IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [sfc] WG Last Call draft-ietf-sfc-oam-framework-06

"Nagendra Kumar Nainar (naikumar)" <naikumar@cisco.com> Thu, 06 June 2019 16:59 UTC

Return-Path: <naikumar@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: sfc@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: sfc@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 90F6F120183 for <sfc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 6 Jun 2019 09:59:43 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.5
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.5 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, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.com header.b=N/yQmgNm; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.onmicrosoft.com header.b=lczsoRXV
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 DR76TXkJcqXN for <sfc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 6 Jun 2019 09:59:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rcdn-iport-3.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-3.cisco.com [173.37.86.74]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A5B41120170 for <sfc@ietf.org>; Thu, 6 Jun 2019 09:59:31 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=26969; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1559840371; x=1561049971; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:references:in-reply-to: mime-version; bh=8hEw0xqnqwlKihlBgMkPYUk3lWMPBviQ5cYTVZaL4lQ=; b=N/yQmgNmCoZh17ElMFlSpEIjUWCNonMglxwkr+r2o6307BSgTbs99zBs ls4kbZsc2+GppOOdfdF/d4gzF3ELW1Gwif6GuxZaqx5+Q0r/BNxqvKkAv Bwj8mEMtSlKf52Rdr2y+FQVyLxIG3stCmfOgnq2ISWxjcme846bHC6qPR g=;
IronPort-PHdr: 9a23:BY29IBZlLYL8PeZP62m1pJn/LSx94ef9IxIV55w7irlHbqWk+dH4MVfC4el20gabRp3VvvRDjeee87vtX2AN+96giDgDa9QNMn1NksAKh0olCc+BB1f8KavsZi05AcFLTndu/mqwNg5eH8OtL1A=
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0BsAAABRvlc/5hdJa1lHAEBAQQBAQcEAQGBUQcBAQsBgQ4vUANqVSAECygKhAqDRwOEUooMgleXMYEuFIEQA1QJAQEBDAEBIgsCAQGBBV2CXgIXgkwjNAkOAQMBAQQBAQIBBG0cDAkFhTwBAQECAhIRChMBASwMDwIBCBEDAQIhBwMCAgIwFAkIAgQBEiKCewQBAYEdTQMdAQIMnDYCgTiIX3GBMYJ5AQEFgTYDDUGCdwMVgg8DBoE0AYtaF4F/gREnH4JMPoJhAgEBAQEWgQ8/BwkJDQmCVDKCJotngjyEbIg6jVQJAoIOhkOMehuCI4Z3iXaDeI0OhxKPHgIEAgQFAg4BAQWBTzgNgUtwFTsqAYJBE4FYJAwXg02FFIU/cgEBAQGBJY05ATFvAQE
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.63,560,1557187200"; d="scan'208,217";a="558711825"
Received: from rcdn-core-1.cisco.com ([173.37.93.152]) by rcdn-iport-3.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA; 06 Jun 2019 16:58:58 +0000
Received: from XCH-ALN-006.cisco.com (xch-aln-006.cisco.com [173.36.7.16]) by rcdn-core-1.cisco.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id x56GwwcR032393 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Thu, 6 Jun 2019 16:58:58 GMT
Received: from xhs-aln-001.cisco.com (173.37.135.118) by XCH-ALN-006.cisco.com (173.36.7.16) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3; Thu, 6 Jun 2019 11:58:58 -0500
Received: from xhs-aln-002.cisco.com (173.37.135.119) by xhs-aln-001.cisco.com (173.37.135.118) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3; Thu, 6 Jun 2019 11:58:57 -0500
Received: from NAM03-CO1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (173.37.151.57) by xhs-aln-002.cisco.com (173.37.135.119) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3 via Frontend Transport; Thu, 6 Jun 2019 11:58:57 -0500
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cisco.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector2-cisco-onmicrosoft-com; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=8hEw0xqnqwlKihlBgMkPYUk3lWMPBviQ5cYTVZaL4lQ=; b=lczsoRXVSNCBzj+Q2aMwlWg15lg7mwvztzHiWW59IKVAouCMYHISzKcV+CwDfj8iSWRykjjwZSaaA4D/q4X+YzC+Y6ny0h8lvIi/kAlk4FYyV9B35/Z1E+M8kD2HpaobY3vPlOHu9YgZfmmsT/jKcx3Ori3fTyWVoiaQJt7hgQ8=
Received: from SN6PR11MB2829.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (52.135.93.20) by SN6PR11MB3519.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (52.135.125.24) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.1943.22; Thu, 6 Jun 2019 16:58:56 +0000
Received: from SN6PR11MB2829.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::6d50:f5eb:c8b4:f10b]) by SN6PR11MB2829.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::6d50:f5eb:c8b4:f10b%7]) with mapi id 15.20.1965.011; Thu, 6 Jun 2019 16:58:56 +0000
