[spring] Re: draft-decraene-spring-sr-mpls-aggregation-segment-00
Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net> Thu, 06 March 2025 10:09 UTC
Return-Path: <robert@raszuk.net>
X-Original-To: spring@mail2.ietf.org
Delivered-To: spring@mail2.ietf.org
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail2.ietf.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7221D821889 for <spring@mail2.ietf.org>; Thu, 6 Mar 2025 02:09:57 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at ietf.org
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.099
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 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, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: mail2.ietf.org (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=raszuk.net
Received: from mail2.ietf.org ([166.84.6.31]) by localhost (mail2.ietf.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id eZuANrA9PsgN for <spring@mail2.ietf.org>; Thu, 6 Mar 2025 02:09:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-ed1-x533.google.com (mail-ed1-x533.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::533]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-256) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mail2.ietf.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BB7FA8217D7 for <spring@ietf.org>; Thu, 6 Mar 2025 02:09:44 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-ed1-x533.google.com with SMTP id 4fb4d7f45d1cf-5e52c1c3599so643892a12.2 for <spring@ietf.org>; Thu, 06 Mar 2025 02:09:44 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=raszuk.net; s=google; t=1741255784; x=1741860584; darn=ietf.org; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=RwDdhjZyeadJWed+gmESQsfTXbP6nXsnKlOQZleUa60=; b=aUlSd2RX16qu51wPjacP3ul/pazORV699bPQBGZw4SH1rk99Ie9D+LI0/kwGu2z9xz lNcTabUADPxUoJVhFvuHEh/waNHQb4T4sXpFgeiBPHbPn0WxtvkbrEg2z2tLxwwOdc7i ItVRpoSr6vQoSOXtyrowuRfI/SnP9OaKIT+GH+bIQPo86onS8uyOxjcB4oOGYFkeh9SZ oq+yPcImK+4DPHiCrCjIWVn0OY1bnbANkucGPOFLyUff5LAxiQfd9ybjCfHLuUKxsNtQ oY5ZQ2/2SPE0H99gC7NvaG1i9hxSsdu7DgSv2oOdbUXFAeAXACg3sxAKZe47GZnUnAJq d7Tg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1741255784; x=1741860584; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=RwDdhjZyeadJWed+gmESQsfTXbP6nXsnKlOQZleUa60=; b=Lcs5MhUFM0qBUGLWHFViJ0zZr3Z3Xa03GCvAz5lS29QAaGRy7MIJ4hqRR1zdYiEFTQ 6dsPxuDKUYsCl3e0kz42q8syIbghiRm+s12vz4grd9LRs5H/crcBD/Ul+OOHGswu3/Yq vZ7X48q99PaTaOXLvD/UtU6LAKG+tQhM5e2FUt4PKaGxz9oHCN6s9YbqPtE+ftnp7Kb/ 4wGxI6VHKraZn9eeVo9jUkavSbklOP9soFIXY2dg6YN4J8tuuxbIuCC038OFdx25iw7B lB9sktC96OfXWPKthqGdazCSTdowwFPfABTyKtkbF9qPXA5ajL1ozcohDYF9dTk/8L8F 2Xqw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yx/VSJiEqQABdFrbc22ntn8LXrBT+cOgHxKbx5USnlk4sID3fPG T4jxIE/DrE6E5wxO9hsHmS+JAqjRdqQ5ssjwcGNqD9AA1BBIA3lxRoV/5xcr941M5wkAyMiBMoY 3wjAsoA3Yl0ANzn0YmcF0HpiQsG6DF9llj9XN/IXg1jJKo1MkQGg=
X-Gm-Gg: ASbGncvYce4DBzeH5y3Ow4BYW08kQb4mYdwYOyVJ1eu4OyzTw0V2rBZRw9mBoEassCu Q8+JINFN3ERfVj2scziTV4aZrtHkQ9T5YhsBi6uVf6GGdkitSWMYg63UNj3nQcSxgZmo32c0NWp 28sa8QQK/dyD4P/91WKDl5JuWjllI=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IF+fJuTODiCPi0aZGSOocE5fNJL1hlfqhbbjPu1Fy+NkMX1whvfluw3wCxyx2SslEXNgtroiJ/mbRQIUftQqQo=
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6402:2711:b0:5e4:bea3:a74d with SMTP id 4fb4d7f45d1cf-5e59f4a4629mr6742374a12.30.1741255783523; Thu, 06 Mar 2025 02:09:43 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <174101865541.385055.1608035694530636197@dt-datatracker-5dd67b77bb-4k4zh> <PASP264MB5802A756DE8D95B7562F03CAF0C92@PASP264MB5802.FRAP264.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
In-Reply-To: <PASP264MB5802A756DE8D95B7562F03CAF0C92@PASP264MB5802.FRAP264.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
From: Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net>
Date: Thu, 06 Mar 2025 11:09:32 +0100
X-Gm-Features: AQ5f1JpkwfYzI99ac-9Cl1zJBQlTPkFYZdp1AY7UbvS3LD8_aWNpXVDq4Et8yfM
Message-ID: <CAOj+MMHjYahVpHfBGQCwX9ne1m0BOW3aLCBFZjVY0s6WTzx2Tw@mail.gmail.com>
To: bruno.decraene@orange.com
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000070d349062fa9b4c4"
Message-ID-Hash: UOLFTGBKDIJLAGYOTW6HLTVWYRCPL2JK
X-Message-ID-Hash: UOLFTGBKDIJLAGYOTW6HLTVWYRCPL2JK
X-MailFrom: robert@raszuk.net
X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; header-match-spring.ietf.org-0; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header
CC: SPRING WG <spring@ietf.org>, "draft-decraene-spring-sr-mpls-aggregation-segment@ietf.org" <draft-decraene-spring-sr-mpls-aggregation-segment@ietf.org>
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc6
Precedence: list
Subject: [spring] Re: draft-decraene-spring-sr-mpls-aggregation-segment-00
