IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [spring] Updating the SPRING WG Charter

"Zafar Ali (zali)" <zali@cisco.com> Wed, 06 June 2018 19:14 UTC

Return-Path: <zali@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: spring@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: spring@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 21B5D12F1A5 for <spring@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 6 Jun 2018 12:14:30 -0700 (PDT)
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_DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.01, 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
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 yuQF9DRAbHkL for <spring@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 6 Jun 2018 12:14:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from alln-iport-7.cisco.com (alln-iport-7.cisco.com [173.37.142.94]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CE5681277CC for <spring@ietf.org>; Wed, 6 Jun 2018 12:14:26 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=15906; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1528312466; x=1529522066; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:mime-version; bh=Es5BQk7AHvh1DRqvyJzX2Y/xYnvTUfQ/gLE5ryfEG7k=; b=NPS1ul4YIIsTX3pZBDY4H0fQAfc1hvx23i4uqsbwjhJd/XljBqNPE1zu +yi8TokiGNDRcnXJ2UvlAZwEbewsBTygq4ECLgMmgSaxySMZi9WvjBzHE CWW+AjMrp0sy+0C5FLoWB9tLMVeusJTP5vFXKpQ2RCPZLVHIXacRmBsiK M=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0CeAABBMhhb/4kNJK1cGQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQcBAQEBAYJOSypifygKg26IBIxmgVghj1qEeBSBZAslhEcCF4IeITQYAQIBAQEBAQECbBwMhSgBAQEEI0sLEAIBCBEBAgECKAMCAgIwFAMGCAEBBAENBYMiAoEbZA+pW4IciESBYwWIQoFUP4EPJAyCXIMRAgIBgSoBEgE/FoJKMYIkAog1iHeHSgkChWuCWYYigT2DeIdtigGHAAIREwGBJB04YXFwFTsqAYIYCYIXF3oBB4dXhT5vAY4ygR+BGQEB
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.49,484,1520899200"; d="scan'208,217";a="125410335"
Received: from alln-core-4.cisco.com ([173.36.13.137]) by alln-iport-7.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 06 Jun 2018 19:14:17 +0000
Received: from XCH-RTP-020.cisco.com (xch-rtp-020.cisco.com [64.101.220.160]) by alln-core-4.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id w56JEHl7031848 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Wed, 6 Jun 2018 19:14:17 GMT
Received: from xch-rtp-018.cisco.com (64.101.220.158) by XCH-RTP-020.cisco.com (64.101.220.160) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1320.4; Wed, 6 Jun 2018 15:14:16 -0400
Received: from xch-rtp-018.cisco.com ([64.101.220.158]) by XCH-RTP-018.cisco.com ([64.101.220.158]) with mapi id 15.00.1320.000; Wed, 6 Jun 2018 15:14:16 -0400
From: "Zafar Ali (zali)" <zali@cisco.com>
To: Rob Shakir <robjs=40google.com@dmarc.ietf.org>, Michael McBride <Michael.McBride@huawei.com>
CC: Xiejingrong <xiejingrong@huawei.com>, "spring@ietf.org" <spring@ietf.org>, "Zafar Ali (zali)" <zali@cisco.com>
Thread-Topic: [spring] Updating the SPRING WG Charter
Thread-Index: AdP56p5QOgEqtjT0TPyaFDKrNzAuwABwo3NQACTI6YAAAQilgAAAHQ4AAGFqSQA=
Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2018 19:14:16 +0000
Message-ID: <75252B5F-6BCB-4166-ACC1-C9E9697B7B68@cisco.com>
References: <8CCB28152EA2E14A96BBEDC15823481A1CB79F12@sjceml521-mbs.china.huawei.com> <16253F7987E4F346823E305D08F9115A99A7D4CE@nkgeml514-mbx.china.huawei.com> <CAHd-QWvx-tkP1Asx3PwM3p2=wjuJm7b=A4Hb-BUnCMRzwT1J8w@mail.gmail.com> <8CCB28152EA2E14A96BBEDC15823481A1CB7FBFE@sjceml521-mbs.china.huawei.com> <CAHd-QWu+184A3Nje_Bmki9A3wwpp=4YyyKTTkWBtLcf_gt7Lvg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAHd-QWu+184A3Nje_Bmki9A3wwpp=4YyyKTTkWBtLcf_gt7Lvg@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/10.9.0.180116
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [10.82.211.35]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_75252B5F6BCB4166ACC1C9E9697B7B68ciscocom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spring/7_dNLFsLwHIrFCTW_O2mBF4U_Nw>
Subject: Re: [spring] Updating the SPRING WG Charter
X-BeenThere: spring@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Source Packet Routing in NetworkinG \(SPRING\)" <spring.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/spring>, <mailto:spring-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/spring/>
List-Post: <mailto:spring@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:spring-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring>, <mailto:spring-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2018 19:14:31 -0000

Hi Rob,

The multicast in SR belongs to the same category as I highlighted in my last email. Just to repeat …

At IETF101, you and Bruno presented a slide based on the WG feedback on the mailing list (https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/101/materials/slides-101-spring-00-chairs-slides-01). During the Spring meeting, the WG agreed to add milestones to those items. In general, I see some milestones are not included in the proposed chartered text.

Specifically, multicast in SR is included in that list with the "Ingress replication SID (Tree SID /spray)" bullet (and support during the WG meeting) but is missing in the proposed charter text. So, I agree with Xiejingrong and Michael highlighting the same. There is already interest and agreement shown by the WG to include multicast in SR in the charter.

In the light of the above, please add a milestone for the WG to specify architecture, and the required protocol extensions for multicast in SR with MPLS and IPv6 data planes, including specification of the ingress replication SIDs (e.g., Tree SID, Spray). Nonetheless, I wholeheartedly agree that the actual protocol extension work should be done at the WG that owns the protocol.

Thanks

Regards … Zafar

From: spring <spring-bounces@ietf.org> on behalf of Rob Shakir <robjs=40google.com@dmarc.ietf.org>
Date: Monday, June 4, 2018 at 12:45 PM
To: Michael McBride <Michael.McBride@huawei.com>
Cc: Xiejingrong <xiejingrong@huawei.com>, "spring@ietf.org" <spring@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [spring] Updating the SPRING WG Charter

Michael,

Thanks for the comment.
On Mon, Jun 4, 2018 at 9:42 AM Michael McBride <Michael.McBride@huawei.com<mailto:Michael.McBride@huawei.com>> wrote:
It would be helpful, while updating the charter, to state whether multicast in SR is in/out of scope in order to know which wg to take our future work.

I think this is impractical. If we state everything that is in or out of scope, we'll end up with a laundry list. The aim of the charter is to define clearly the work that the WG should focus on. It does not mean that we can never host discussion of individual drafts if they are relevant. If there are requirements, we can always recharter if something new becomes the highest priority for the industry w.r.t SR.

Kind regards,
r.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email