From: "Nagendra Kumar Nainar (naikumar)" <naikumar@cisco.com>
To: "mohamed.boucadair@orange.com" <mohamed.boucadair@orange.com>, James Guichard <james.n.guichard@futurewei.com>, "sfc@ietf.org" <sfc@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [sfc] WG Last Call draft-ietf-sfc-oam-framework-06
Thread-Index: AQHVGBvDclfwmJbvSka+gK5L5bnVD6aOnvqA
Date: Thu, 06 Jun 2019 16:58:56 +0000
Message-ID: <02BFE28B-55BB-4EBA-8F5B-70040BFAF917@cisco.com>
References: <48DE23B9-2696-44A4-898B-0C98901A0968@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <48DE23B9-2696-44A4-898B-0C98901A0968@cisco.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/10.10.9.190412
authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=naikumar@cisco.com;
x-originating-ip: [173.38.117.85]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: b7a8bf45-4bae-4ce5-750e-08d6eaa04337
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(2390118)(7020095)(4652040)(8989299)(4534185)(4627221)(201703031133081)(201702281549075)(8990200)(5600148)(711020)(4605104)(1401327)(2017052603328)(7193020); SRVR:SN6PR11MB3519;
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: SN6PR11MB3519:
x-ms-exchange-purlcount: 5
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <SN6PR11MB3519B6B4F263A0E21E0791B0C6170@SN6PR11MB3519.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:9508;
x-forefront-prvs: 00603B7EEF
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10009020)(396003)(346002)(39860400002)(366004)(376002)(136003)(199004)(189003)(53754006)(9326002)(8936002)(478600001)(236005)(6486002)(53546011)(66946007)(76176011)(25786009)(83716004)(606006)(229853002)(486006)(71200400001)(71190400001)(53936002)(256004)(6506007)(2906002)(11346002)(966005)(2616005)(316002)(476003)(81166006)(86362001)(6436002)(446003)(102836004)(81156014)(64756008)(110136005)(186003)(66066001)(54896002)(2501003)(36756003)(14454004)(6512007)(6306002)(5660300002)(6246003)(8676002)(73956011)(26005)(6116002)(790700001)(66476007)(99286004)(58126008)(3846002)(68736007)(76116006)(33656002)(91956017)(66556008)(82746002)(7736002)(66446008); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; SCL:1; SRVR:SN6PR11MB3519; H:SN6PR11MB2829.namprd11.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; LANG:en; PTR:InfoNoRecords; A:1; MX:1;
received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: cisco.com does not designate permitted sender hosts)
x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: 9jPnq+pSLvQdIl4suJ3sylCIiVon1teKrIl4gFeyAFb7Ti7+opSvhunzGnFNkt1iftraciOv1V3yI24tI+8kYDLeHfCYfQszXJK/tPO9w1m2bH8rw0+2etED6BbWlxdw3Zkcxi3Ugt2KQwQvIFIZu8Y+J8bBEZzj2Qsmy3PrOu+rpAjMyJYvdLUVl/+tp58IuM5+xH4CU5cJ8X98oPwr5NKevK2zJgI6TYS2KE26B69D6E87HqWoETUVWiZfyOX5n0490CHKCGPGDksxryf+G4xxq9GCk3kMu0kkgdrmrlwP5CQ96tTiebFYdSG6iwUTQyXYBFgaiC1zQwRblq/3Gjg0sMchORePTilHbgbl7Dw+P8owXH+OZxINYcZEmHLDvhl3jVU7MSVfsgYJ8pQZqpMCh6dUZvuaSYlWVarn+vw=
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_02BFE28B55BB4EBA8F5B70040BFAF917ciscocom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: b7a8bf45-4bae-4ce5-750e-08d6eaa04337
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 06 Jun 2019 16:58:56.1529 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 5ae1af62-9505-4097-a69a-c1553ef7840e
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: naikumar@cisco.com
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: SN6PR11MB3519
X-OriginatorOrg: cisco.com
X-Outbound-SMTP-Client: 173.36.7.16, xch-aln-006.cisco.com
X-Outbound-Node: rcdn-core-1.cisco.com
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/sfc/oe88ROLHnsYEnB_lWvS4QtLyz3Y>
Subject: Re: [sfc] WG Last Call draft-ietf-sfc-oam-framework-06
X-BeenThere: sfc@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Network Service Chaining <sfc.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/sfc>, <mailto:sfc-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/sfc/>
List-Post: <mailto:sfc@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sfc-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sfc>, <mailto:sfc-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 06 Jun 2019 16:59:44 -0000