List-Id: "Source Packet Routing in NetworkinG (SPRING)" <spring.ietf.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spring/uJe__2w_Rhd2DcZo0gbbdBUCsXI>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/spring>
List-Help: <mailto:spring-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:spring-owner@ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:spring@ietf.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:spring-join@ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:spring-leave@ietf.org>
Hi, Question (previously it was more of an observation :). Draft says: If the same Aggregation segment is advertised by multiple nodes, it becomes an anycast segment. Absent specific provisions (e.g., context specific label) such anycast segment needs to advertise the same labels related parameters (first prefix, the absolute label associated with that first prefix) for all instances. Well - I think this is expressed way too weakly. Each area/level have at least two ABRs. So the proper procedure MUST be in place to assure that all such ABRs aggregate in the same way and allocate the same labels for the identical aggregates. Otherwise this will lead to a situation of different labels (including blocks) being advertised for the same aggregate prefix and then what do you do on ingress ? Pick first and risk no redundancy ? The crux of the matter here is how do you assure such strict symmetry ? Are we back at the world of manual configuration (analogy to static routing in large networks) ? Cheers, R. On Mon, Mar 3, 2025 at 9:32 PM <bruno.decraene@orange.com> wrote: > [obviously speaking as individual contributor] > > Hi all, > > We have just published a short draft. > It introduces an Aggregation Segment for Segment Routing with MPLS data > plane. > This can be used to aggregate IP prefixes along with their SR Prefix > Segments. Aggregation Segments enable aggregation of IP prefixes to be > performed at border routers to improve scalability of MPLS networks. > > We would appreciate your review and comments. > > Thanks, > > --Shraddha, Ketan, Kamran, Bruno > > -----Original Message----- > From: internet-drafts@ietf.org <internet-drafts@ietf.org> > Sent: Monday, March 3, 2025 5:18 PM > To: DECRAENE Bruno INNOV/NET <bruno.decraene@orange.com>; Kamran Raza < > skraza@cisco.com>; Ketan Talaulikar <ketant.ietf@gmail.com>; Shraddha > Hegde <shraddha@juniper.net>; Syed Raza <skraza@cisco.com> > Subject: New Version Notification for > draft-decraene-spring-sr-mpls-aggregation-segment-00.txt > > > A new version of Internet-Draft > draft-decraene-spring-sr-mpls-aggregation-segment-00.txt has been > successfully submitted by Bruno Decraene and posted to the IETF repository. > > Name: draft-decraene-spring-sr-mpls-aggregation-segment > Revision: 00 > Title: SR-MPLS Aggregation Segment > Date: 2025-03-03 > Group: Individual Submission > Pages: 9 > > > https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-decraene-spring-sr-mpls-aggregation-segment-00.html > > Abstract: > > One of the key features of IP that has helped IP Routing to scale is > aggregation of IP prefixes. This is made possible with longest-match > lookup in IP forwarding. Contrary to this, MPLS forwarding works on > exact match on MPLS labels. This poses a challenge in aggregation of > IP prefixes when the forwarding is based on the MPLS labels > associated with those IP prefixes. > > This document introduces an Aggregation Segment for Segment Routing > with MPLS data plane which can be used to aggregate IP prefixes along > with their SR Prefix Segments. Aggregation Segments enable > aggregation of IP prefixes to be performed at border routers to > improve scalability of MPLS networks. > > > > The IETF Secretariat > > > > ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________ > 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 > To unsubscribe send an email to spring-leave@ietf.org >
- [spring] draft-decraene-spring-sr-mpls-aggregatio… bruno.decraene
- [spring] Re: draft-decraene-spring-sr-mpls-aggreg… Nat Kao
- [spring] Re: draft-decraene-spring-sr-mpls-aggreg… bruno.decraene
- [spring] Re: draft-decraene-spring-sr-mpls-aggreg… Nat Kao
- [spring] Re: draft-decraene-spring-sr-mpls-aggreg… bruno.decraene
- [spring] Re: draft-decraene-spring-sr-mpls-aggreg… Nat Kao
- [spring] Re: draft-decraene-spring-sr-mpls-aggreg… bruno.decraene
- [spring] Re: draft-decraene-spring-sr-mpls-aggreg… Nat Kao
- [spring] Re: draft-decraene-spring-sr-mpls-aggreg… Robert Raszuk
- [spring] Re: draft-decraene-spring-sr-mpls-aggreg… Robert Raszuk
- [spring] Re: draft-decraene-spring-sr-mpls-aggreg… bruno.decraene
- [spring] Re: draft-decraene-spring-sr-mpls-aggreg… Robert Raszuk
- [spring] Re: draft-decraene-spring-sr-mpls-aggreg… bruno.decraene
- [spring] Re: draft-decraene-spring-sr-mpls-aggreg… Robert Raszuk
- [spring] Re: draft-decraene-spring-sr-mpls-aggreg… bruno.decraene