Re: [Tsvwg] Making draft-davie-ecn-mpls a TSVWG item
Dimitri.Papadimitriou@alcatel-lucent.be Wed, 17 January 2007 10:24 UTC
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1H77xu-0002DN-8g; Wed, 17 Jan 2007 05:24:22 -0500
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1H77xt-0002Cn-33 for tsvwg@ietf.org; Wed, 17 Jan 2007 05:24:21 -0500
Received: from smail.alcatel.fr ([62.23.212.165]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1H77xq-0003Li-D0 for tsvwg@ietf.org; Wed, 17 Jan 2007 05:24:21 -0500
Received: from bemail05.netfr.alcatel.fr (bemail05.netfr.alcatel.fr [155.132.251.11]) by smail.alcatel.fr (8.13.4/8.13.4/ICT) with ESMTP id l0HAOLwh003158; Wed, 17 Jan 2007 11:24:21 +0100
To: lars.eggert@nokia.com
Subject: Re: [Tsvwg] Making draft-davie-ecn-mpls a TSVWG item
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 6.5 September 26, 2003
Message-ID: <OFAD1952D8.79E3AFB2-ONC1257266.00329057-C1257266.00392738@netfr.alcatel.fr>
From: Dimitri.Papadimitriou@alcatel-lucent.be
Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2007 11:24:13 +0100
X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on BEMAIL05/BE/ALCATEL(Release 5.0.13aHF163 | June 23, 2005) at 01/17/2007 11:24:14
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="=_mixed 003926BBC1257266_="
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.51 on 155.132.180.81
X-Spam-Score: 0.2 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 7698d1420ecbbce1995432e99bb6d1a1
Cc: tsvwg@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: tsvwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Transport Area Working Group <tsvwg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tsvwg>, <mailto:tsvwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:tsvwg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tsvwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tsvwg>, <mailto:tsvwg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: tsvwg-bounces@ietf.org
discussion was led on the list mid november - no real conclusion or action where derived from the concerns expressed at that time - note that the first point is not at all an issue about process (discussion slides during MPLS WG meetings without feedback and certainly no conclusion simply does not ensure a safe path) - another question is around value/functionality vs the overhead in putting such fct at MPLS level (being by definition a fwd'ing paradigm, bind to the end-to-end networking paradigm of IP) - see below for the details - Bruce Davie <bdavie@cisco.com> 15/11/2006 13:55 To: Dimitri PAPADIMITRIOU/BE/ALCATEL@ALCATEL cc: Magnus Westerlund <magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com>, tsvwg <tsvwg@ietf.org> Subject: Re: [Tsvwg] Re: [mpls] Making draft-davie-ecn-mpls a TSVWG item On Nov 14, 2006, at 6:07 PM, Dimitri.Papadimitriou@alcatel.be wrote: > hi - > > 1. CN marking in the EXP bits of the MPLS header falls imho under the > MPLS change process that states for an optional problem statement and > a mandatory prior requirements statement I-D to commit for any > specific > change or extension to MPLS > > see section 2.1.1 and 4.2 of > > <http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-andersson-rtg-gmpls- > change-06.txt> > I'll let the ADs and WG chairs argue about the process issue you've raised, but I do have a comment on the following: > 2. on one side there is a PCN BoF during previous meeting on the other > the document uses PCN as motivation for copying the CE state into > outer > header at ingress - if found this rather circular as reasoning > where is > the real "problem statement" outside PCN scope for such operation ? I wonder if perhaps you have not read the latest (-01) version of draft-davie-ecn-mpls [dp] i read that version - my remark refers to section 7. in that section it seems that the inner->outer CE is driven by PCN needs (also part of the discussion slides) You will notice that the abstract does not mention PCN, and that the list of changes from the last draft includes