Re: [spring] WG Adoption call - draft-srcompdt-spring-compression-requirement - draft-srcompdt-spring-compression-analysis
Dhruv Dhody <dhruv.ietf@gmail.com> Mon, 20 September 2021 16:56 UTC
Return-Path: <dhruv.ietf@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 D4ACE3A08E7 for <spring@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 20 Sep 2021 09:56:57 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.087
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.087 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, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_KAM_HTML_FONT_INVALID=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] 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 uF_74mC1LurU for <spring@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 20 Sep 2021 09:56:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-il1-x12d.google.com (mail-il1-x12d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::12d]) (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 41E133A08E2 for <spring@ietf.org>; Mon, 20 Sep 2021 09:56:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-il1-x12d.google.com with SMTP id a20so19427975ilq.7 for <spring@ietf.org>; Mon, 20 Sep 2021 09:56:52 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=8UOWA8VVbPZoziETeNly8MClTUu146Hw2Fiw9bx+GT0=; b=lKdIArwTePp1OViJgQoU3PR8B4LFH5BMg/VkFHFWFSHi4h5vx5/KSo3Ued0RIdfmS9 iXLZFQ7Y1MtOgqZ1x2uYgFOFWQ501EdxXABrZV90GN6GMtrbE78u7NrX4y6M+MUn450K W5+3vv168haaxqvekCz8v7mE6AVWEvLAtSO+PiGgU45VTBZoLBxzdxKqT3MKLLnUr6yt hQcGpskQjhv9iy7Abgrv28oiQhjbxOKLDasFCvV75/EYc3+gn7fzVx7m27cuQW8GQ6lD clUq0SN6CCyXz4eN2S+Z16uuhLYIzJup1mAH98yVsjgiQbB2bxvn10ne9EwCwAICDrZN n4Bw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=8UOWA8VVbPZoziETeNly8MClTUu146Hw2Fiw9bx+GT0=; b=wZEx+lveeX506k0YBhK4jwVlB8SHYZfr538v8OKNrHBbxIAkDnhgqDchT5ZtQrwr1v gRQfjJ0jdcgbIdz50bNgsoSI2pTZWO+Hu6JgBJLXqL1t+Tb3OfloGiyA6VdgjfK9+EoM AxC0KKF8b8AXDVaACA4OAtUrBYrBREV1CrzAI/Z3h7pshJ2y/no2120R22CUCwmO0UJR zOy037SyWmrEFNXf+UUUz6qvhaIdjmVz9bP9nB+OldnD52trGuxwOjLILkhdPLYGc5W7 rofQS3A7Te9iCkX51WmPUd4CVQ0naGRWGGjC+3eMLZbDrTVUyWxxL7u6A2d1h9uKH0bm tWew==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533JT5UVOlWpT+B0rrvZelLLLmUd3K/MgPjUnLKM7BslF2QcWqJN td0l8pD4V7PWOWpiWQ8By6ENr5pVjfxBLy94un7Dr/bYimM=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzDcte0ElblCZSUg/DLiHp18+gYNIWpN6rfhhmIfEum6/+TAHuuphbHa9iZsDywDk7glMJs98atF9LMvmEyDa0=
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6e02:1a0d:: with SMTP id s13mr17528435ild.240.1632157010924; Mon, 20 Sep 2021 09:56:50 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <15436_1631020356_61376544_15436_364_1_53C29892C857584299CBF5D05346208A4CE99E43@OPEXCAUBM43.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup>
In-Reply-To: <15436_1631020356_61376544_15436_364_1_53C29892C857584299CBF5D05346208A4CE99E43@OPEXCAUBM43.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup>
From: Dhruv Dhody <dhruv.ietf@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2021 22:26:08 +0530
Message-ID: <CAB75xn7RFyBm7Z_Lhc7=fm8yFH+_Ha_E2YYVLUUa-evxaz=zgQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: bruno.decraene@orange.com
Cc: "spring@ietf.org" <spring@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000da9b0205cc702a8e"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spring/lTI3zQLQ47OxvuHZCMRw9Wqv9P4>
Subject: Re: [spring] WG Adoption call - draft-srcompdt-spring-compression-requirement - draft-srcompdt-spring-compression-analysis
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: Mon, 20 Sep 2021 16:56:58 -0000
