[spring] Regarding Circuit Style Segment Routing Policies [draft-schmutzer-pce-cs-sr-policy]
Vishnu Pavan Beeram <vishnupavan@gmail.com> Fri, 25 March 2022 13:48 UTC
Return-Path: <vishnupavan@gmail.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 64D273A128E; Fri, 25 Mar 2022 06:48:53 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.107
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.107 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01] 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 e6lOClErLaai; Fri, 25 Mar 2022 06:48:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-il1-x132.google.com (mail-il1-x132.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::132]) (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 C9B303A1279; Fri, 25 Mar 2022 06:48:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-il1-x132.google.com with SMTP id d3so5231310ilr.10; Fri, 25 Mar 2022 06:48:48 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=coNgV6MpAwmMpObnmfGQ0fRJqRVQ3JnpkXccZ4t4088=; b=H1s4YWTckyPsqu501TKXqsvjjNXasSCG2QTC9VmAcUD/q+1nzs2YzRsNdW4ITCswE4 4oEGfp7WAKrOedKu72Ayp/DELeTzBWtpw4+wbZ3u0DnggPQqKJ494pxSRaA6UMhNMrVt 3Ldr1wIjFWKE0jyEiz7plRdBXNdgc/Ts6vVdLNZdwQhaVFcSSQ2I1Cy8kTcIfN7THS3C e/lRu21+5zkc5V+G5O/byxe+oJpZhCVQz849DWqeMKkVXS90aBv7zcU1d3CIOcXlQfpt zZh+1fWgUOnclawbVULANaP7ZZcFeDoIh1sUHjbq7TPOahRUEkGHwEfqQVlB3smr0ak6 2bSg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=coNgV6MpAwmMpObnmfGQ0fRJqRVQ3JnpkXccZ4t4088=; b=3jFbcPiAJa83Ri5HEnIgjaWnYdXB4pzZp9ZGKqLtU5j18eMw1Av9i5LZRwgaMdP/uC y6BnrCzybiIdKutCeQ+VivIEU2infTCQPkEX1KBveN4TnvzJ0spWlxXdkAqb+mlBd2Rb 6djxqSLxFJivffioyhIvMsXewhjRQeoimmctza3RYsUPqk48zIe5QwxBz2rnYdHlUVLf eBRGL+MifPjeaW3zxkKZiNFuHF4VbiMCQrYhTO9CamcgeAGmgQ3VJMXXid7xiMcvp/Wj aP9tpL17In4Gq3uh/S3JVj84IYY5YIzggjIoI0hbnz1rg83Wz+5hilqTi2x8SCN1wO6k Ns+Q==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530Ub3ewcrwlDSQjwaZJHv5lHpOPQ6H8aPaC38SqgOZoQrUCPzle hV2YaJaaSnjzvpGDPAHk++hrlL3HkYWmu9fjsFqH4GSgu8k=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxymaHq8gbkgatYT2WgDa3Yo/XTrvyETwo4aHi2Lw8BGaxnVttrzSXsFuhvn+QGa/6Kf10wucSpjcGZrEMYTuc=
X-Received: by 2002:a92:ae02:0:b0:2c6:798d:2be with SMTP id s2-20020a92ae02000000b002c6798d02bemr5016521ilh.18.1648216127033; Fri, 25 Mar 2022 06:48:47 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
From: Vishnu Pavan Beeram <vishnupavan@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2022 08:48:35 -0500
Message-ID: <CA+YzgTt2pBOC-Fm+-r=Kk0Q3by0Eu606a9iQmpeV=J9Wj=X9bQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: draft-schmutzer-pce-cs-sr-policy@ietf.org
Cc: spring@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000c3d69905db0b3830"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spring/ExKMuq_fboUsb3JNG97b81iLX1w>
Subject: [spring] Regarding Circuit Style Segment Routing Policies [draft-schmutzer-pce-cs-sr-policy]
X-BeenThere: spring@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Fri, 25 Mar 2022 13:48:54 -0000
Authors, This draft is introducing a specific type of transport profile for SR policy paths. To be more precise, it is introducing "Bandwidth Constrained Bidirectional Corouted Pinned Path SR policies" with restoration and/or reversion features enabled. I'm not sure if "Circuit-Styled" is an apt name for this specific profile, but I don't have a better alternative to offer . It is interesting how all of these TE features are being reinvented for SR policy paths. Is "Bandwidth Constraint" the only reason for the dependency on a PCE/Controller (because of the need for a centralized Resource Reservation Manager)? Would a Bidirectional Corouted Pinned Path SR policy not be classified as "Circuit Style" if it wasn't bandwidth constrained (in other words, do you envision any "Circuit Style" SR policy without a controller in place)? If this work were to progress, I would suggest having one document in SPRING WG that discusses just the profile without getting into any PCEP/BGP specific details (TEAS WG participants would be interested given that you are modeling/defining a specific type of TE path profile; would be useful to keep them notified) and a document in PCE WG that discusses the PCEP specific procedures for this type of SR policies. The "new" PCEP protocol-extensions being proposed (in draft-sidor-pce-circuit-style-pcep-extensions) are path-control technology agnostic (don't quite agree with the proposed encodings -- but that would be a mail on the PCE list) and can potentially be discussed separately. Regards, -Pavan
- [spring] Regarding Circuit Style Segment Routing … Vishnu Pavan Beeram