Re: [trill] I-D Action: draft-ietf-trill-over-ip-01.txt

Joe Touch <touch@isi.edu> Mon, 14 July 2014 17:13 UTC

Return-Path: <touch@isi.edu>
X-Original-To: trill@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: trill@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 39A3C1A0AE8 for <trill@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 14 Jul 2014 10:13:40 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.851
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.851 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.651] autolearn=ham
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 VAzAF5Y4BK-o for <trill@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 14 Jul 2014 10:13:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from boreas.isi.edu (boreas.isi.edu [128.9.160.161]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DD24D1A0AE6 for <trill@ietf.org>; Mon, 14 Jul 2014 10:13:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [128.9.160.166] (abc.isi.edu [128.9.160.166]) (authenticated bits=0) by boreas.isi.edu (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id s6EHCxvO015473 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT); Mon, 14 Jul 2014 10:13:00 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <53C40F9B.7090901@isi.edu>
Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2014 10:12:59 -0700
From: Joe Touch <touch@isi.edu>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Donald Eastlake <d3e3e3@gmail.com>, "trill@ietf.org" <trill@ietf.org>
References: <20140704111902.18356.26893.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <53BC708F.3070708@isi.edu> <CAF4+nEFh8i9g37xvEvX6eaJVdcyu7gcY3R7BeFn-X60Q-gMRrA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAF4+nEFh8i9g37xvEvX6eaJVdcyu7gcY3R7BeFn-X60Q-gMRrA@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-ISI-4-43-8-MailScanner: Found to be clean
X-MailScanner-From: touch@isi.edu
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/trill/SXBO5mVHkGz_DvreWW3_bsVq3Vk
Subject: Re: [trill] I-D Action: draft-ietf-trill-over-ip-01.txt
X-BeenThere: trill@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: Mon, 14 Jul 2014 17:13:40 -0000

Hi, Donald,

I raised these concerns at the time the doc was proposed as a WG item, 
and these issues were never really addressed. WG adoption does not 
ensure a document gets published - there's always IETF LC, in addition 
to other steps - this being one of them.

I see your points about keying, zero-config, etc., but those argue for a 
new layer to support TRILL use of existing encapsulation, not for a 
totally new encapsulation.

Although I appreciate the IESG's "let a thousand flowers bloom" 
viewpoint, the result is a thousand wheels get reinvented, and it's 
nearly impossible to ensure that past mistakes are not repeated.

Joe

On 7/11/2014 1:02 PM, Donald Eastlake wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 8, 2014 at 6:28 PM, Joe Touch <touch@isi.edu> wrote:
>> Hi, all,
>
> Hi Joe,
>
> First off, I'd like to thank you for your contributions to this draft.
> In particular, section 10.1 on Recursive Ingress was included in
> response to comments that, as I recall, came primarily from you.
>
>> I don't see TRILL as needing a specific solution, given ethernet can already
>> be bridged using IP any number of ways (including GRE or L2VPN approaches).
>
> Well, I suppose you would get different answers from different people
> as to whether or not having convenient default security keying
> leveraging IS-IS keying, zero configuration under some circumstances,
> saving 14 or 18 or so bytes on every packet, having protection against
> recursive ingress, etc., are worth it. But in the context of TRILL,
> this has already been decided. TRILL over IP is specifically part of
> the work in the TRILL Charter, that Charter was approved by the TRILL
> WG and the IESG, it has been determined that there is a TRILL WG
> consensus to use UDP encapsulation, and, in my opinion, most of the
> work, although not all of it, has already been done as per this draft.
>
> Thanks,
> Donald
> =============================
>   Donald E. Eastlake 3rd   +1-508-333-2270 (cell)
>   155 Beaver Street, Milford, MA 01757 USA
>   d3e3e3@gmail.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> trill mailing list
> trill@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/trill
>