Re: [tsvwg] Doubts regarding motivation of draft-ietf-tsvwg-iana-dscp-registry-04

Alexander Vainshtein <Alexander.Vainshtein@ecitele.com> Thu, 10 May 2018 08:19 UTC

Return-Path: <Alexander.Vainshtein@ecitele.com>
X-Original-To: tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D2DE12AAB6 for <tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 10 May 2018 01:19:36 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.79
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.79 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (1024-bit key) reason="fail (body has been altered)" header.d=eci365.onmicrosoft.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 GGM-Z-WlFjRl for <tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 10 May 2018 01:19:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail1.bemta26.messagelabs.com (mail1.bemta26.messagelabs.com [85.158.142.4]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 16315126DFB for <tsvwg@ietf.org>; Thu, 10 May 2018 01:19:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [85.158.142.103] (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256 bits)) by server-4.bemta.az-a.eu-central-1.aws.symcld.net id 98/7E-30567-39004FA5; Thu, 10 May 2018 08:19:31 +0000
X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA1WTW0gUURjHPTOz61hOTruaX6KFGxFUs7lluBZ CEJEUUQ9BtN0ct8ldWkfbmS01AsMSSi2RNvMS7eYWVOJDNwx7SEstu2JqV7PSwtLKtOhmbjN7 tOw8HH58//93OYdzaFI3oI2ihSxZcIq8w6CdQMXHLtnElQR9scQN+GeaP5dXUea+/ApkHiwu1 Zib+ju1S6jkkrJjZHLhUC+R7PP9IJI93lpyDWXR2MXUjKwUje17/+bMqoso68NdP5WLTh1HB9 EEmmLzSfjxxBd8EIXQOraCgN+laaqgY18j8N7OR6qgZZPg/LlOrcrh7Gx4lHedVJlkc+Dnha4 A69kN0F90icCejXA5rw1htkB9x5FAnGJnwr1PjYE4w6ZAY127BjcroKDz5DtKFUJYHvqaDmhU RuwU+NZSTeBmkfC050SAgWXBd/U+iTkC3nWPjPpToeuNF+F4LBx7URmMOQZaTxQEjgzsZQKG9 /4aFTgYcLuVQrTCM+Bi7ybs6UBw5lc3geNzoeZxErZnwIOCsmDsKUJQf/jnaLNpcLboFYW5mY QbRVacGw29t6dgf7sWjt7tIvBVW+Fm5RBVjLjycWcrV1JIVoTm+2HlgTuaDLfKeihsmQueukE t5jlw2ttHjvGda93E+LgHBZ9FialOe5pNTuftDs4UF8eZTAu4+ZwpIcHI53C8UXBxVkGUnbyi GvldklHKTrc6thpFQT6PlBcXpKxa1NVkbUBTacIQwZS1DVp0k1IztmbbeMm2xelyCFIDiqZpA zCcf8iim+wU0oSsbXaH8mzHZKBDDeHM6RFFZqRMPl2yp2GpBSXSDZ+OFJL0vcD+1ucuJHWUmC EKUZHMQrUeqybYXOLfcmMfoRXFROkZpAyoC80UnOl2+X/9PYqkkUHP7FSrhNpF+W/X98pAhDJ QfXtgIJn/J0XlopQnsQm7d7jDVpI1E/MkeSSF6VvxvEM3g0MPQk5K8+dd2Vxiy2vz75v3UV+a n/1wcIMrp3jPan3Q7rXi/mrOMcvlu2pzcLXWo95V5nUh0yd2J5461DrnbXz0lTvPvi6O3760O vemfdkiz4Kq9e7lZzy/nbUx/rrhGkGmhlpehn3+aqAkG2+aTTol/g9aNevDAwQAAA==
X-Env-Sender: Alexander.Vainshtein@ecitele.com
X-Msg-Ref: server-11.tower-228.messagelabs.com!1525940366!617407!1
X-Originating-IP: [52.33.64.93]
X-SYMC-ESS-Client-Auth: mailfrom-relay-check=pass
X-StarScan-Received:
X-StarScan-Version: 9.9.15; banners=ecitele.com,-,-
X-VirusChecked: Checked
Received: (qmail 8059 invoked from network); 10 May 2018 08:19:29 -0000
Received: from us-west-2b.mta.dlp.protect.symantec.com (HELO EUR01-HE1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com) (52.33.64.93) by server-11.tower-228.messagelabs.com with AES256-SHA256 encrypted SMTP; 10 May 2018 08:19:29 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ECI365.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector1-ecitele-com; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version; bh=WAe88zt0EnQ0zJBJ/21yfNsQBqQzih+YKdnW7xiSdAM=; b=ZInSGAQEPX4ds4EKs2LdTRbaGOgFkgCMMbU5a9g/lXtnt7QtAk80SmWfyj4SR7v7zzeuJi5bfLpHTVQ3/DxvHthlDOzFYDJDyr6p5bMMAGQoysuyCmgKWli+LM5Vi9Ry4EULmocS9oTL1P5th6jDMSUP2caMnGx255w3algBRo0=
