Re: [v6ops] draft-ietf-6man-grand : saving lookups

Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com> Sun, 09 August 2020 19:13 UTC

Return-Path: <bob.hinden@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9280F3A0C51; Sun, 9 Aug 2020 12:13:26 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.098
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-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=gmail.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 wm97FrAIo9MW; Sun, 9 Aug 2020 12:13:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wr1-x429.google.com (mail-wr1-x429.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::429]) (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 B56203A0C44; Sun, 9 Aug 2020 12:13:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wr1-x429.google.com with SMTP id r4so6224532wrx.9; Sun, 09 Aug 2020 12:13:23 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to:cc:to :references; bh=5NysM5oE/9Yfc0Zl94GQ+9PQ5AExKLsrRU/Vh8LVp88=; b=vLcQZYdNI51rxIE0a6N+/jqoR6q4XmXEzBnlEd95i93Av9KgeXVV7lCQZHpqMDmuS7 ccKMiKDkRmdB7ltzMVRTt/sS1Ipp8rk74zp5sL3+aGTkFNYVLhEFA6MvSRvKRT40LIm2 Ul47rJItwFC0n7zz9l3XU1Y6wCPO/ETWXEOwArhBK+9TyUHOak4w7mRuIwF8O+K9vVVN DfgqgpZDkpdDPfqgWL3LgwMtp9532KViI2x9zdgHLv/KRqmZm5L73I5xgD/c+fOfFS7b +399+msTln7AVewvUnWctptxm5AjuOCugHhwdf4RfAGE1iWRexWbULgDr4GzYbulJDZF P9Hw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date :in-reply-to:cc:to:references; bh=5NysM5oE/9Yfc0Zl94GQ+9PQ5AExKLsrRU/Vh8LVp88=; b=l7PSRFAhXkPMc0CiEI9JxsxCVaPhXR+27+91O+Plk7bIqeTBkF47WJQyimoqtMrLjH pCu+zCrO+qN73uc2WR+nTYIkhk01lFLYoEgmKEaTxszx6vmN1FzjUmT4/7iK4P7fx573 PKvYVbhKE4utShofuHsoadMLmNn8U1Ok8Vs0TNlAvWVTDh61aPMCj4uKmwsL4lyFknYN H394CxdYxcw62Kyq8xMh1/NOkngV7AgOgmWuzK2enZhNustaP9bMVJ5MrPlqU+Rbuuqu SpdmkxJQnz5PKPrV+SJfoFKRd4oNyeWnecWcZkO0z9mz/5gQDRdgFgAX5EcMQCvMS1pr gcEA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532RrLP0NlKCYG3mAu6FrRNmJ3AZGSa4ABIqrSCeb16dZjHOD9zW 5RkYS1DNftg6Zd999VIitLA=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwjPwbby/mHl7e7UzJg9KHReZhQFK2IrdT7/EXuSPmXEuuqyPCaspYctqrPlQ/qPlItFQT0TQ==
X-Received: by 2002:a5d:514e:: with SMTP id u14mr20897499wrt.20.1597000402044; Sun, 09 Aug 2020 12:13:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ?IPv6:2601:647:5a00:ef0b:1072:f6de:c5f8:6a90? ([2601:647:5a00:ef0b:1072:f6de:c5f8:6a90]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id j5sm19145263wmb.12.2020.08.09.12.13.19 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sun, 09 Aug 2020 12:13:21 -0700 (PDT)
From: Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com>
Message-Id: <17A8FA06-3776-450A-B549-958157AD5784@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_84E74B78-3484-44A4-8D8A-2DA84F5EDD36"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha512
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.4 \(3445.104.15\))
Date: Sun, 9 Aug 2020 12:13:12 -0700
In-Reply-To: <4B1A43D0-45B1-4C73-8B09-089D4EC1FFF7@cisco.com>
Cc: Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com>, Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com>, "v6ops@ietf.org" <v6ops@ietf.org>, IPv6 List <ipv6@ietf.org>, Philip Homburg <pch-v6ops-9@u-1.phicoh.com>
To: "Pascal Thubert (pthubert)" <pthubert=40cisco.com@dmarc.ietf.org>
References: <m1k4nX7-0000ICC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net> <1D1A68AE-4C75-4DF0-8C7C-3500DB67C8FB@fugue.com> <4B1A43D0-45B1-4C73-8B09-089D4EC1FFF7@cisco.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.104.15)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/9peNv8eywoQv3s5KtgNXy5tRzcE>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] draft-ietf-6man-grand : saving lookups
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: v6ops discussion list <v6ops.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/v6ops/>
List-Post: <mailto:v6ops@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 09 Aug 2020 19:13:27 -0000

Pascal,

> On Aug 9, 2020, at 11:56 AM, Pascal Thubert (pthubert) <pthubert=40cisco.com@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
> 
> We have some Ted;
> 
> In large meetings we measured way above 100 ND multicast messages per second on the wire, for 90 minutes in a row.

What does “way above 100” mean?   101, 1000, 10000, ?

100 per second doesn’t seem excessive to me.  What percentage of overall messages was that?  How many nodes on the link?

Bob


> 
> This was on the wire because we use proprietary tech to dampen the wireless side, things like ND proxy but based on snooping for the lack of a better information.
> 
> I asked for the figures at the last 2 in person IETF meetings but never got them. First time I asked too late, there needs to be due process to guarantee anonymity. Not sure if they were captured in Singapore and if so where they are.
> 
> Take care,
> 
> Pascal
> 
>> Le 9 août 2020 à 18:04, Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com> a écrit :
>> 
>> Do we have data that indicates that this would be an improvement?
>> 
>>> On Aug 9, 2020, at 11:47, Philip Homburg <pch-v6ops-9@u-1.phicoh.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> So what I'm after is the host behavior of "not onlink" for the
>>>> lookup phase, the router behavior of onlink for the redirect phase,
>>>> and the L bit set iff the link is P2P or a transit. E.g., in a
>>>> distributed fabric, all addresses "reside on-link and can be reached
>>>> directly without going through a router" and yet we want to avoid
>>>> broadcast lookups.
>>> 
>>> Suppose we have a no-multicast bit, that tells a host to send traffic to
>>> its default router when it doesn't have a neighbor in the NC cache.
>>> 
>>> It is not clear to me how the semantics would be different from clearing the
>>> L-bit, but if you think there are considerable differences, why no write
>>> a draft that describes the use of such a bit.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
>>> ipv6@ietf.org
>>> Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
> ipv6@ietf.org
> Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
> --------------------------------------------------------------------