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

Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com> Fri, 19 February 2021 21:14 UTC

Return-Path: <tom@herbertland.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 16F353A07EB for <tsv-art@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 19 Feb 2021 13:14:49 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.897
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=herbertland-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com
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 l1UOQcZ8QLej for <tsv-art@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 19 Feb 2021 13:14:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-ej1-x630.google.com (mail-ej1-x630.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::630]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2D0B53A0801 for <tsv-art@ietf.org>; Fri, 19 Feb 2021 13:14:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-ej1-x630.google.com with SMTP id w1so15989868ejf.11 for <tsv-art@ietf.org>; Fri, 19 Feb 2021 13:14:04 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=herbertland-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=gaQzCx11WNBcqAlLTeSHq+hy88daIi1lvx9naQXAiTM=; b=B/flqJkRsbWUDhNNfMtkhTHlSPAm/908KaaFLDDPX5pTJFKTAF2wGJ79KfWTLBclUs hcLehnGW8sc9sCaVr7pc33j1f2bO4dtiaTw8Bm+3/fgXUFMBXpJJfMPh6nhdYQUPRWDT 5dvvdyZpPTmZppVcX8EmZkGJAmIpahWKpCn3OP3FLP6WkfKuOlMzQNtvGaVPlO7tq+7I 6IKQaW3eRc4XMmyG8EuWejZZBfeD/QH0AqvWMrfiHvwKezUKln1oJswXg53/9ILerdr8 a48HFfJpoVdxd3Wsz8E0V1BgKptUCINtNSQuu5/d4mZFtXsR3P+yzuXNNf1RbeWWvOip xYqA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=gaQzCx11WNBcqAlLTeSHq+hy88daIi1lvx9naQXAiTM=; b=E9WcJ1GHIAcMuCIUf4/K6c6+3JqQkkuxb86ctrIN/8iBGPfyx6jOAHwLNMOj0c1BUS c3AH1qD2wB67dg5uVKCDklOxu8Ytie3i/OS64Bl8ZQTIvZyfjVQJDZkndRicbwtXeW5y 4v+Ex/sKiIznYCM5BqHmU9ugcFRYPtJp7zHdMpeZwGC8ZcZTLc6RFZr0TKyZnyTZkIvg m8ZbIuFxMGwttkX55D6OhOzrbmPSGaYDSKRCdR68Y5OPUezbTbWYIpTmyXGxKpKE+xT4 Nz0eBcrx2ig777Ory+kbXnqeoNX2YSCvPlZ8bljhGzjl4odxkeYcjdMVrwTxsI6xw08u d9lw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531ywoSiDAtXGSYY6QUy8a5sqKWE+fIcZXXrNWvr8TZG9quOBLrc RmS/ZhyZxE0aW5FbNxq4w/XGzImzB+z3QmqWUfLn7A==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwoLdKhmbypht9y++a9um/OKzb7byiLmI7OaFmSgudVHcKyQsGpCaLGA6R1P0gToIGH2M00RzP5F5qGaSMl6DU=
X-Received: by 2002:a17:907:7252:: with SMTP id ds18mr10536587ejc.239.1613769243365; Fri, 19 Feb 2021 13:14:03 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
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>
In-Reply-To: <5f464f17-85ed-f105-35f9-02f35d04aed2@si6networks.com>
From: Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 2021 14:13:52 -0700
Message-ID: <CALx6S364zGbq_HZNNVEaJHnHccuk4Zau2DXhmaVYbwnYQc-5bw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.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>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tsv-art/kt1Sm9iG98paYL9ZuR18VpwzDpc>
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: Fri, 19 Feb 2021 21:14:49 -0000

On Thu, Feb 18, 2021 at 1:08 PM Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com> wrote:
>
> Hi, Brian,
>
> On 18/2/21 16:35, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
> > On 19-Feb-21 06:56, Fernando Gont wrote:
> [....]
> >>> * The ID also discusses use of the IPv6  Flow Label: This seems a little off
> >>> topic, but seems linked to EH implications on ECMP.  However, the final
> >>> sentence of this section is a reference to [Jaeggli-2018] which in turn
> >>> concludes that the IPv6 Flow Label should not be used it as a part of hashes
> >>> for load balancing. Yet, as far as I know, this is not the recommendation of
> >>> the IETF in 2020.
> >>
> >> FWIW, we discuss the Flow Label a bit because the usual reaction would
> >> be "why do you process the header chain for load-balancing, instead of
> >> employing the Flow Label?"
> >
> > However, Gorry is right that citing Joel's operational comments is only part
> > of the story. I immodestly suggest citing RFC 7098 too, for a discussion
> > of how the flow label can in principle be used for server load balancing.
>
> Good grief! I thought we were referencing this one already (but looks
> like we're not) Any suggestion on how to reference it?
>
> E.g., we could do:
>
>     Thus, ECMP and Hash-based Load-Sharing [rfc6434] [RFC7098] should be
> possible
>     without the need to process the entire IPv6 header chain to obtain
>     upper-layer information to identify lows.
>
>
> plus adding it ALONG WITH RFC6438 here:
>
>     making Flow Label-based ECMP
>     and Hash-based Load-Sharing [RFC6438] feasible.
>
>
>
> 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". 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).

Tom

>
>
> Alternatively, if you can think of a better way to do it, please do let
> us know.
>
> Thanks!
>
> Regards,
> --
> Fernando Gont
> SI6 Networks
> e-mail: fgont@si6networks.com
> PGP Fingerprint: 6666 31C6 D484 63B2 8FB1 E3C4 AE25 0D55 1D4E 7492
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> v6ops mailing list
> v6ops@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops