Re: [Srcomp] Comments on REQ-8-17-FWD-EFFICIENCY

"Darren Dukes (ddukes)" <ddukes@cisco.com> Mon, 28 September 2020 06:37 UTC

Return-Path: <ddukes@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: srcomp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: srcomp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6509D3A0E80 for <srcomp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 27 Sep 2020 23:37:26 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -11.897
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-11.897 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_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.com header.b=N6bK+OX8; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.onmicrosoft.com header.b=Ek4v5na+
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 9WEBsvTE3foe for <srcomp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 27 Sep 2020 23:37:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rcdn-iport-6.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-6.cisco.com [173.37.86.77]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 738593A0E7E for <srcomp@ietf.org>; Sun, 27 Sep 2020 23:37:24 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=9418; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1601275044; x=1602484644; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:references:in-reply-to: mime-version; bh=j8shRtnv5vJbP37ikNrt0rlkwDcsJ82VFCdgH1uiWns=; b=N6bK+OX80fCEef3cNXauGvvtIADlUkxirNNlLTJQCtOuU15ycurXCVV9 8/Jg93SzcE4xd+h4cDnyW0Eoe01j8AENNiFjINs8algKenS+xI71AosSZ Os+N45SLfL8Ze1cofWVD7hC1Do3j0atUbXacwtMDW1rE7CI9T8RIzg0lA c=;
IronPort-PHdr: 9a23:+HIleRBUnYsw3WtPfHfCUyQJPHJ1sqjoPgMT9pssgq5PdaLm5Zn5IUjD/qw30A3FWIzB4LRFhvbY9af6Vj9I7ZWAtSUEd5pBH18AhN4NlgMtSMiCFQXgLfHsYiB7eaYKVFJs83yhd0QAHsH4ag7ep3So5ngTFwnxcw1vKbe9Fovblc/i0ee09tXaaBlJgzzoZ7R0IV22oAzdu9NQj5FlL/M6ywDCpT1DfOEFyA==
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0CjCAD9g3Ff/5BdJa1fgQmBT4EjAS5RB4FJLywKh3kDjX2UCIRuglMDVQsBAQENAQEtAgQBAYRLAoIwAiU3Bg4CAwEBCwEBBQEBAQIBBgRthVwMhXIBAQEBAxIuAQE4DwIBCBEEAQEvMh0IAQEEARIIEweFA00DLgGpOAKBOYhhdIE0gwEBAQWFMRiCEAmBOIJyijwbgUE/gVSCTT6CXASBPyCDSIItkEeJcp0MCoJnmnmhE5MJoAwCBAIEBQIOAQEFgWokgVdwFTuCaVAXAg2SEIpWdAI1AgYKAQEDCXyNQAGBEAEB
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.77,312,1596499200"; d="scan'208,217";a="832916120"
Received: from rcdn-core-8.cisco.com ([173.37.93.144]) by rcdn-iport-6.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA; 28 Sep 2020 06:36:54 +0000
Received: from XCH-RCD-002.cisco.com (xch-rcd-002.cisco.com [173.37.102.12]) by rcdn-core-8.cisco.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id 08S6aslx004963 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Mon, 28 Sep 2020 06:36:54 GMT
Received: from xhs-aln-002.cisco.com (173.37.135.119) by XCH-RCD-002.cisco.com (173.37.102.12) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1497.2; Mon, 28 Sep 2020 01:36:53 -0500
Received: from xhs-rtp-003.cisco.com (64.101.210.230) by xhs-aln-002.cisco.com (173.37.135.119) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1497.2; Mon, 28 Sep 2020 01:36:53 -0500
Received: from NAM11-BN8-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (64.101.32.56) by xhs-rtp-003.cisco.com (64.101.210.230) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1497.2 via Frontend Transport; Mon, 28 Sep 2020 02:36:53 -0400
ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=flDpaJKdnD5tDOiqfT+HNR0Trj+t480saK5xRJ1n/rPooEOkjOeR3mvkD+kATzB2T0z5x/vjyqODBz/dEjfUSNQeYvnmARyOK5MFJ7XG8MtX38t7ePGR7vHLC8eTv8DPBx1pmeqN/gx54BG0DjBEQ79lWCILyMSf3faQqhPiK1DRP6YRMmSJD6RTnESSFjkipYgXhQKcY5f24vlqG0TE6rFDMTHT2zne3ojYC2PxJNyIF/RyURqpMXpblpwtoyzkrzo8/zcLoacUlV5QSn72hcfMQk9UZW7ZdeYyUj9Ix1S2mLPqlujUWtfZlHvjGSQCMTw/WHInQnBOL0g/6fHJRw==
ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=1C+snCWqWLsu7Ev8EUMnj432eDkw0BgOga/hz4cWgvk=; b=BStyJJyqYKZGIURgNmgQwLm59KwNZPDNvc7Xod4kAx8m3IrRLk+yLz1uXauQ75XHB8w2SDjX2NpwrJrED3YcCWHuZgVgXPP/3ZZUvaP/0m36Dg6LbNFwd6iKs9WvwDgvuM2hKh0QP9DsvOm2B8V43dXsGkQTApKROKjZn5PJnNuzT8yMhYgE1lr7F0PFMH5dFjS1RyJ0zEh23JLLJOtlhqamYsNAtlYJSgv0DUMPKaJz3hrG7FCrXYsZF6EaZDI09Mka1G4QVS9Fch2R0SjpT1dOWWVWh9LiJCVyDRD/ZWgBeBm0Z+HORRS4XQTiVAitaKkiJSUPh9Sg2EjiLYZknA==
ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=cisco.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=cisco.com; dkim=pass header.d=cisco.com; arc=none
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cisco.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector2-cisco-onmicrosoft-com; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=1C+snCWqWLsu7Ev8EUMnj432eDkw0BgOga/hz4cWgvk=; b=Ek4v5na+7RpNwm55DNA5U7Rk/gFQDzweCwTvSRTkm9Cceko+B4mUUMt6O9eYv1ccjF8gE7Hghhi86Gv20K3bzek2cMt/LvZc2h456z8sPoL2OB7Fxm6oXz7h4twEjtTX3AunEGx6XVldqBFckCgD6e1nc+X50k9nrWtcWhWZN7g=
