IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

Nick Hilliard <nick@foobar.org> Sat, 20 February 2021 12:59 UTC

Return-Path: <nick@foobar.org>
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 723A93A1329; Sat, 20 Feb 2021 04:59:19 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-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 Hvqg75_SlHFt; Sat, 20 Feb 2021 04:59:17 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.netability.ie (mail.netability.ie [IPv6:2a03:8900:0:100::5]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 899973A132A; Sat, 20 Feb 2021 04:59:14 -0800 (PST)
X-Envelope-To: tsv-art@ietf.org
Received: from crumpet.local (admin.ibn.ie [46.182.8.8]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.netability.ie (8.16.1/8.16.1) with ESMTPSA id 11KCx8Aj020343 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Sat, 20 Feb 2021 12:59:09 GMT (envelope-from nick@foobar.org)
X-Authentication-Warning: cheesecake.ibn.ie: Host admin.ibn.ie [46.182.8.8] claimed to be crumpet.local
From: Nick Hilliard <nick@foobar.org>
To: Gorry Fairhurst <gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk>
Cc: tsv-art@ietf.org, draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-ehs-packet-drops.all@ietf.org, last-call@ietf.org, v6ops@ietf.org
References: <161366727749.10107.14514005068158901089@ietfa.amsl.com>
Message-ID: <bc2f4753-f954-9c1c-1002-62cc51f91d72@foobar.org>
Date: Sat, 20 Feb 2021 12:59:07 +0000
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.16; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 PostboxApp/7.0.46
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <161366727749.10107.14514005068158901089@ietfa.amsl.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------54197D4A5AB2E3D146449F66"
Content-Language: en-US
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tsv-art/ij5r2B-U6bWlzZsmwjSGlpqkVN0>
Subject: Re: [Tsv-art] 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 12:59:20 -0000

Hi Gorry,

Gorry Fairhurst via Datatracker wrote on 18/02/2021 16:54:
> * I suggest a more powerful chip design might not have reduced performance, but 
>
> would cost more: /but the overall performance of the system will be reduced. / 
>
> - so maybe either performance is reduced or the system cost increased?

The practical issue here is that on all hardware, if you increase the 
complexity of a pipeline, the performance will be reduced.  This is a 
statement of what happens in the real world on installed systems.

The purpose of this ID was to provide an practical overview of the 
real-world problems that operators are likely to experience, and why 
they happen, rather than getting into the thornier issue of analysing 
the what-ifs and wherefores of design choices.  So we deliberately 
steered clear of value judgements, including the trade-offs between 
cost, complexity and performance - there's too much scope in there to 
get lost in the long grass.

Nick

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email