Hi Med,

I am working on your comments and would like to get some clarity on a few. Please see below:


<Med> You may add some text saying that SF availability can be about the availability of SF in a given SFC-enabled domain (think about stateless SFs) or a given SF instance. Both should be in scope.

<Nagendra> Can you help understand more about what you mean by stateless SF?. Did you meant the ability to check if the SF is up (where the SF can be a cluster running multiple instances of the function for load balancing or resiliency) vs a specific SF instance (within the cluster) is up?.
<Med> Isn’t this deployment-specific? Or you assume that an SFC-aware node can initiate OAM operations for its local needs? Are there any authorization to be granted, etc.?

<Nagendra> As defined in section 3.2.2, if the PM is to be performed for a specific segment of service function, the relevant SFC-aware node should have the ability to initiate OAM. Since they all belongs to the same domain, I don’t we need any additional authorization.

Are you seeing any issues here?.


<Med> Orchestration is not defined here. Consider introducing it to..
<Nagendra> Just like other fields, in the table, it looks self-explanatory to me ☺. Scanning through the other drafts, I don’t see any reference. If you have any pointers, please share.

I will share the updated draft soon.

Thanks,
Nagendra

From: sfc <sfc-bounces@ietf.org> on behalf of "mohamed.boucadair@orange.com" <mohamed.boucadair@orange.com>
Date: Wednesday, May 29, 2019 at 7:50 AM
To: James Guichard <james.n.guichard@futurewei.com>, "sfc@ietf.org" <sfc@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [sfc] WG Last Call draft-ietf-sfc-oam-framework-06

Hi all,

The draft is almost ready.

FWIW, some inputs/comments/nits are available at:

  *   pdf: https://github.com/boucadair/IETF-Drafts-Reviews/blob/master/draft-ietf-sfc-oam-framework-06-rev%20Med.pdf
  *   doc: https://github.com/boucadair/IETF-Drafts-Reviews/raw/master/draft-ietf-sfc-oam-framework-06-rev%20Med.doc

Nagendra, feel free to share on the list points that you think need further discussion/clarification.

Cheers,
Med

De : sfc [mailto:sfc-bounces@ietf.org] De la part de James Guichard
Envoyé : mardi 28 mai 2019 16:30
À : sfc@ietf.org
Objet : [sfc] WG Last Call draft-ietf-sfc-oam-framework-06


Dear WG:



This message starts a new two week WG Last Call on advancing https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-sfc-oam-framework/<https://nam03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdatatracker.ietf.org%2Fdoc%2Fdraft-ietf-sfc-oam-framework%2F&data=02%7C01%7Cjames.n.guichard%40futurewei.com%7Ce47e5eb13f224f18c46408d6e378b2f7%7C0fee8ff2a3b240189c753a1d5591fedc%7C1%7C0%7C636946504868870205&sdata=lkKvAgmKik7lkqGANQpnIvBRdbjKAqYtzTUdTfB9f3Y%3D&reserved=0> for publication as an Informational RFC.



Substantive comments and statements of support for publishing this document should be directed to the mailing list. Editorial suggestions can be sent to the authors.  This last call will end on 11th June 2019.



Thanks!



Jim & Joel

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email