Received: from DB5PR0301MB1909.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com (10.167.226.155) by DB5PR0301MB2023.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com (10.167.227.141) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA384_P256) id 15.20.735.18; Thu, 10 May 2018 08:19:25 +0000
Received: from DB5PR0301MB1909.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::fdb3:6753:a5e:5909]) by DB5PR0301MB1909.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::fdb3:6753:a5e:5909%14]) with mapi id 15.20.0735.021; Thu, 10 May 2018 08:19:25 +0000
From: Alexander Vainshtein <Alexander.Vainshtein@ecitele.com>
To: Gorry Fairhurst <gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk>
CC: "Black, David" <david.black@dell.com>, "tsvwg@ietf.org" <tsvwg@ietf.org>, "Bless, Roland (TM)" <roland.bless@kit.edu>
Thread-Topic: [tsvwg] Doubts regarding motivation of draft-ietf-tsvwg-iana-dscp-registry-04
Thread-Index: AdPmoFK9aWKmiaf9TbeUMDqszKs2hwADjKcAAAmz/VAAAX/kAAAAL+oAAAhIzQAAAd2OFwBMr9OQ
Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 08:19:25 +0000
Message-ID: <DB5PR0301MB1909D6B0AB6DE1E9450802BD9D980@DB5PR0301MB1909.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
References: <DB5PR0301MB1909E703CA7C90CBB6E0D5259D9A0@DB5PR0301MB1909.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com> <ceeabcb5-a66b-8c31-f094-4c37d617acd8@kit.edu> <DB5PR0301MB190945262AFB792AA5A1CE629D9A0@DB5PR0301MB1909.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com> <CE03DB3D7B45C245BCA0D243277949363010E8FF@MX307CL04.corp.emc.com> <DB5PR0301MB1909A75D64FF631A8C2C12729D9A0@DB5PR0301MB1909.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>, <F00368F7-CECC-4066-8D59-4AD25CA5BC9A@erg.abdn.ac.uk> <DB5PR0301MB1909DBAE4BD858DA2530781E9D9A0@DB5PR0301MB1909.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
In-Reply-To: <DB5PR0301MB1909DBAE4BD858DA2530781E9D9A0@DB5PR0301MB1909.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [147.234.241.1]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; DB5PR0301MB2023; 7:Oj5T/Dwj+nyvmBYtX1Bd8M+g8BfcmPqeghKb7/o+feYKiUfGB4olyKiZo05J4UamF9fEnO17cwMvJMYBnHgK1Ba23FDW5YB+0L61KKat2w/2K/lYNGmE4Ju1ztJy1MqHDHdSUyj9yoAWrUie53LA3QrM7+xKgaim244AoqpclRNG89UWGy4GXLqz6b8DGICu8jgcZnFbN0I+5E0ySPEbuW4N7VMCFZJWivNyv3j6iRkfFfNQxL60c0HgbzD1ZMoy
x-ms-exchange-antispam-srfa-diagnostics: SOS;
x-ms-office365-filtering-ht: Tenant
x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:(130329453890623); BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(7020095)(4652020)(4534165)(4627221)(201703031133081)(201702281549075)(5600026)(48565401081)(2017052603328)(7153060)(7193020); SRVR:DB5PR0301MB2023;
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: DB5PR0301MB2023:
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <DB5PR0301MB20237FDF158FBF5FB39704CA9D980@DB5PR0301MB2023.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:(28532068793085)(120809045254105)(130329453890623)(21748063052155)(279101305709854)(56004941905204);
x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1
x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(6040522)(2401047)(8121501046)(5005006)(3002001)(10201501046)(93006095)(93001095)(3231254)(944501410)(52105095)(6055026)(149027)(150027)(6041310)(20161123558120)(20161123564045)(20161123562045)(201703131423095)(201703031522075)(201702281528075)(20161123555045)(201703061421075)(201703061406153)(20161123560045)(6072148)(201708071742011); SRVR:DB5PR0301MB2023; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:DB5PR0301MB2023;
x-forefront-prvs: 066898046A
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(366004)(39860400002)(396003)(376002)(346002)(39380400002)(13464003)(252514010)(189003)(199004)(606006)(53546011)(59450400001)(11346002)(102836004)(7696005)(6506007)(186003)(76176011)(54906003)(68736007)(2906002)(3280700002)(14454004)(476003)(486006)(446003)(99286004)(3660700001)(26005)(5003630100001)(296002)(316002)(478600001)(6436002)(229853002)(2900100001)(6916009)(966005)(72206003)(97736004)(25786009)(86362001)(5250100002)(6246003)(4326008)(106356001)(66066001)(53936002)(81166006)(7736002)(8676002)(81156014)(74316002)(105586002)(5660300001)(8936002)(93886005)(6306002)(9686003)(3846002)(6116002)(790700001)(8666007)(33656002)(236005)(55016002)(54896002); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:DB5PR0301MB2023; H:DB5PR0301MB1909.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; LANG:en; PTR:InfoNoRecords; MX:1; A:1;
received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: ecitele.com does not designate permitted sender hosts)
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: VT9GDIl5IAMWoTX6oL2+f7jOzckqbgODG9xfBXZQT3GUYV81i9EaUPzBCQ83G56TbXVV/coHfuQAELjLrmpe+tlNmcpESgS0mj36uF6/gu32J2FwmGDpZnH0V/dpvJ/VXuS5ZcYuRU8nVWzoA2QvLoLYK0E2K1S01vQp9jGTHrhwSg7w8XwR+7vQgU+JTOyI
spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:99
spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_DB5PR0301MB1909D6B0AB6DE1E9450802BD9D980DB5PR0301MB1909_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Office365-Filtering-Correlation-Id: 8bdbec7c-8ef4-4bdb-856e-08d5b64ebde0
X-OriginatorOrg: ecitele.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 8bdbec7c-8ef4-4bdb-856e-08d5b64ebde0
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 10 May 2018 08:19:25.1168 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 2c514a61-08de-4519-b4c0-921fef62c42a
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: DB5PR0301MB2023
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tsvwg/fPSpZdCuUhTHlyIjy00AKC5LcTk>
Subject: Re: [tsvwg] Doubts regarding motivation of draft-ietf-tsvwg-iana-dscp-registry-04
X-BeenThere: tsvwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: Transport Area Working Group <tsvwg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/tsvwg>, <mailto:tsvwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tsvwg/>
List-Post: <mailto:tsvwg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tsvwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tsvwg>, <mailto:tsvwg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 08:19:36 -0000