Received: from BN6PR11MB4081.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (10.255.128.166) by BN6PR11MB4051.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (10.255.128.225) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.3412.29; Mon, 28 Sep 2020 06:36:52 +0000
Received: from BN6PR11MB4081.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::d5ad:3254:1bd7:c177]) by BN6PR11MB4081.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::d5ad:3254:1bd7:c177%7]) with mapi id 15.20.3412.029; Mon, 28 Sep 2020 06:36:51 +0000
From: "Darren Dukes (ddukes)" <ddukes@cisco.com>
To: Ron Bonica <rbonica=40juniper.net@dmarc.ietf.org>, srcomp <srcomp@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: Comments on REQ-8-17-FWD-EFFICIENCY
Thread-Index: AdaR1qZKdMwN7UB9Td2I1OzCoQF1fwDhdvh8
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2020 06:36:51 +0000
Message-ID: <BN6PR11MB4081FE1AEEFEBA1198D23473C8350@BN6PR11MB4081.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
References: <DM6PR05MB634814AA4485E2770C54E867AE380@DM6PR05MB6348.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
In-Reply-To: <DM6PR05MB634814AA4485E2770C54E867AE380@DM6PR05MB6348.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
msip_labels: MSIP_Label_0633b888-ae0d-4341-a75f-06e04137d755_Enabled=true; MSIP_Label_0633b888-ae0d-4341-a75f-06e04137d755_SetDate=2020-09-23T19:06:01Z; MSIP_Label_0633b888-ae0d-4341-a75f-06e04137d755_Method=Standard; MSIP_Label_0633b888-ae0d-4341-a75f-06e04137d755_Name=0633b888-ae0d-4341-a75f-06e04137d755; MSIP_Label_0633b888-ae0d-4341-a75f-06e04137d755_SiteId=bea78b3c-4cdb-4130-854a-1d193232e5f4; MSIP_Label_0633b888-ae0d-4341-a75f-06e04137d755_ActionId=351f2c95-a04a-41ee-9337-1fef359b1ed3; MSIP_Label_0633b888-ae0d-4341-a75f-06e04137d755_ContentBits=2;
authentication-results: dmarc.ietf.org; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;dmarc.ietf.org; dmarc=none action=none header.from=cisco.com;
x-originating-ip: [198.84.207.201]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 1cd2d3cb-ff38-4495-0a31-08d86378e270
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: BN6PR11MB4051:
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <BN6PR11MB40513AF2A235C5AA2ECEA504C8350@BN6PR11MB4051.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:9508;
x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0;
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: DCu5NRTpUMbRxr2UXgo8r5aqNh2VBMZO9N4H0HHhLKeW7lDeetmubko1EL3q9nvnl+K5k1kvVnPPoU1DyRXi+fQp+p0XGKLA4NbHVQscd0y/gNcgYcu1+aMSYZsNkT67pCnlri+ihee7tt8UmHSWHNWBCZH+H19VH3in4oicmVbhG1MdhaZGtS8fn9gF8ookMFtkUa/tRcyqqvoBP1kufCc4fwk4KS2rQgfJLvBc9dpGRs8jVapy/AigenY/5qFsl7gyMn/ly1Q0R9Pa9vQ0zZU4DV/NYJp93OD4hTp2pcRtc1iVCIWGW4UfJytTa258vaUfCgUrqvNGWRZ8+lItyoIXQ+cImpDl0c6Q+W6j6RDmk2ZCVKTFEwbFmOWBmT8m
x-forefront-antispam-report: CIP:255.255.255.255; CTRY:; LANG:en; SCL:1; SRV:; IPV:NLI; SFV:NSPM; H:BN6PR11MB4081.namprd11.prod.outlook.com; PTR:; CAT:NONE; SFS:(136003)(39860400002)(396003)(376002)(366004)(346002)(6506007)(110136005)(76116006)(66556008)(316002)(52536014)(64756008)(8676002)(66476007)(66946007)(33656002)(91956017)(55016002)(19627235002)(186003)(26005)(53546011)(9686003)(7696005)(5660300002)(71200400001)(2906002)(66446008)(8936002)(86362001)(478600001)(19627405001); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101;
x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata: 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
x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_BN6PR11MB4081FE1AEEFEBA1198D23473C8350BN6PR11MB4081namp_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthAs: Internal
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthSource: BN6PR11MB4081.namprd11.prod.outlook.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 1cd2d3cb-ff38-4495-0a31-08d86378e270
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 28 Sep 2020 06:36:51.7554 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 5ae1af62-9505-4097-a69a-c1553ef7840e
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: 9MikDprK+8kEV783F95skEdfreiFDhIEU3t8lSAsrX2yhG53aeC3hozhBf2hPLfRMKN0wihH0UphJmDj5dBbOA==
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BN6PR11MB4051
X-OriginatorOrg: cisco.com
X-Outbound-SMTP-Client: 173.37.102.12, xch-rcd-002.cisco.com
X-Outbound-Node: rcdn-core-8.cisco.com
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/srcomp/ENA7SgFcIXRognmHJK8_7sRJcbU>
Subject: Re: [Srcomp] Comments on REQ-8-17-FWD-EFFICIENCY
X-BeenThere: srcomp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: <srcomp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/srcomp>, <mailto:srcomp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/srcomp/>
List-Post: <mailto:srcomp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:srcomp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/srcomp>, <mailto:srcomp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2020 06:37:26 -0000

