WG,

I agree with Jeffrey that the BESS adopted draft 
draft-ietf-bess-bgp-multicast-controller provides
Solution in the same problem space. It is good to discuss the two drafts before 
adopting
draft-hb-idr-sr-p2mp-policy in IDR.

Rgds
Shraddha



Juniper Business Use Only
From: Idr <idr-boun...@ietf.org> On Behalf Of Jeffrey (Zhaohui) Zhang
Sent: Friday, March 25, 2022 8:17 PM
To: Susan Hares <sha...@ndzh.com>; i...@ietf.org
Cc: 'p...@ietf.org' <p...@ietf.org>; 'BESS' <bess@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Idr] draft-hb-idr-sr-p2mp-policy (3/10 to 3/24/2022) - Adoption 
call

[External Email. Be cautious of content]

[+ BESS, PIM]

Hi,

I realized that in a hurry I did not respond to the specific questions below. 
Please see zzh> next to the questions.

Looks like that there are some comments on BESS/PIM list and I will go through 
those to see if I have any addition/follow-up on those.



Juniper Business Use Only
From: Idr <idr-boun...@ietf.org<mailto:idr-boun...@ietf.org>> On Behalf Of 
Jeffrey (Zhaohui) Zhang
Sent: Friday, March 25, 2022 6:30 AM
To: Susan Hares <sha...@ndzh.com<mailto:sha...@ndzh.com>>; 
i...@ietf.org<mailto:i...@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Idr] draft-hb-idr-sr-p2mp-policy (3/10 to 3/24/2022) - Adoption 
call

[External Email. Be cautious of content]

I am sorry for responding late. I somehow missed this.

I think we should discuss the relationship with 
daft-ietf-bess-bgp-multicast-controller further before adopting this.

Thanks.
Jeffrey



Juniper Business Use Only
From: Idr <idr-boun...@ietf.org<mailto:idr-boun...@ietf.org>> On Behalf Of 
Susan Hares
Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2022 10:28 AM
To: i...@ietf.org<mailto:i...@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Idr] draft-hb-idr-sr-p2mp-policy (3/10 to 3/24/2022) - Adoption 
call

[External Email. Be cautious of content]

IDR WG:

If you just wish to respond to the IDR list,
you may respond to this email on the adoption call.

Cheers, Sue

From: Idr [mailto:idr-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Susan Hares
Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2022 9:55 AM
To: i...@ietf.org<mailto:i...@ietf.org>; p...@ietf.org<mailto:p...@ietf.org>; 
bess@ietf.org<mailto:bess@ietf.org>
Subject: [Idr] draft-hb-idr-sr-p2mp-policy (3/10 to 3/24/2022)

This begins a 2 week WG adoption call for:
draft-hb-idr-sr-p2mp-policy from (3/10 to 3/24/2022)

You can obtain the draft at:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-hb-idr-sr-p2mp-policy/<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-hb-idr-sr-p2mp-policy/__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!TfiPI1NfecN3db3pj6WZ8paxUr4s6OvmVZ91mapddPFeCkFZJodxFk8aTGCpYg34$>

In your comments for this call please consider:

Zzh> I want to point out that 
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bess-bgp-multicast-controller/<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bess-bgp-multicast-controller/__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!VA2RfAmcBA46YljU7KP0svRjk7kWVgXhzfsGzul45PZ5GQ32gWZgaclSIG0DaUH9$>
 is another way to do the same. I also explained in 
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/KObeSgKPu3HRbd0ZN7L7fWq_Eto/<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/KObeSgKPu3HRbd0ZN7L7fWq_Eto/__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!VA2RfAmcBA46YljU7KP0svRjk7kWVgXhzfsGzul45PZ5GQ32gWZgaclSICdM0D1B$>
 why it was in the bess WG.
Zzh> In addition, the bess draft supports *other* multicast trees (IP, mLDP 
besides SR-P2MP) using a consistent way.

1)  Does this technology support the SR P2MP features
that distributes candidate paths which connect
a multicast distribution tree (tree to leaves).

Zzh> It is one way to use BGP to support that. The bess draft specifies another 
way.

2) Is the technology correctly specified for the
NLRI (AFI/SAFI) and the tunnel encapsulation attribute
additions (sections 2 and 3)?

Zzh> The specified SAFI and tunnel encapsulation attribute additions are one 
way for the BGP signaling for SR-P2MP. The bess draft specifies another way.

3) Does the P2MP policy operation (section 4)
provide enough information for those implementing this
technology and those deploying the technology?

4) Do you think this multicast technology is a good
Place to start for P2MP policy advertisement via BGP?

Zzh> Both ways are good place to start. We just need to figure out how to 
proceed with the two proposals.

5) Do you think this SR P2MP policies should not be advertised
via BGP?

Zzh> I do think BGP signaling for SR P2MP is appropriate. We just need to 
discuss the two ways and figure out how to proceed. The authors have discussed 
before though we have not reached consensus.
Zzh> Thanks!
Zzh> Jeffrey

Cheers, Susan Hares
_______________________________________________
BESS mailing list
BESS@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess

Reply via email to