> >>> running fine. i.e. conflict entries is not the nominal behavior in the
> >>> network, and conflict are detected and reported to the network operator
> >>> for
> >>> correction. (e.g. via the yang model, syslog, error message on the
> >>
n the
>>> individual (mapping server). In this assumption where a single node is
>>> misconfigured, preference many advertisement over a single one, maximize
>>> the number of valid advertisement kept. I agree that this is dependent on
>>> the assumption, and an
probably the best source, I'd be inclined to trust the originator of the IP
> > prefix, as the reference for the SID to be used.
> >
> > Regarding 2,
> > Some network operation people have expressed a need to control which
> > advertisement is preferred, especiall
essage-
>> From: spring [mailto:spring-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Martin Horneffer
>> Sent: Friday, July 22, 2016 10:59 AM
>> To: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg); spring@ietf.org
>> Cc: Horneffer, Martin
>> Subject: [spring] draft-ietf-spring-conflict-resolution - Preference
Here I meant Martin
Horneffer.
From: spring [mailto:spring-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Martin Horneffer
Sent: Friday, July 22, 2016 11:02 AM
To: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg); spring@ietf.org
Cc: Horneffer, Martin
Subject: Re: [spring] draft-ietf-spring-conflict-resolution - Policy
Hi Les,
comme
; To: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg); spring@ietf.org
> Cc: Horneffer, Martin
> Subject: [spring] draft-ietf-spring-conflict-resolution - Preference Rule
>
> Hi Les,
>
> this topic, and this document is in my eyes a very important one. Thanks
> a lot for writing and promoting it!
>
Hi Les, authors,
As an individual contributor.
Many thanks for the good slides presented in Berlin.
Please find below some proposed comments.
My email object may be misleading as I'm actually commenting on the slides, as
the draft doesn't reflect the slides
https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/96/
Hi Les,
this topic, and this document is in my eyes a very important one. Thanks
a lot for writing and promoting it!
During the Berlin WG session you proposed a new preference rule which
would make the policy choice easier. You asked for a discussion on the
list - more on your slides rather
NM, you have not answered my below email/proposal. I had waited for the new
version of the draft but it also does not touch this subject.
So, could you please consider and answer my comment?
In short, in an implementation-independent sentence:
> I'm wondering if we could address the conflict on a
..@gmail.com [mailto:rras...@gmail.com] *On Behalf Of *Robert
> Raszuk
> *Sent:* Tuesday, July 05, 2016 12:30 AM
> *To:* Les Ginsberg (ginsberg)
> *Cc:* bruno.decra...@orange.com; spring@ietf.org
> *Subject:* Re: [spring] draft-ietf-spring-conflict-resolution
>
>
>
> Hi Le
[mailto:rras...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Robert Raszuk
Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2016 12:30 AM
To: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg)
Cc: bruno.decra...@orange.com; spring@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [spring] draft-ietf-spring-conflict-resolution
Hi Les,
> However, this is not existing MPLS forwarding behavior
MT/OLN; spring@ietf.org<mailto:spring@ietf.org>
Subject: RE: draft-ietf-spring-conflict-resolution
Bruno -
Inline.
From: spring [mailto:spring-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
bruno.decra...@orange.com<mailto:bruno.decra...@orange.com>
Sent: Thursday, May 12, 2016 8:23 AM
To: spring@ietf
Les,
Thanks for the clarification with regarding to the meaning of SID.
Now, if the draft considers index, I'm afraid comparing index from different
protocols (using different SRGB) is meaningless. e.g.
IGP1:
SRGB: 1000-2000
Mapping entry: (PFX, 1.1.1.1/32, 1, 1, 0, 0)
IGP2:
SRGB: 2000-3000
ould you please consider and answer my comment?
In short, in an implementation-independent sentence:
> I'm wondering if we could address the conflict on a per FEC/Prefix basis
> rather than on a per IGP advertisement (range) basis.
> If so, this may avoid the discussion between
n 3.1.2. While there are no
> “Prefix-conflicts” across topologies, there are “SID Conflicts”. This is
> important to understand.*
>
> [Bruno3] Conflicts are related to a forwarding context i.e. FIB. This is
> equally important to understand. Please read
> https://tools.ietf.or
Bruno -
I agree with your point. The draft is only discussing SIDs as index values. We
will add some language to make that clear in the next revision.
Thanx.
Les
> -Original Message-
> From: bruno.decra...@orange.com [mailto:bruno.decra...@orange.com]
> Sent: Monday, July 04, 2016
rithm.
