: Request for WG adoption of draft-bashandy-rtgwg-bgp-pic-02.txt
Jeff Tantsura <jeff.tantsura@ericsson.com> Tue, 10 November 2015 01:47 UTC
Return-Path: <jeff.tantsura@ericsson.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 8030E1B2EA1 for <rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 9 Nov 2015 17:47:11 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 JR6SLfJ3ewVG for <rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 9 Nov 2015 17:47:09 -0800 (PST)
Received: from usevmg21.ericsson.net (usevmg21.ericsson.net [198.24.6.65]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DE3771ACCEE for <rtgwg@ietf.org>; Mon, 9 Nov 2015 17:47:08 -0800 (PST)
X-AuditID: c6180641-f792c6d00000686a-10-5640dee3cc5b
Received: from EUSAAHC007.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain [147.117.188.93]) by usevmg21.ericsson.net (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id 1C.0A.26730.3EED0465; Mon, 9 Nov 2015 18:58:59 +0100 (CET)
Received: from EUSAAMB109.ericsson.se ([147.117.188.126]) by EUSAAHC007.ericsson.se ([147.117.188.93]) with mapi id 14.03.0248.002; Mon, 9 Nov 2015 20:47:07 -0500
From: Jeff Tantsura <jeff.tantsura@ericsson.com>
To: "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: AQHRG05QOmc8FhnrCUi0LUusmUrUj56USoCA
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2015 01:47:06 +0000
Message-ID: <30DB7514-DC23-44B3-A5F6-58532791DEFB@ericsson.com>
References: <20151110000559.13326.25820.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <56413977.1060100@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <56413977.1060100@cisco.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/0.0.0.151008
x-originating-ip: [147.117.188.12]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_30DB7514DC2344B3A5F658532791DEFBericssoncom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFjrCIsWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUyuXRPrO7jew5hBl/PqFkc23yRxeLHeleL nbN72Cxaut6wWVx485vZgdVjyu+NrB5Llvxk8rjedJXdY9asw0wBLFFcNimpOZllqUX6dglc GXtOLmUsmNjAWDFn4xLWBsZrNV2MnBwSAiYSdxZeYYKwxSQu3FvP1sXIxSEkcIRRYuaJNcwQ zjJGid5jzawgVWwCBhL/vx1nAbFFBKIkfnTcYgUpYhZoYZRov7ueGSQhLOAtMXXXNTaIIh+J a8tbGCFsI4l3nafZuxg5OFgEVCWad4iDhHkF7CU+33kJVi4kkCAx4Ukf2C5OAU2JpX2XwHYx Al33/dQasEuZBcQlbj2ZD3W1gMSSPeeZIWxRiZeP/4H1igroSpzY3gkVV5KY8/oaM0RvssTv f10sEHsFJU7OfMIygVFsFpKxs5CUzUJSNgvoamagk9bv0ocoUZSY0v2QHcLWkGidMxfKtpbY MOkYO7KaBYwcqxg5SotTy3LTjQw3MQLj9pgEm+MOxgWfLA8xCnAwKvHwftjiECbEmlhWXJl7 iFGCg1lJhNf+BVCINyWxsiq1KD++qDQntfgQozQHi5I477wZ90OFBNITS1KzU1MLUotgskwc nFINjBuMDPK/FAWFJd+YIXl/5oyX3wLUnIzi809zPnW5W8ej/t2qw3NeO2vgnb2S+mHNi09M 43PTs3t5061ullP0i791zXEJL21i371RdcyKcF8d7aXst0TiSsaW88vyE7yf5ddMmFOcW2m/ pcL9jNHb1fzGmac03/98v3ST95mru7Svz+d0TtaoV2Ipzkg01GIuKk4EAAzctd7XAgAA
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtgwg/J0yW-8gb1inAnFtTqL9pLNgF1S0>
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 01:47:11 -0000
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