Gorry and all,
I have looked up the -05 revision of the draft, and it provides a reasonable explanation of motivation.

Regards,
Sasha

Office: +972-39266302
Cell:      +972-549266302
Email:   Alexander.Vainshtein@ecitele.com

From: Alexander Vainshtein
Sent: Tuesday, May 8, 2018 10:42 PM
To: Gorry Fairhurst <gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk>
Cc: Black, David <david.black@dell.com>om>; tsvwg@ietf.org; Bless, Roland (TM) <roland.bless@kit.edu>
Subject: Re: [tsvwg] Doubts regarding motivation of draft-ietf-tsvwg-iana-dscp-registry-04

Gorry,
Providing additional context including explicit description of bleaching of the IP Precedence bits would surely help.
Thumb typed by Sasha Vainshtein


From: Gorry Fairhurst
Sent: Tuesday, May 8, 21:49
Subject: Re: [tsvwg] Doubts regarding motivation of draft-ietf-tsvwg-iana-dscp-registry-04
To: Alexander Vainshtein
Cc: Black, David, tsvwg@ietf.org<mailto:tsvwg@ietf.org>, Bless, Roland (TM)

Hi, Maybe I can provide a little more context about other unallocated values in the registry. Each request for a new DSCP needs to be considered carefully and separately looking at the implications on both the deployed use of Codepoints and the needs for the PHB. As it happens, the unassigned DSCPs in pool 1 could well remain useful for any new PHBs- if any new ones are approved by TSVWG that can be bleached to default (BE) - the case for most currently defined PHBs. I expect the new pool will be only used by IANA requests from TSVWG when there is a case for not using any of the remaining pool 1 values. That case has been made for the LE PHB. There could potentially be other allocations in the future, but that is none are currently considered. Gorry Sent from my iPad > On 8 May 2018, at 15:55, Alexander Vainshtein wrote: > > David, > Lots of thanks for a very detailed explanation. > > Coming back to my original doubt, , changing the IANA allocation policy on Pool 3 (16 values) in order to make just one value standard still looks an exaggeration to me. > What are we going to do with the remaining 15 values? > > Regards, > Sasha > > Office: +972-39266302 > Cell: +972-549266302 > Email: Alexander.Vainshtein@ecitele.com<mailto:Alexander.Vainshtein@ecitele.com> > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Black, David [mailto:David.Black@dell.com] > Sent: Tuesday, May 8, 2018 5:46 PM > To: Alexander Vainshtein ; Bless, Roland (TM) > Cc: gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk<mailto:gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk>; tsvwg@ietf.org<mailto:tsvwg@ietf.org> > Subject: RE: [tsvwg] Doubts regarding motivation of draft-ietf-tsvwg-iana-dscp-registry-04 > > Writing as an individual, not WG chair ... > >> It provides a workaround for the IP precedence bleaching for LE >> traffic that you want to introduce - but what about all other PHBs? > > The concern is not about what happens in Diffserv domains/regions that are updated to implement support for the new LE PHB, but what happens when that LE PHB traffic transits through routers elsewhere that bleach IP Precedence. > > Right now IP Precedence bleaching tends to result in best effort service, which is ok, albeit not ideal. If IP Precedence bleaching could result in a DSCP for the LE PHB, the result downstream of the bleaching could be worse than best effort service for a DSCP that was intended to obtain better than best effort service - that is the priority inversion that we're trying to avoid. > >> Would they not require some intelligent rewrite of the DSCP when >> traffic enters the bleaching domain? > > Unfortunately, that's wishful thinking, IMHO. IP Precedence bleaching already violates a bunch of RFCs, dating back to RFC 2474. We can write what we like in a new RFC, but that "running code" in deployed routers isn't going to magically stop bleaching IP Precedence just because we publish a new RFC. > > Thanks, --David > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: tsvwg [mailto:tsvwg-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Alexander >> Vainshtein >> Sent: Tuesday, May 8, 2018 10:08 AM >> To: Bless, Roland (TM) >> Cc: gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk<mailto:gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk>; tsvwg@ietf.org<mailto:tsvwg@ietf.org> >> Subject: Re: [tsvwg] Doubts regarding motivation of >> draft-ietf-tsvwg-iana- >> dscp-registry-04 >> >> Ronald, >> Lots of thanks for a prompt response. >> >> I have to admit that your explanation looks problematic to me. >> It provides a workaround for the IP precedence bleaching for LE >> traffic that you want to introduce - but what about all other PHBs? >> Would they not require some intelligent rewrite of the DSCP when >> traffic enters the bleaching domain? >> And if so, why should not the same approach be used for LE in this domain? >> >> Regards, >> Sasha >> >> Office: +972-39266302 >> Cell: +972-549266302 >> Email: Alexander.Vainshtein@ecitele.com<mailto:Alexander.Vainshtein@ecitele.com> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Bless, Roland (TM) [mailto:roland.bless@kit.edu] >> Sent: Tuesday, May 8, 2018 12:26 PM >> To: Alexander Vainshtein ; >> gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk<mailto:gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk> >> Cc: tsvwg@ietf.org<mailto:tsvwg@ietf.org> >> Subject: Re: [tsvwg] Doubts regarding motivation of >> draft-ietf-tsvwg-iana- >> dscp-registry-04 >> >> Hi Sasha, >> >>> Am 08.05.2018 um 09:56 schrieb Alexander Vainshtein: >>> I have looked up the draft >>> >>> , and I have doubts regarding validity of its motivation. >>> >>> The draft says - correctly -that 22 out of 32 values in Pool 1 of >>> the DSCP code points have been already assigned, therefore it >>> considers this pool as nearly exhausted. >>> >>> What the draft does not say that, out of these 22 assignments, 2o >>> have been done in 1998 and one - in 1999. Only one assignment has >>> been requested in the past 19 years, and no assignments have been >>> requested after 2010. >> >>> At this rate my estimate is that Pool 1 would suffice for the next >>> 50+ years without its exhaustion becoming an issue. So why should >>> the IETF do anything */now/*? >> >> This is motivated in section 1: >> >> The rationale for this update is a need >> to assign codepoints for particular PHBs that are unable to use any >> of the unassigned values in Pool 1. >> >> This problem is caused by implementations that do IP precedence >> bleaching (i.e., zeroing the top three bits of the DSCP) thereby >> rewriting (or unintentionally mapping) DSCP values to other DSCP >> values. This is a problem for the mentioned LE PHB I-D >> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-tsvwg-le- >> phb >> It is possible that some other standardized DSCPs get mapped to the LE >> PHB DSCP if the LE DSCP were taken from the DSCP standards action pool >> 1 (xxxxx0). >> >> There are measurements and more background material for this: >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/99/materials/slides-99-tsvwg-sess >> b- >> 31measurements-concerning-the-dscp-for-a-le-phb-00 >> https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/96/slides/slides-96-maprg-6.pdf >> >> Regards, >> Roland >> >> __________________________________________________________ >> _________________ >> >> This e-mail message is intended for the recipient only and contains >> information which is CONFIDENTIAL and which may be proprietary to ECI >> Telecom. If you have received this transmission in error, please >> inform us by e-mail, phone or fax, and then delete the original and >> all copies thereof. >> __________________________________________________________ >> _________________ > > ___________________________________________________________________________ > > This e-mail message is intended for the recipient only and contains information which is > CONFIDENTIAL and which may be proprietary to ECI Telecom. If you have received this > transmission in error, please inform us by e-mail, phone or fax, and then delete the original > and all copies thereof. > ___________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________

This e-mail message is intended for the recipient only and contains information which is 
CONFIDENTIAL and which may be proprietary to ECI Telecom. If you have received this 
transmission in error, please inform us by e-mail, phone or fax, and then delete the original 
and all copies thereof.
___________________________________________________________________________