this statement: o Pre-congestion notification (PCN) marking is now described in a way that does not require normative references to PCN specifications. PCN discussion now serves only to illustrate how the ECN marking concepts can be extended to cover more complex scenarios, with PCN being an example. The motivation for this work is to prevent ECN from being broken when traversing an MPLS network. That seems sufficient motivation for the draft whether or not PCN becomes a problem that the IETF wants to work on. [dp] the same section 7 mentions "[RFC3168] does not give any reasons against conveying CE information from the inner header to the outer in the "full functionality" mode." nor the other way around - which leaves the point open for ECN itself -> the issue i am raising is that in absence of evidence current the processing should be left per RFC3168 and not inline with the expected PCN needs (even if it does not affect the former) -d. > > thanks, > - d. > > > > > > Magnus Westerlund <magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com> > 14/11/2006 11:48 > > To: tsvwg <tsvwg@ietf.org> > cc: > Subject: [mpls] Making draft-davie-ecn-mpls a TSVWG > item > > > Hi, > (BCC MPLS for information) > > Based on feedback from the TSVWG session in San Diego we think > there is > consensus on adopting draft-davie-ecn-mpls as a TSVWG work item. We > are > hereby confirming this consensus on the list. If you have an opinion > please state it. > > Cheers > > Magnus Westerlund > TSVWG chair > > Multimedia Technologies, Ericsson Research EAB/TVA/A > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Ericsson AB | Phone +46 8 4048287 > Torshamsgatan 23 | Fax +46 8 7575550 > S-164 80 Stockholm, Sweden | mailto: magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com > > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@lists.ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > <lars.eggert@nokia.com> 16/01/2007 08:22 To: <tsvwg@ietf.org> cc: Subject: Re: [Tsvwg] Making draft-davie-ecn-mpls a TSVWG item < Attachment smime.p7s removed > On Nov 14, 2006, at 5:48 AM, Magnus Westerlund wrote: > > Based on feedback from the TSVWG session in San Diego we think there > is consensus on adopting draft-davie-ecn-mpls as a TSVWG work item. We > are hereby confirming this consensus on the list. If you have an > opinion please state it. We haven't seen any responses arguing differently. To ensure no such responses where lost due to the recent mailing list problems: Please speak up now if you disagree with the call above. Otherwise we'll go ahead shortly and adopt this. Lars -- NEW EMAIL: lars.eggert@nokia.com NEW MOBILE: +358 50 48 24461 NEW JABBER: lars.eggert@googlemail.com
- [Tsvwg] Making draft-davie-ecn-mpls a TSVWG item Magnus Westerlund
- Re: [Tsvwg] Making draft-davie-ecn-mpls a TSVWG i… Francois Le Faucheur IMAP
- [Tsvwg] Re: [mpls] Making draft-davie-ecn-mpls a … Dimitri.Papadimitriou
- Re: [mpls] [Fwd: [Tsvwg] Making draft-davie-ecn-m… Magnus Westerlund
- RE: [Tsvwg] Making draft-davie-ecn-mpls a TSVWG i… philip.eardley
- Re: [mpls] [Fwd: [Tsvwg] Making draft-davie-ecn-m… Bruce Davie
- Re: [Tsvwg] Re: [mpls] Making draft-davie-ecn-mpl… Bruce Davie
- Re: [Tsvwg] Re: [mpls] Making draft-davie-ecn-mpl… Dimitri.Papadimitriou
- RE: [Tsvwg] Making draft-davie-ecn-mpls a TSVWG i… Anna Charny (acharny)
- Re: [mpls] [Fwd: [Tsvwg] Making draft-davie-ecn-m… Adrian Farrel
- Re: [Tsvwg] Making draft-davie-ecn-mpls a TSVWG i… lars.eggert
- Re: [Tsvwg] Making draft-davie-ecn-mpls a TSVWG i… Dimitri.Papadimitriou
- RE: [Tsvwg] Making draft-davie-ecn-mpls a TSVWG i… lars.eggert
- Re: [Tsvwg] Making draft-davie-ecn-mpls a TSVWG i… Bob Briscoe
- RE: [Tsvwg] Making draft-davie-ecn-mpls a TSVWG i… Dimitri.Papadimitriou
- Re: [Tsvwg] Making draft-davie-ecn-mpls a TSVWG i… Bruce Davie
- Re: [Tsvwg] Making draft-davie-ecn-mpls a TSVWG i… Lars Eggert
- Re: [Tsvwg] Making draft-davie-ecn-mpls a TSVWG i… Dimitri.Papadimitriou
- Re: [Tsvwg] Making draft-davie-ecn-mpls a TSVWG i… Bob Briscoe