Les
Les
Thanks,
Bruno
From: spring [mailto:spring-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
bruno.decra...@orange.com<mailto:bruno.decra...@orange.com>
Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2016 1:57 PM
To: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg); spring@ietf.org<mailto:spring@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [spring]
t touch this subject.
So, could you please consider and answer my comment?
In short, in an implementation-independent sentence:
> I'm wondering if we could address the conflict on a per FEC/Prefix basis
> rather than on a per IGP advertisement (range) basis.
> If so, this may avo
Sent: Saturday, May 14, 2016 8:30 PM
To: DECRAENE Bruno IMT/OLN; spring@ietf.org<mailto:spring@ietf.org>
Subject: RE: draft-ietf-spring-conflict-resolution
Bruno -
Inline.
From: spring [mailto:spring-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
bruno.decra...@orange.com<mailto:bruno.decra...@orange
C/Prefix basis
> rather than on a per IGP advertisement (range) basis.
> If so, this may avoid the discussion between the Quarantine vs ignore policy.
Thanks
Bruno
From: spring [mailto:spring-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
bruno.decra...@orange.com<mailto:bruno.decra...@orange.com&g
Hi Les,
When talking about SID conflicts I think the document should spell out what it
means by SID.
Indeed, the architecture document defines SID as:
"SID: a Segment Identifier. Examples of SIDs are: a MPLS label, an
index value in a MPLS label space, an IPv6 address. Other types of
SID
Deccan -
From: peng.sha...@zte.com.cn [mailto:peng.sha...@zte.com.cn]
Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 2:46 AM
To: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg)
Cc: spring@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [spring] draft-ietf-spring-conflict-resolution
His Les,
1) From implementation, because preference algorithm is protocol
His Les,
1) From implementation, because preference algorithm is protocol
independent, it is better to do conflict resolution at a common place, not
at individual protocol instance. For example, we can do prefix-conflict
resolution when generate the preference FIB entry at the common place. For
om>
Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2016 1:57 PM
To: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg); spring@ietf.org<mailto:spring@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [spring] draft-ietf-spring-conflict-resolution
Les,
Thanks for your reply.
Please see inline [Bruno]
From: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) [mailto:ginsb...@cisco.com]
Sent
ge) basis.
> If so, this may avoid the discussion between the Quarantine vs ignore policy.
Thanks
Bruno
From: spring [mailto:spring-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
bruno.decra...@orange.com<mailto:bruno.decra...@orange.com>
Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2016 1:57 PM
To: Les Ginsberg (
spring [mailto:spring-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Les Ginsberg
(ginsberg)
Sent: Wednesday, June 29, 2016 18:19
To: DECRAENE Bruno IMT/OLN
Cc: spring@ietf.org<mailto:spring@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [spring] draft-ietf-spring-conflict-resolution
Bruno -
From: bruno.decra...@orange.com<ma
7 PM
To: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg); spring@ietf.org<mailto:spring@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [spring] draft-ietf-spring-conflict-resolution
Les,
Thanks for your reply.
Please see inline [Bruno]
From: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) [mailto:ginsb...@cisco.com]
Sent: Saturday, May 14, 2016 8:30 PM
To: DECRAE
this may avoid the discussion between the Quarantine vs ignore policy.
Thanks
Bruno
From: spring [mailto:spring-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
bruno.decra...@orange.com<mailto:bruno.decra...@orange.com>
Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2016 1:57 PM
To: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg); spring@ietf
Best Regards,
Stephane
From: spring [mailto:spring-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Les Ginsberg
(ginsberg)
Sent: Wednesday, June 29, 2016 18:19
To: DECRAENE Bruno IMT/OLN
Cc: spring@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [spring] draft-ietf-spring-conflict-resolution
Bruno -
From: bruno.decra...@orange.com<ma
Behalf Of
bruno.decra...@orange.com<mailto:bruno.decra...@orange.com>
Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2016 1:57 PM
To: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg); spring@ietf.org<mailto:spring@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [spring] draft-ietf-spring-conflict-resolution
Les,
Thanks for your reply.
Please see inline [Brun
discussion between the Quarantine vs ignore policy.
Thanks
Bruno
From: spring [mailto:spring-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
bruno.decra...@orange.com<mailto:bruno.decra...@orange.com>
Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2016 1:57 PM
To: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg); spring@ietf.org<mailto:spring@ietf.or
f
bruno.decra...@orange.com
Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2016 1:57 PM
To: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg); spring@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [spring] draft-ietf-spring-conflict-resolution - Policy
Les,
Please see inline [Bruno]
From: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) [mailto:ginsb...@cisco.com]
Sent: Sunday, May 15, 2016 12:41 A
om: spring [mailto:spring-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
bruno.decra...@orange.com
Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2016 1:57 PM
To: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg); spring@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [spring] draft-ietf-spring-conflict-resolution
Les,
Thanks for your reply.
