Re: Mail regarding draft-hu-rtgwg-srv6-egress-protection

Yimin Shen <yshen@juniper.net> Sun, 23 February 2020 02:10 UTC

Return-Path: <yshen@juniper.net>
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 F0F893A09CC for <rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 22 Feb 2020 18:10:31 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.1
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=juniper.net header.b=YD08ofRu; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=juniper.net header.b=cXeuZ0V3
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 n28P1vPNzJnc for <rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 22 Feb 2020 18:10:30 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mx0a-00273201.pphosted.com (mx0a-00273201.pphosted.com [208.84.65.16]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1E9A23A09C8 for <rtgwg@ietf.org>; Sat, 22 Feb 2020 18:10:30 -0800 (PST)
Received: from pps.filterd (m0108158.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-00273201.pphosted.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 01N2ARiQ014371; Sat, 22 Feb 2020 18:10:27 -0800
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=juniper.net; h=from : to : subject : date : message-id : references : in-reply-to : content-type : content-id : content-transfer-encoding : mime-version; s=PPS1017; bh=+pYhtcUYTq7kKDmXPz/VQLK7hCEx+3vpkIINzxlBrxo=; b=YD08ofRuJH7l7I1EQPzqy8cjJEwbil0MrFKAB0lFqc0DHWC9rQT2R+K012cf2PeSBig4 Dfqq9Q4DX/558rLhi04thGrMMRxTAhzT0lt+rX9Mi5yzvBg6C9kH5Hb8RiZu8H4GyIyj n8NvtS0Enh1uzbXx9EsBx1WLQeo/YYVbk7g5UVuGpqInQyob1nCnL/UccTQD8ZQWkWPV bCg1QKDaCaJ/WhTeRFHoQnjiGDp4CFMolyG2NTUugadmZZXNYAw6mSjX0kAjiV8L0XrF s/IkYt2F677bKKydnZ2kbGdXfJYhq9Gs9t2iI7HWwAsYPP1nL8s6LfCpr3iDv6Pnho44 uw==
Received: from nam02-sn1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-sn1nam02lp2057.outbound.protection.outlook.com [104.47.36.57]) by mx0a-00273201.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2yb0w0gw77-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Sat, 22 Feb 2020 18:10:27 -0800
ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=OnfPlKnTvvt1x5iJdqxuqNKjCBwlC6s6Co5KydJBxanV+QDBQ9V9He/vJbvh9vwjgLeo5kAmHTk6SO3tKqQXkGqOZjs7hyIEtIJyNwcTUlUK/kl+NwFRZ7GgjO2ZB8oXf4uLvubpE6y1l95en3lMoLOGjcWfdt5BCF66bSt7eeWvnsMPbp3/+d83+hOeTGXNx8qcaAKDbBD6CYDmrPh/Ow8c7uctfFlmNHBri6dh9r4d/oSUe+Y00p9lOE1uD5Ou8Ks2TRsMBDX8cNWGeo9Xbql9eJgh0U1RfVRCOc/XewQTgD3CGTAkmHFb55v13SzmvbGsbsfH5Tk8htN2w2tDRA==
ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=+pYhtcUYTq7kKDmXPz/VQLK7hCEx+3vpkIINzxlBrxo=; b=FoxvZlG4dnzZr5pSYblhSfUxYqtdUJ6V7dp+HBKhVaPO0bJhry4KQ8yZ5mOEH0s4gbnu40rYA11A+Tzr5SDJ+HNOB89kaYsznNBZ7nlnjpul+La2/neY9eM9jOALo1p5GhLAuvLtrDosBlrjs6ajCYHkiQQaZ9Xpf3KTs7kKwNcb7GeHIAt8OpWBcQE5E/lRMns2vgQzFetbkX3Z9rhKglc5jNw5lrgLjl1h1vTnt7ScBAHO9qzg3A/xoCRhzfwq2LM+tUYmfXpGlqzpPSSpTMjCtdUJkAphsNx4io5Hn0ySCqpb+/RlGGrIEAq2rRy1VZwVjK7TTvG0gFg0KlbPuA==
ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=juniper.net; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=juniper.net; dkim=pass header.d=juniper.net; arc=none
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=juniper.net; s=selector1; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=+pYhtcUYTq7kKDmXPz/VQLK7hCEx+3vpkIINzxlBrxo=; b=cXeuZ0V3MPTIb6Z1zDvYa9xzipOpNcCSyw4Kg6xx4qV01BSG/uegfuUNPh17EAqkDRaZW/Db+KTaw15GKc51WbwxEO5dx+lLDT9uzhg9BNLpSYeZKZhNPQtM/NyNaKDrhvetCEh4X7ypKnDmI98od6nI+MvXWYPFsdS2QVt1WlY=
Received: from BYAPR05MB5126.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:a03:9a::26) by BYAPR05MB5127.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:a03:96::28) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.2750.18; Sun, 23 Feb 2020 02:10:25 +0000
Received: from BYAPR05MB5126.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::9d24:3518:be60:efe5]) by BYAPR05MB5126.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::9d24:3518:be60:efe5%4]) with mapi id 15.20.2729.033; Sun, 23 Feb 2020 02:10:25 +0000
From: Yimin Shen <yshen@juniper.net>
To: Huaimo Chen <huaimo.chen@futurewei.com>, "rtgwg@ietf.org" <rtgwg@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: Mail regarding draft-hu-rtgwg-srv6-egress-protection
Thread-Topic: Mail regarding draft-hu-rtgwg-srv6-egress-protection
Thread-Index: AQHV6Tj/QTh4u6ex9kyPrxr+4lY6AKgnDNKA
Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2020 02:10:24 +0000
Message-ID: <15DAD938-D0E1-4BB0-BE20-40602495474A@juniper.net>
References: <BY5PR13MB3651E27C33405CA8D1BC4FF4F2EE0@BY5PR13MB3651.namprd13.prod.outlook.com>
In-Reply-To: <BY5PR13MB3651E27C33405CA8D1BC4FF4F2EE0@BY5PR13MB3651.namprd13.prod.outlook.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
msip_labels: MSIP_Label_9784d817-3396-4a4f-b60c-3ef6b345fe55_Enabled=true; MSIP_Label_9784d817-3396-4a4f-b60c-3ef6b345fe55_Name=Juniper Business Use Only; MSIP_Label_9784d817-3396-4a4f-b60c-3ef6b345fe55_Enabled=true; MSIP_Label_9784d817-3396-4a4f-b60c-3ef6b345fe55_SiteId=bea78b3c-4cdb-4130-854a-1d193232e5f4; MSIP_Label_9784d817-3396-4a4f-b60c-3ef6b345fe55_ContentBits=0; MSIP_Label_9784d817-3396-4a4f-b60c-3ef6b345fe55_Method=Standard; MSIP_Label_9784d817-3396-4a4f-b60c-3ef6b345fe55_ActionId=3fa7612f-4f88-4ca1-9717-000039fa078d; MSIP_Label_9784d817-3396-4a4f-b60c-3ef6b345fe55_SetDate=2020-02-22T15:48:41Z;
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/10.22.0.200209
x-originating-ip: [66.129.241.11]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-ms-office365-filtering-ht: Tenant
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 1113c78e-5085-4979-efa3-08d7b8058b9a
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: BYAPR05MB5127:
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <BYAPR05MB51276F1EE52E446396167EFEBDEF0@BYAPR05MB5127.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:10000;
x-forefront-prvs: 0322B4EDE1
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(4636009)(39860400002)(136003)(346002)(366004)(376002)(396003)(189003)(199004)(53546011)(6506007)(186003)(6512007)(86362001)(478600001)(316002)(26005)(66574012)(8676002)(8936002)(2616005)(81156014)(66476007)(71200400001)(76116006)(36756003)(5660300002)(91956017)(81166006)(6486002)(64756008)(2906002)(66946007)(33656002)(110136005)(66446008)(66556008); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:BYAPR05MB5127; H:BYAPR05MB5126.namprd05.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; LANG:en; PTR:InfoNoRecords; MX:1; A:1;
received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: juniper.net does not designate permitted sender hosts)
x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0;
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: O1+nSpa1vIOGY+7XFgBmSVpdTQ6BV7WyNJXvKNgQ6XvnYOfAWt0q/Jb7wXPH9cCbW/TKOhSHqYXdH5g2gfc1TvJbMv8KTXlBojaQOOO5QeZWXweqPQ3vI+N0zroM0KxPJpiiB8CNk2UC0cDmxAKoUwPfWlpKswOKDyzkq3KrAuLbK+xBedOcrOIU661/7Ougo3C9qS3TWdHUxSK9VR5z4lCrFkThc3mC5FvktoI80Tf214Ud7c8HR3pfcIWrtax+e9GkTJNUe93c/XGBEBHBal1wtzeJGcBKrk4gFJcK4i2bbbJmZ8oDZUoSz94uWfxIIwfNrWBF5XkSympJZLD1GNB7XOFhx1VAlzb+HrIyWP9lQvcN6TBEb0Vq2MzdyLZAmxgM+/pMzATdsPTJGT1IuRpvOKY0a4AbFWuwRIKuKG8RYERQDeR64K1zdy0Pq30X
x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata: j/Z+675jcl9uXid/flAa4uyj2PH5TtrUxtrMg5Ood3IZKMm966NhbLfS3eLwjOhAOFP2uI+hHhodZXiDmTFDaXriZTlcZrou6iUt2UfYCX0uAfwUya2x/F4K/OV5Y36M7iwfAkUAunGfg2WToCRUdg==
x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-ID: <9F4A7049A47B114C9DDE178B6E136290@namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: juniper.net
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 1113c78e-5085-4979-efa3-08d7b8058b9a
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 23 Feb 2020 02:10:25.0368 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: bea78b3c-4cdb-4130-854a-1d193232e5f4
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: O5w2vfmR0CBJpspIrdeVVn5XyxDZMz9QpuG4X+6e/7OdDVbw3igfFAObbDCtvOwgnQ14GqqlmOggwonn8t0NOQ==
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BYAPR05MB5127
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.138, 18.0.572 definitions=2020-02-22_08:2020-02-21, 2020-02-22 signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_spam_notspam policy=outbound_spam score=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 malwarescore=0 adultscore=0 spamscore=0 priorityscore=1501 bulkscore=0 impostorscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 clxscore=1015 mlxlogscore=999 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2001150001 definitions=main-2002230015
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtgwg/teHhMl_6_t1at8Whm2FCNWuKQuQ>
X-BeenThere: rtgwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Sun, 23 Feb 2020 02:10:32 -0000