Hi, I support the adoption of both documents. Thanks for all the effort put in by everyone involved. Few minor comments - *draft-srcompdt-spring-compression-requirement-07* In section 1 It is a goal of the design team to identify solutions to… It is also a goal of the design team to consider proposals… The design team will produce a separate document… Should we still need to mention the design team in the introduction? If some history needs to be maintained, let's put that in the appendix! – In Section 4.2.3 Description: The compression proposal MUST be able to represent SR paths that contain up to 16 segments. Rationale: Strict TE paths require SID list lengths proportional to the diameter of the SR domain. It would be nice to include why the number “16” in the rationale. – We should be explicit that the metric value is “yes” or “no”. This is explicit for some metric (4.1. SRv6 Based) but not for other (4.2.2. Heterogeneous SID lists). – The term “services per node” is not clear to me. Could you add some more text for clarity? – What is the plan for Appendix A? – Nits Expand on first use - SRv6 (currently expanded later) - SID - SPRING - TI-LFA - GUA – In Section 1 The design team will produce a separate document to analyze the proposals. Add reference to draft-srcompdt-spring-compression-analysis – This document is a draft; additional requirements are under review, additional requirements will be added, and current requirements may change. Do we need this? We have the boilerplate for the I-D that highlights it is a “work in progress”! – In Section 3.1.2 D.PRS(segment list): number of headers parsed during processing of the segment list, starting from and including the IPv6 header. “number of extension headers parsed…” and “…including the IPv6 base header” - would be more appropriate phrasing right? – In Section 4.1 Suggest to change U.RFC8402 and U.RFC8754 to U.SR <http://u.sr/> (or U.SRArch) and U.SRH respectively; this would match the descriptive names for other metrics in this section. – In Section 5.1 State that the metric is “yes” when all the conditions are satisfied? – *draft-srcompdt-spring-compression-analysis-02* – Section 3.1 Table 9 mentions updates that need to be made along with Yes. The corresponding requirement does not talk about updates. Should it as you mention it in the conclusion! – Some sections such as 3.4.1, 4.1, 5.1, 5.2, provide no analysis just a conclusion. In some of these, some analysis would be nice or perhaps a clear reference with section number to other documents. – Should section 6 also include the final conclusion after going through each of the requirements? – *Nits* Expand on first use - SRv6 (currently expanded later) - SID - CSID - CRH - TPF - VSID - UIDSR - CFIB - XPS – In Figure 1, you have [M1_0],[C_0], & [M2_0] but the text says 1 is the starting number - o M1_1..M1_i are routers in Metro 1 o C_1..C_j are routers in Core o M2_1..M2_k are routers in Metro 2 – Thanks! Dhruv On Tue, Sep 7, 2021 at 6:43 PM <bruno.decraene@orange.com> wrote: > Dear WG, > > > > > > The Design Team has produced two documents: > > - A requirement document: draft-srcompdt-spring-compression-requirement > > - A solution analysis document: draft-srcompdt-spring-compression-analysis > > > > Both have been presented to the WG and triggered some discussions but are > still individual documents. > > We believe it's now time for the WG to consider taking ownership of those > two documents. > > Note that, especially for those two documents, WG adoption does not > necessarily mean RFC publication in particular if it turns out that the > benefit of long term archive would not justify the WG and IESG effort to > finalize those two documents. > > > > > > This message starts a 2 week WG adoption call, ending September 20th > 2021, for: > > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-srcompdt-spring-compression-requirement > > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-srcompdt-spring-compression-analysis > > > > > > After review of the document(s) please indicate support (or not) for WG > adoption of the document(s) to the mailing list. > > Please also provide comments/reasons for your support (or lack thereof) as > this is a stronger way to indicate your (non) support as this is not a vote. > > > > If you are willing to work on the document(s), please state this > explicitly. This gives the chairs an indication of the energy level of > people in the working group willing to work on the document. > > > > Thanks! > > > > Jim, Bruno & Joel > > > > _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ > > Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc > pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler > a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration, > Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci. > > This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law; > they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation. > If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments. > As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified. > Thank you. > > _______________________________________________ > spring mailing list > spring@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring >
- [spring] WG Adoption call - draft-srcompdt-spring… bruno.decraene
- Re: [spring] WG Adoption call - draft-srcompdt-sp… Chengli (Cheng Li)
- Re: [spring] WG Adoption call - draft-srcompdt-sp… Xiejingrong (Jingrong)
- Re: [spring] WG Adoption call - draft-srcompdt-sp… Xiejingrong (Jingrong)
- Re: [spring] WG Adoption call - draft-srcompdt-sp… Henderickx, Wim (Nokia - BE/Antwerp)
- Re: [spring] WG Adoption call - draft-srcompdt-sp… Dirk Steinberg
- Re: [spring] WG Adoption call - draft-srcompdt-sp… Bocci, Matthew (Nokia - GB)
- Re: [spring] WG Adoption call - draft-srcompdt-sp… Rabadan, Jorge (Nokia - US/Mountain View)
- Re: [spring] WG Adoption call - draft-srcompdt-sp… Gyan Mishra
- Re: [spring] WG Adoption call - draft-srcompdt-sp… Gyan Mishra
- Re: [spring] WG Adoption call - draft-srcompdt-sp… Ron Bonica
- Re: [spring] WG Adoption call - draft-srcompdt-sp… Tony Li
- Re: [spring] WG Adoption call - draft-srcompdt-sp… Greg Mirsky
- Re: [spring] WG Adoption call - draft-srcompdt-sp… Robert Raszuk
- Re: [spring] WG Adoption call - draft-srcompdt-sp… Linda Dunbar
- Re: [spring] WG Adoption call - draft-srcompdt-sp… Huaimo Chen
- Re: [spring] WG Adoption call - draft-srcompdt-sp… Zhuangshunwan
- Re: [spring] WG Adoption call - draft-srcompdt-sp… zhen han
- Re: [spring] WG Adoption call - draft-srcompdt-sp… Kentaro Ebisawa
- Re: [spring] WG Adoption call - draft-srcompdt-sp… Eduard Metz
- Re: [spring] WG Adoption call - draft-srcompdt-sp… bruno.decraene
- Re: [spring] WG Adoption call - draft-srcompdt-sp… Voyer, Daniel
- Re: [spring] WG Adoption call - draft-srcompdt-sp… Ron Bonica
- Re: [spring] WG Adoption call - draft-srcompdt-sp… peng.shaofu
- Re: [spring] WG Adoption call - draft-srcompdt-sp… Lihao
- [spring] 答复: WG Adoption call - draft-srcompdt-sp… Huzhibo
- Re: [spring] WG Adoption call - draft-srcompdt-sp… Ketan Talaulikar (ketant)
- Re: [spring] WG Adoption call - draft-srcompdt-sp… Gaurav Dawra
- Re: [spring] WG Adoption call - draft-srcompdt-sp… Qiuyuanxiang
- Re: [spring] WG Adoption call - draft-srcompdt-sp… li_zhenqiang@hotmail.com
- Re: [spring] WG Adoption call - draft-srcompdt-sp… Lizhenbin
- Re: [spring] WG Adoption call - draft-srcompdt-sp… Gengxuesong (Geng Xuesong)
- Re: [spring] WG Adoption call - draft-srcompdt-sp… Bernier, Daniel
- [spring] 回复: WG Adoption call - draft-srcompdt-sp… 苏远超(以泰)
- Re: [spring] WG Adoption call - draft-srcompdt-sp… linchangwang
- Re: [spring] WG Adoption call - draft-srcompdt-sp… Yangfan(Fan,IP Standards)
- Re: [spring] WG Adoption call - draft-srcompdt-sp… Yingzhen Qu
- Re: [spring] WG Adoption call - draft-srcompdt-sp… Tetsuya Murakami
- Re: [spring] WG Adoption call - draft-srcompdt-sp… Dongjie (Jimmy)
- Re: [spring] WG Adoption call - draft-srcompdt-sp… Dhruv Dhody
- Re: [spring] WG Adoption call - draft-srcompdt-sp… Satoru Matsushima
- Re: [spring] WG Adoption call - draft-srcompdt-sp… Ron Bonica
- Re: [spring] WG Adoption call - draft-srcompdt-sp… Ron Bonica
- Re: [spring] WG Adoption call - draft-srcompdt-sp… Ron Bonica
- Re: [spring] WG Adoption call - draft-srcompdt-sp… Dhruv Dhody
- Re: [spring] WG Adoption call - draft-srcompdt-sp… bruno.decraene
- Re: [spring] WG Adoption call - draft-srcompdt-sp… Chengli (Cheng Li)
- Re: [spring] WG Adoption call - draft-srcompdt-sp… zhaofeng@caict.ac.cn
- Re: [spring] WG Adoption call - draft-srcompdt-sp… TIAN