Re: [Tsv-art] [v6ops] [Last-Call] Tsvart last call review of draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-ehs-packet-drops-05

Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com> Sat, 20 February 2021 05:09 UTC

Return-Path: <fgont@si6networks.com>
X-Original-To: tsv-art@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tsv-art@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 228E43A0F02; Fri, 19 Feb 2021 21:09:44 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.889
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.889 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, T_SPF_TEMPERROR=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 amdrX_Kj3lxI; Fri, 19 Feb 2021 21:09:41 -0800 (PST)
Received: from fgont.go6lab.si (fgont.go6lab.si [91.239.96.14]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B49F03A113A; Fri, 19 Feb 2021 21:09:37 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [IPv6:2800:810:464:2b9:cc90:3a89:34f0:5ee6] (unknown [IPv6:2800:810:464:2b9:cc90:3a89:34f0:5ee6]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by fgont.go6lab.si (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7B1D52801AA; Sat, 20 Feb 2021 05:09:33 +0000 (UTC)
To: Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com>
Cc: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>, Gorry Fairhurst <gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk>, tsv-art@ietf.org, last-call@ietf.org, draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-ehs-packet-drops.all@ietf.org, IPv6 Operations <v6ops@ietf.org>
References: <161366727749.10107.14514005068158901089@ietfa.amsl.com> <42668fb5-a355-e656-7d99-c40b3d33fb92@si6networks.com> <0e377231-c319-2157-30a0-759e2f96a692@gmail.com> <5f464f17-85ed-f105-35f9-02f35d04aed2@si6networks.com> <CALx6S364zGbq_HZNNVEaJHnHccuk4Zau2DXhmaVYbwnYQc-5bw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com>
Message-ID: <1847e8e3-543f-5deb-dd14-f7c7fa3677db@si6networks.com>
Date: Sat, 20 Feb 2021 02:07:41 -0300
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CALx6S364zGbq_HZNNVEaJHnHccuk4Zau2DXhmaVYbwnYQc-5bw@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tsv-art/5ib_1gb12WFPt_1bH51zDcQFWUw>
Subject: Re: [Tsv-art] [v6ops] [Last-Call] Tsvart last call review of draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-ehs-packet-drops-05
X-BeenThere: tsv-art@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Transport Area Review Team <tsv-art.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/tsv-art>, <mailto:tsv-art-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tsv-art/>
List-Post: <mailto:tsv-art@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tsv-art-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tsv-art>, <mailto:tsv-art-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 20 Feb 2021 05:09:44 -0000

Hi, Tom,

On 19/2/21 18:13, Tom Herbert wrote:
[....]>> xor add this:
>>
>>     [RFC7098] discusses how the IPv6 FLow Label can used to enhance layer
>>      3/4 (L3/4) load distribution and balancing for large server farms.
>>
>> right after:
>>      Thus, ECMP and Hash-based Load-
>>      Sharing should be possible without the need to process the entire
>>      IPv6 header chain to obtain upper-layer information to identify
>>      flows.
>>
> I don't why this is only a "should". 

This is not a requirement. We're mostly indicating possibility.


> Hashing of three tuple for load
> balancing works as described as evident by the fact it is in wide
> deployment (consider it's been in Linux stack for it's internal load
> balancing for several years and there's now over a billion devices in
> the world that do this).

LB based on the FL relies on:
* Appropriate implementation of the FL
* Use of the FL in load balancers

There has been (and still is) an interesting mix of cases where one or 
both of this simply do not happen.

See e.g.: https://blog.apnic.net/2018/01/11/ipv6-flow-label-misuse-hashing/

We're just the messenger here....

Thanks,
-- 
Fernando Gont
SI6 Networks
e-mail: fgont@si6networks.com
PGP Fingerprint: 6666 31C6 D484 63B2 8FB1 E3C4 AE25 0D55 1D4E 7492