Re: [spring] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-spring-segment-routing-msdc-02

Anoop Ghanwani <anoop@alumni.duke.edu> Wed, 08 March 2017 20:59 UTC

Return-Path: <ghanwani@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 81A31129435 for <spring@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 8 Mar 2017 12:59:14 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.369
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.369 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.229, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-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 5rykm9NWdADH for <spring@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 8 Mar 2017 12:59:13 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-qk0-x22d.google.com (mail-qk0-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c09::22d]) (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 38A23129426 for <spring@ietf.org>; Wed, 8 Mar 2017 12:59:13 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-qk0-x22d.google.com with SMTP id p64so87657101qke.1 for <spring@ietf.org>; Wed, 08 Mar 2017 12:59:13 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc; bh=sE4wNdDpegsC8TyuOJC3KpQ+GMdSeVjKBul351pdYbc=; b=sQwoloCllv8H0jNCwivJzX+IzLWWEXvh8aIwd+SyXAErkcuYX/J0kDyN8S5XB7O1Cd JRmLJbVdayDbfyJKdHXhwV3OAprl7bAuQdF1dyU/4ylGPj0A+KeojDwL6ib7KmeOZwsg zleBaKLeLFYLp1H5GddwqnfQX1YVbkIzqAewdVS8Zys47zDrdheNWSfo6x4cNuGEfOHT QRHEXYbf25ujqWBef69jPTOdY2Y5JKIDQLs2hHGKITh8kfcCiqdB/PSzGCZg5VotX5Va 8Z+R+l4adhaD7uYxC7n6hfsiyWEM6X3z+BbHLmZfJHDw6lguRx/NPUSPRDgkyff2y46K xqzA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=sE4wNdDpegsC8TyuOJC3KpQ+GMdSeVjKBul351pdYbc=; b=gp9Xjxs4D9dh1hFMfz64bSHPq70KtYbasA5DxDiQHHshYfnD69WLqiHMxwGijK+J2n UG9kchQSqrYF1oEdP/Tf/LHpFYHsfMuNyUkbA9xKwjLTblN5uiijMazYOFCLOfuqLvLO GGBm3SP91q7aLiQTP55vmTil/Gm8Pr5vehPHoDQ0U1YHd5iQaKmVPq1jeDaRmHE3bmC7 Vux9jJ4KgRaukCF4AjQwBOR+sEmdnuxGyTuQegamWP9LqTxehbUeXW83eP9CY5rvU/OP Wl8orrxkwN9I9Trm01mEYCm3yVLJ4aOUrZzo1TuwOK0AD6hJLRCP2UQGMUP9JPxhu6S7 77qQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AMke39lU0WQeDHF3j+VC7DDniFnAy4DBVStNy/+2/Na6JfQSf59yOfoqZRr9JPhmGOVK4PZdor7FfYT+4WOgnA==
X-Received: by 10.200.39.97 with SMTP id h30mr10010687qth.18.1489006752296; Wed, 08 Mar 2017 12:59:12 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: ghanwani@gmail.com
Received: by 10.200.4.2 with HTTP; Wed, 8 Mar 2017 12:59:11 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <CA+-tSzzyf8mcerdHNeP1_U97+eJ2fFS-Q9SHukLr7LwmP0opVg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <27991_1487670653_58AC0D7D_27991_2292_1_53C29892C857584299CBF5D05346208A1ED7122E@OPEXCLILM21.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup> <18673_1487691447_58AC5EB7_18673_4491_1_53C29892C857584299CBF5D05346208A1ED71F65@OPEXCLILM21.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup> <A19DD756-D858-4F86-BF76-F6AC94C0D211@cisco.com> <CA+-tSzwFRuFyaB+UVZXRCP5Db2H8Fr7vftjwz_yn2b=yZqiF7Q@mail.gmail.com> <5B45FE6C-C091-4FBA-A1CD-DA809D98235A@cisco.com> <CA+-tSzzpxmsoX3c-TB8Fqh3_1QLVpdaPhxVZO6A2Y5VssRyD3w@mail.gmail.com> <20535FDB-CE80-48D8-8616-F1F78E1E45F4@cisco.com> <CA+-tSzzDSU6vR-mAVxVMVMRL8sUOrqoa8_c7z2GrH7LmZxJYGg@mail.gmail.com> <F896D1A1-9694-484F-AA99-6CDB422A2A18@cisco.com> <CA+-tSzzyf8mcerdHNeP1_U97+eJ2fFS-Q9SHukLr7LwmP0opVg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Anoop Ghanwani <anoop@alumni.duke.edu>
Date: Wed, 08 Mar 2017 12:59:11 -0800
X-Google-Sender-Auth: dMzyWKr0f42Y1p4tQ8e-ujAQUJo
Message-ID: <CA+-tSzyzGeNKJXXL5LK9qQg-1xM1ZYonjokY7X6cZ3rJp+Tb8w@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Stefano Previdi (sprevidi)" <sprevidi@cisco.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a1140426889fa5f054a3e660a"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spring/p-PqkCLPb731NVIYypJjUmwn0n8>
Cc: "bruno.decraene@orange.com" <bruno.decraene@orange.com>, "spring@ietf.org" <spring@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [spring] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-spring-segment-routing-msdc-02
X-BeenThere: spring@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Stacked Tunnels for Source Routing \(STATUS\)." <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, 08 Mar 2017 20:59:14 -0000

Hi Stefano,

Just noticed, pg 7 still says 1600x, when I think it should say (16000 + x).

Anoop

On Fri, Mar 3, 2017 at 12:25 PM, Anoop Ghanwani <anoop@alumni.duke.edu>
wrote:

>
>
> On Fri, Mar 3, 2017 at 6:38 AM, Stefano Previdi (sprevidi) <
> sprevidi@cisco.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> > On Mar 1, 2017, at 7:27 PM, Anoop Ghanwani <anoop@alumni.duke.edu>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > What I am asking for is clarification on how different Tier-3 nodes
>> might share the same AS number.
>>
>>
>> “share” is the wrong term and we agreed to change it.
>>
>> Btw, RFC7938 section 5.2.2. "Private Use ASNs” says:
>>
>>
>>    The original range of Private Use ASNs [RFC6996] limited operators to
>>    1023 unique ASNs.  Since it is quite likely that the number of
>>    network devices may exceed this number, a workaround is required.
>>    One approach is to re-use the ASNs assigned to the Tier 3 devices
>>    across different clusters.  For example, Private Use ASNs 65001,
>>    65002 ... 65032 could be used within every individual cluster and
>>    assigned to Tier 3 devices.
>>
>> By “share” we intended to “use” the same number in different clusters.
>>
>
> Thanks.  That address all the comments I had.
>
> Anoop
>