[trill] TRILL OAM Requirements: Third party debugging
Thomas Narten <narten@us.ibm.com> Thu, 26 April 2012 18:55 UTC
Return-Path: <narten@us.ibm.com>
X-Original-To: trill@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: trill@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6907E21E816D for <trill@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 26 Apr 2012 11:55:16 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -110.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-110.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6-8oAfrdpJyt for <trill@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 26 Apr 2012 11:55:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from e35.co.us.ibm.com (e35.co.us.ibm.com [32.97.110.153]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B1DAB21E8160 for <trill@ietf.org>; Thu, 26 Apr 2012 11:55:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from /spool/local by e35.co.us.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for <trill@ietf.org> from <narten@us.ibm.com>; Thu, 26 Apr 2012 12:55:15 -0600
Received: from d03dlp02.boulder.ibm.com (9.17.202.178) by e35.co.us.ibm.com (192.168.1.135) with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted; Thu, 26 Apr 2012 12:55:13 -0600
Received: from d03relay01.boulder.ibm.com (d03relay01.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.226]) by d03dlp02.boulder.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C1D5D3E4004E for <trill@ietf.org>; Thu, 26 Apr 2012 12:55:11 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from d03av02.boulder.ibm.com (d03av02.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.168]) by d03relay01.boulder.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id q3QIt5NG151450 for <trill@ietf.org>; Thu, 26 Apr 2012 12:55:06 -0600
Received: from d03av02.boulder.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d03av02.boulder.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.13.1/NCO v10.0 AVout) with ESMTP id q3QIt1Po015442 for <trill@ietf.org>; Thu, 26 Apr 2012 12:55:01 -0600
Received: from cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com ([9.80.5.204]) by d03av02.boulder.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.13.1/NCO v10.0 AVin) with ESMTP id q3QIt0Z3015124 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for <trill@ietf.org>; Thu, 26 Apr 2012 12:55:01 -0600
Received: from cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com (8.14.5/8.12.5) with ESMTP id q3QIsxDS019263 for <trill@ietf.org>; Thu, 26 Apr 2012 14:54:59 -0400
Message-Id: <201204261854.q3QIsxDS019263@cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com>
To: trill@ietf.org
Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2012 14:54:58 -0400
From: Thomas Narten <narten@us.ibm.com>
X-Content-Scanned: Fidelis XPS MAILER
x-cbid: 12042618-6148-0000-0000-00000559775E
Subject: [trill] TRILL OAM Requirements: Third party debugging
X-BeenThere: trill@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Developing a hybrid router/bridge." <trill.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/trill>, <mailto:trill-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/trill>
List-Post: <mailto:trill@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:trill-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/trill>, <mailto:trill-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2012 18:55:16 -0000
I may just be misreading intent, but to be sure, I'd like to clarify the following point. I had assumed that things like connectivity testing, tracing, etc. would need to be supported from one RB to another. That is, if I was on RB1, I could do a connectivity check to any other RB. Or trace a path. However, any sort of test involving connectivity from RB1 would need to be *initiated* from RB1. There is some wording in draft-tissa-trill-oam-req-00.txt that could be interpreted as it being a requirement that one should be able to initiate an operation between RB1 and RB2 from some arbitrary third RB. Is that the case? E.g.,: > OAM MUST have the ability to verify an RBridge RB1 is connected to a > specific RBridge RB2. I would assume that the verifying that RB1 can reach RB2 is a requirement "for RB1". that is, if I am logged into RB1, I can initiate such a check to any destination I want. But the above definition would also include being able to ask that question from *any* RB. Is that the intention? > An RBridge SHOULD have the ability to verify the above connectivity > tests on sections. As an example, assume RB1 is connected to RB5 via > RB2, RB3 and RB4. An operator SHOULD be able to verify the RB1 to > RB5 connectivity on the section from RB3 to RB5. The difference is > that the ingress and egress TRILL nicknames in this case are RB1 and > RB5 as opposed to RB3 and RB5, even though the message itself may > originate at RB3. Is the operator above "sitting at" RB3? I.e., is the test initiated from RB3 and does it inject packet that have a source RB of RB1? (That seems fine at one level because no special mechanisms are needed to achieve this.) But beyond that, I'm not sure what is envisioned, because if you did (say) traceroute, TTL exceeded errors would go back to RB1, not RB3. Same for any OAM response messages. What is the thinking here? Thomas
- [trill] TRILL OAM Requirements: Third party debug… Thomas Narten