Please see inline [Bruno]
From: Les Ginsberg
ring-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
bruno.decra...@orange.com<mailto:bruno.decra...@orange.com>
Sent: Thursday, May 12, 2016 8:23 AM
To: spring@ietf.org<mailto:spring@ietf.org>
Subject: [spring] draft-ietf-spring-conflict-resolution - Policy
Hi authors, all
As an individual contributor, please fin
Hi Les,
Thanks for your quick replay.
Inline [Bruno]
From: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) [mailto:ginsb...@cisco.com]
Sent: Saturday, May 14, 2016 8:07 PM
To: DECRAENE Bruno IMT/OLN; spring@ietf.org<mailto:spring@ietf.org>
Subject: RE: [spring] draft-ietf-spring-conflict-resolution - Pref
n Behalf Of Les Ginsberg
(ginsberg)
Sent: Saturday, May 14, 2016 3:41 PM
To: bruno.decra...@orange.com<mailto:bruno.decra...@orange.com>;
spring@ietf.org<mailto:spring@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [spring] draft-ietf-spring-conflict-resolution - Policy
Bruno -
I am having difficulty parsing t
...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
bruno.decra...@orange.com<mailto:bruno.decra...@orange.com>
Sent: Thursday, May 12, 2016 8:23 AM
To: spring@ietf.org<mailto:spring@ietf.org>
Subject: [spring] draft-ietf-spring-conflict-resolution
Hi,
As an individual contributor, please find below s
lict - as
the example I presented below demonstrates.
Are we closer to agreement now?
Les
From: spring [mailto:spring-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Les Ginsberg
(ginsberg)
Sent: Saturday, May 14, 2016 3:41 PM
To: bruno.decra...@orange.com; spring@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [spring] draft-ietf-sp
pring [mailto:spring-boun...@ietf.org] *On Behalf Of *
bruno.decra...@orange.com
*Sent:* Thursday, May 12, 2016 8:23 AM
*To:* spring@ietf.org
*Subject:* [spring] draft-ietf-spring-conflict-resolution - Policy
Hi authors, all
As an individual contributor, please find below some feedback on
00, 1, 1, 0) !VPN1
The latter choice is suboptimal because it prevents use of the VPN2 entry
unnecessarily.
This point needs to be made explicit in the draft.
Les
From: spring [mailto:spring-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
bruno.decra...@orange.com
Sent: Thursday, May 12, 2016 8:23 AM
To:
g@ietf.org<mailto:spring@ietf.org>"
mailto:spring@ietf.org>>
Subject: Re: [spring] draft-ietf-spring-conflict-resolution - Preference
Algorithm
Bruno -
Thanx for your comments – inline.
From: spring [mailto:spring-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
bruno.decra...@orange.com<mailto:bruno.d
Bruno -
Inline.
From: spring [mailto:spring-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
bruno.decra...@orange.com
Sent: Thursday, May 12, 2016 8:23 AM
To: spring@ietf.org
Subject: [spring] draft-ietf-spring-conflict-resolution
Hi,
As an individual contributor, please find below some comments:
--
Isn&#
Bruno -
Thanx for your comments - inline.
From: spring [mailto:spring-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
bruno.decra...@orange.com
Sent: Thursday, May 12, 2016 8:23 AM
To: spring@ietf.org
Subject: [spring] draft-ietf-spring-conflict-resolution - Preference Algorithm
Hi authors, all
As an
Hi,
As an individual contributor, please find below some comments:
--
Isn't this document specific to the MPLS dataplane?
If so, it could be indicated in the introduction, and possibly in the abstract.
Then this indication could be removed from the 1rst sentence of sections 2 & 3.
--
§3
"Mapping
Hi authors, all
As an individual contributor, please find below some feedback on the policy.
I'm wondering if we could address the conflict on a per FEC/Prefix basis rather
than on a per IGP advertisement basis.
If so, this may avoid the discussion between the Quarantine vs ignore policy.
The p
Hi authors, all
As an individual contributor, please find below some feedback to trigger
discussion on the Preference Algorithm defined in §3.2.4.
> 1. Smaller range wins
Looks ok to me, as this gives preference to Prefix-SID advertisement from SR
routers which speaks for themselves/their o
46 matches
Mail list logo
