Re: [spring] WG Adoption Call fordraft-dong-spring-sr-for-enhanced-vpn

"Dongjie (Jimmy)" <jie.dong@huawei.com> Thu, 16 July 2020 11:50 UTC

Return-Path: <jie.dong@huawei.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 8423E3A0A2E; Thu, 16 Jul 2020 04:50:13 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 Z5HRPZZxsl6G; Thu, 16 Jul 2020 04:50:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [185.176.76.210]) (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 77EB63A0A2D; Thu, 16 Jul 2020 04:50:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lhreml713-chm.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.18.7.106]) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTP id 6E1F7E9E691A8D61B2B2; Thu, 16 Jul 2020 12:50:07 +0100 (IST)
Received: from dggeme754-chm.china.huawei.com (10.3.19.100) by lhreml713-chm.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.64) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256) id 15.1.1913.5; Thu, 16 Jul 2020 12:50:06 +0100
Received: from dggeme754-chm.china.huawei.com (10.3.19.100) by dggeme754-chm.china.huawei.com (10.3.19.100) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.1913.5; Thu, 16 Jul 2020 19:50:04 +0800
Received: from dggeme754-chm.china.huawei.com ([10.6.80.77]) by dggeme754-chm.china.huawei.com ([10.6.80.77]) with mapi id 15.01.1913.007; Thu, 16 Jul 2020 19:50:04 +0800
From: "Dongjie (Jimmy)" <jie.dong@huawei.com>
To: "chen.ran@zte.com.cn" <chen.ran@zte.com.cn>, "james.n.guichard@futurewei.com" <james.n.guichard@futurewei.com>, "spring@ietf.org" <spring@ietf.org>
CC: "spring-chairs@ietf.org" <spring-chairs@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [spring] WG Adoption Call fordraft-dong-spring-sr-for-enhanced-vpn
Thread-Index: AQHWW1JXq5JkI/hO0ECM81zm3l9EwakKEeVg
Date: Thu, 16 Jul 2020 11:50:04 +0000
Message-ID: <d37cd591d1864972b17b225f41cab4bc@huawei.com>
References: <202007161719327112195@zte.com.cn>
In-Reply-To: <202007161719327112195@zte.com.cn>
Accept-Language: en-US, zh-CN
Content-Language: zh-CN
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.45.191.175]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_d37cd591d1864972b17b225f41cab4bchuaweicom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spring/hVJsT31LseGE5asubOPe_8jO_6Q>
Subject: Re: [spring] WG Adoption Call fordraft-dong-spring-sr-for-enhanced-vpn
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: Thu, 16 Jul 2020 11:50:14 -0000

Hi Ran,

Thanks for your comments. While I don’t quite get your point of objection.  Perhaps you have some misunderstanding about the relationship of the drafts mentioned.

RFC 8402 introduced the topology and service semantics of SR SID, this document proposed to add resource semantics to SIDs. Then MT or Flex-Algo are control plane mechanism for the distribution of topology-specific SIDs. The relationship with these documents are described in this draft.

My reading of draft-peng in LSR and TEAS is that they may provide an option of control plane extensions for the resource-aware SIDs defined in this document, which just proves that the enhancement in this document is in the right direction, and more work based on it could be done in relevant WGs.

Thus my suggestion would be to have the SR enhancement adopted in SPRING first, then more discussion about its control plane could happen in other WGs as the next step.

Hope this helps.

Best regards,
Jie

From: spring [mailto:spring-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of chen.ran@zte.com.cn
Sent: Thursday, July 16, 2020 5:20 PM
To: james.n.guichard@futurewei.com; spring@ietf.org
Cc: spring-chairs@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [spring] WG Adoption Call fordraft-dong-spring-sr-for-enhanced-vpn


Dear WG,

I don't support WG adoption.

It is not a new idea for each Virtual Network to have its own SIDs.

e.g. The earlist description of the SID be allocated per flex-algorithm and related metric

 information was in draft-hegdeppsenak-isis-sr-flex-algo-00(2017.7.17) (now is draft-ietf-isis-sr-flex-algo) .

The earlist description of the SID be allocated per MT was in draft-filsfils-spring-segment-routing-04(2014.7.3)

(now is RFC8402 ), and draft-peng-lsr-network-slicing-00(2019.2.25) describe the

SID be allocated per AII(alias alice).  For slice resources, https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-peng-teas-network-slicing-03

induced slice-id(AII) for slice resources management, and can differentiate them (e.g. L2 link or L3 interface,

section 7 ), and how to compute SR-BE or SR-TE path according to AII combined with other criteria.



Regards,

Ran



-----Original Message-----
From: spring <spring-bounces@ietf.org<mailto:spring-bounces@ietf.org>> On Behalf Of James Guichard
Sent: Wednesday, July 15, 2020 8:17 PM
To: spring@ietf.org<mailto:spring@ietf.org>
Cc: spring-chairs@ietf.org<mailto:spring-chairs@ietf.org>
Subject: [spring] WG Adoption Call for draft-dong-spring-sr-for-enhanced-vpn

Dear WG:



This email begins a 2 week WG adoption call for https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-dong-spring-sr-for-enhanced-vpn/ <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-dong-spring-sr-for-enhanced-vpn/>  ending Wednesday 29th July 2020.



Please speak up if you support or oppose adopting this document into the WG. Please also provide comments/reasons for that support (or lack thereof). Silence will not be considered consent.



Thanks!



Jim, Joel & Bruno








_______________________________________________
spring mailing list
spring@ietf.org<mailto:spring@ietf.org>