Hi Ron, the metrics in this requirement are indeed valid, as lookups and header parsing can directly translate to impacts on pps, power, heat, cost.  These are things that operators tell me they care about and that we should analyze.

Let's change the rationale to reflect this.

Rationale: Performing multiple lookups per packet can impede the forwarding rate and functionality of many ASICS.
Parsing multiple headers per packet to perform those lookups can impede the forwarding rate and functionality of many ASICs.
These may translate to reduced pps or increased costs for operators.

During the analysis of each proposal, it can be determined just how many lookups would be required and their type, but this is analysis work for the analysis phase of this team's output.

Darren
________________________________
From: Srcomp <srcomp-bounces@ietf.org> on behalf of Ron Bonica <rbonica=40juniper.net@dmarc.ietf.org>
Sent: Wednesday, September 23, 2020 3:06 PM
To: srcomp <srcomp@ietf.org>
Subject: [Srcomp] Comments on REQ-8-17-FWD-EFFICIENCY


Folks,



The metrics associate with REQ-8-17-FWD-EFFICIENCY are invalid. Currently, the metrics are:



  *   D.PRS(segment list): worst-case number of headers parsed during processing of the segment list.
  *   D.LKU(segment list): worst-case number of FIB lookups during processing of the segment list.



D.PRS assumes that parsing a second extension header is expensive on all ASICs. While it may be expensive on some ASIC’s it is extremely inexpensive on others. Retaining this metric doesn’t optimize the solution for operators. It merely creates an advantage for the ASIC that can’t parse additional extension headers efficiently.



D.LKU assumes that it is possible to determine how many lookups a particular compression mechanism requires. It ignores the fact that the FIB can be optimized to reduce the number of lookups. Furthermore, it fails to make a distinction between longest match lookups and index lookups.



Finally, this requirement should be stated from the network operators perspective, not the ASIC developer’s. The network operator doesn’t care how many headers were parsed or how many lookups were execute. It cares about:



  *   How many packet per second the ASIC can process
  *   How much power the ASIC consumes
  *   How much heat the ASIC generates
  *   How much the ASIC costs



Unless we can develop better metric for this requirement, we should drop it.



                                                                                           Ron








Juniper Business Use Only