Hi Huaimo, Authors,

>> Step 1:  Find the P-Space P(Z, X) and the Q-Space Q(Y, X), which are similar to those in [RFC7490];

Unfortunately this is not a right solution. As I mentioned before, in egress protection, bypass path computation should not rely on LFA, because it is not finding a path to merge back to the protected/primary router. I have already suggested in a previous email to remove the link between PE3 and PE4, to make your discussion more generic. Similarly, the draft should not assume there is a multi-hop path from PE4 to PE3 which does not traverse P1. Your  mechanism must be able to return a bypass path in these cases. My suggestion is to take the guidelines in RFC 8679, and use context-IDs as locators. 

>>    Step 5:  Try to find a shortest path from Z to Y without going through X;

As a transit router, Z is supposed to perform generic bypass calculation for X (like other IPv6 addresses), based on a general FRR logic. So, how would Z even know to "Try" in this step ? What is it trying ? Isn't this "shortest path from Z to Y without going through X" the bypass path you are looking for in Step 1 - 3 ?

>>    For a (primary) locator associated with the (primary) egress node of a SR path/tunnel, most often the locator is routable.  This is the case we assumed,

Non-routable locator should be supported, and it can be supported. In this case, bypass path calculation should be based on BGP nexthop. Again, please refer to RFC 8679 regarding how to use context-ID as BGP nexthop for a solution. 


Thanks,
-- Yimin


From: Huaimo Chen <huaimo.chen@futurewei.com>
Date: Friday, February 21, 2020 at 11:45 PM
To: Yimin Shen <yshen@juniper.net>, "rtgwg@ietf.org" <rtgwg@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: Mail regarding draft-hu-rtgwg-srv6-egress-protection

Hi Yimin,
    Thanks much for your comments.
    The procedure with details that a PLR uses to compute a backup path has been added into the draft, which has been uploaded.
Best Regards,
Huaimo
Hi Huaimo, authors,

>>> Node P1's pre-computed backup path for PE3 is from P1 to PE4 via P2.

I’m still concerned that there is no details in this draft about the procedures how a PLR computes a backup path to the protector, in both of the two cases below.

[1] the primary locator is routable.
[2] the primary locator is not routable.

Thanks,
-- Yimin