Re: [rbridge] draft-ietf-trill-rbridge-oam-02
David M Bond <dmbond@us.ibm.com> Wed, 21 March 2012 14:10 UTC
Return-Path: <rbridge-bounces@postel.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-trill-archive-Osh9cae4@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-trill-archive-Osh9cae4@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B051621F86EB for <ietfarch-trill-archive-Osh9cae4@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 21 Mar 2012 07:10:53 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.299
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.299 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.300, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_55=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
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 kWxbZqJMnvWq for <ietfarch-trill-archive-Osh9cae4@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 21 Mar 2012 07:10:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from boreas.isi.edu (boreas.isi.edu [128.9.160.161]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D958E21F84F0 for <trill-archive-Osh9cae4@lists.ietf.org>; Wed, 21 Mar 2012 07:10:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from boreas.isi.edu (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by boreas.isi.edu (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q2LDgKm2021560; Wed, 21 Mar 2012 06:42:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from e8.ny.us.ibm.com (e8.ny.us.ibm.com [32.97.182.138]) by boreas.isi.edu (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q2LDfpsV021496 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT) for <rbridge@postel.org>; Wed, 21 Mar 2012 06:42:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from /spool/local by e8.ny.us.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for <rbridge@postel.org> from <dmbond@us.ibm.com>; Wed, 21 Mar 2012 09:41:50 -0400
Received: from d01dlp01.pok.ibm.com (9.56.224.56) by e8.ny.us.ibm.com (192.168.1.108) with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted; Wed, 21 Mar 2012 09:41:48 -0400
Received: from d01relay04.pok.ibm.com (d01relay04.pok.ibm.com [9.56.227.236]) by d01dlp01.pok.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B76E538C8062 for <rbridge@postel.org>; Wed, 21 Mar 2012 09:41:47 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from d01av04.pok.ibm.com (d01av04.pok.ibm.com [9.56.224.64]) by d01relay04.pok.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id q2LDfhRV322120 for <rbridge@postel.org>; Wed, 21 Mar 2012 09:41:45 -0400
Received: from d01av04.pok.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d01av04.pok.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.13.1/NCO v10.0 AVout) with ESMTP id q2LDfde5025906 for <rbridge@postel.org>; Wed, 21 Mar 2012 09:41:39 -0400
Received: from d01ml076.pok.ibm.com (d01ml076.pok.ibm.com [9.63.8.33]) by d01av04.pok.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.13.1/NCO v10.0 AVin) with ESMTP id q2LDfdxH025896 for <rbridge@postel.org>; Wed, 21 Mar 2012 09:41:39 -0400
In-Reply-To: <CAPFewY3aWMTEBWiTpzED94JkuUeKHQZ1P9+w0NWbaZzhZkfccA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAPFewY3aWMTEBWiTpzED94JkuUeKHQZ1P9+w0NWbaZzhZkfccA@mail.gmail.com>
X-KeepSent: 750D2461:C22547FF-852579C8:0044DA2D; type=4; name=$KeepSent
To: somnath chatterjee <somnath.chatterjee01@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 8.5.1FP5 SHF29 November 12, 2010
Message-ID: <OF750D2461.C22547FF-ON852579C8.0044DA2D-852579C8.004B37F5@us.ibm.com>
From: David M Bond <dmbond@us.ibm.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2012 09:41:33 -0400
X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on D01ML076/01/M/IBM(Release 8.5.3 ZX853HP5|January 12, 2012) at 03/21/2012 09:41:39
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Content-Scanned: Fidelis XPS MAILER
x-cbid: 12032113-9360-0000-0000-000004B90FA2
X-ISI-4-43-8-MailScanner: Found to be clean
X-MailScanner-From: dmbond@us.ibm.com
Cc: rbridge@postel.org
Subject: Re: [rbridge] draft-ietf-trill-rbridge-oam-02
X-BeenThere: rbridge@postel.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.6
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Developing a hybrid router/bridge." <rbridge.postel.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://mailman.postel.org/mailman/listinfo/rbridge>, <mailto:rbridge-request@postel.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://mailman.postel.org/pipermail/rbridge>
List-Post: <mailto:rbridge@postel.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rbridge-request@postel.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://mailman.postel.org/mailman/listinfo/rbridge>, <mailto:rbridge-request@postel.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: rbridge-bounces@postel.org
Errors-To: rbridge-bounces@postel.org
Hello Somnath, Thanks for the comments. My responses are inline below with [DBOND]. Thanks, David From: somnath chatterjee <somnath.chatterjee01@gmail.com> To: rbridge@postel.org Date: 03/21/2012 07:58 AM Subject: [rbridge] draft-ietf-trill-rbridge-oam-02 Sent by: rbridge-bounces@postel.org Hi Authors, 1>In Section 4.1.1 two statements can be found which is ambiguous. In first paragraph "The M bit MUST be zero." and in sixth paragraph "The M bit MUST be zero for a known unicast ping." I think the ping tool should not be limited to unicast use only and should be allowed to be sent on distribution tree when used for multidestination frames/unknown unicast. It would be good to include excerpts from draft-yizhou-trill-multi-destination-ping in this OAM draft which talks about multi-destination ping, jitters etc. [DBOND] Agreed. In fact I have been talking with Yizhou about merging these two drafts but I have not had a chance yet. One item that did come up that is useful to mention is in relation to jitter. Currently in Yizhou's draft she has an alternative format for echos so that the time stamp is in a fixed offset for hardware. If at all possible I would prefer to have a single format for echos. My idea was to say time stamps are TLVs but if they appear they MUST always be the first TLV in the TLV list. This way they have a fixed location in the packet so hardware could work with them. Could some hardware folks comment on the viability of this? In general I see there being three options here: Alternative Format Echo with TimeStamp Change Base Format of Echo to include TimeStamp Fixed location of TimeStamp TLV What does everyone in the WG think? [/DBOND] 2> It would be good if RBridges that implement TRILL- OAM does not decrement Hop count by more than one for OAM/Channel messages only. This would help us limiting the max hop count used for traceroute to be equal to the diameter of the campus. [DBOND] To do this there would have to be separate logic for TRILL OAM messages. It is very important that OAM frames follow the same logic as any other frame (to test the forwarding plane) and so we can't make a special condition as such.[/DBOND] 3> If my understanding is correct there is no way to distinguish between pings reply and unicast traceroute reply(other than the error replies). An user may use both the tool concurrently or with minimal time gap. As such it would be hard to distinguish between the replies only with sequence number. I would suggest to use some unique identifier to differentiate between the two types of messages. [DBOND] I'm unsure why the sequence number would be insufficient to meet this need. Please elaborate. 4> In Section 4.1.2.1 ". . . various forms of ECMP hashing based on fields such as MAC addresses, IP addresses, and/or TCP/UDP port numbers." Vlans may be added to the fields list. [DBOND] Adding 5> In Section 4.1.2.2 Editorial changes for "One cannot use the diemater of the network . . ." should be replaced by "One cannot use the diameter of the network/campus" [DBOND] Adding Thank you, Regards, Somnath _______________________________________________ rbridge mailing list rbridge@postel.org http://mailman.postel.org/mailman/listinfo/rbridge _______________________________________________ rbridge mailing list rbridge@postel.org http://mailman.postel.org/mailman/listinfo/rbridge
- [rbridge] draft-ietf-trill-rbridge-oam-02 somnath chatterjee
- Re: [rbridge] draft-ietf-trill-rbridge-oam-02 David M Bond
- Re: [rbridge] draft-ietf-trill-rbridge-oam-02 somnath chatterjee