Hi Stephane,
The rational for the suggested change comes from recent requirements for
per-mcast-flow DF election where it is required to be able to do DF election
for multicast traffic independently from Broadcast and Unknown Unicast traffic.
Up to this point, DF election has been done for the entire BUM traffic;
whereas, there are some asks that DF election for BU traffic to be done by one
algorithm (e.g., vlan carving) and the DF election for M traffic to be done by
HRW. To accommodate this requirements, the proposed change is to limit the
“DF-Alg” field to five bits and use the remaining three bits for M-traffic
(let’s call this new field DF-M). A value 0 for DF-M indicates that multicast
traffic is governed by the same algorithm represented by “DF-Alg” field. For
example, 0x01 means HRW algorithm to be used for All BUM traffic. A none zero
value for DF-M means that multicast traffic to be governed by the indicated
DF-M typ. For example, 0x20 means use VLAN carving for BU traffic an HRW for
(S,G) flows and 0x40 means use VLAN carving for BU traffic and HRW for (*,G)
flows. This stuff will be described in details in per-mcast-flow-df-election
draft.
Regards,
Ali
From: "stephane.litkow...@orange.com" <stephane.litkow...@orange.com>
Date: Wednesday, November 21, 2018 at 1:08 AM
To: Cisco Employee <saja...@cisco.com>, "bess@ietf.org" <bess@ietf.org>
Cc: "bess-cha...@ietf.org" <bess-cha...@ietf.org>, "martin.vigour...@nokia.com"
<martin.vigour...@nokia.com>
Subject: PLEASE LOOK: minor change to
draft-ietf-bess-evpn-df-election-framework-05 => two weeks poll to get feedback
Hi Ali,
Thanks a lot for your email.
Speaking as chair, could you please highlight to the working group the
rationale of the change and associated use case ? Just to give the context…
To WG Folks,
Please review this change with care. There are two points that I would like to
highlight:
* We need to ensure that there is no current implementation using the value
255. Please raise your voice if you are aware of one.
* The encoding of the mcast DF election algorithm could now be decorrelated
from the base DF alg (applicable to Broadcast and Unknown traffic). The
proposed encoding uses 3 bits for the mcast DF alg. We have to ensure that:
* 3 bits is enough
* There will “never” (at least not mid term) be a requirement for
variable parameters for mcast DF election (like in DF pref draft).
I will let some time to think about this change and raise your support or
concerns.
The poll starts now and will end on Dec 5th.
This DF election framework will be an important component of EVPN and we need
to ensure that we are providing the required level of flexibility to address
the different use cases.
Thanks !
From: Ali Sajassi (sajassi) [mailto:saja...@cisco.com]
Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2018 00:25
To: bess@ietf.org
Cc: bess-cha...@ietf.org
Subject: minor change to draft-ietf-bess-evpn-df-election-framework-05
Folks,
The authors of the above draft are purposing a minor change to the draft and
since the draft is currently under review by IESG, the chair has asked to send
an email to the WG to solicit inputs and ensuring that there is no objection.
The proposed change is as follow:
Currently, the above draft defines an eight-bit “DF Alg” field as shown in the
following figure. The proposed change is to reduce the eight-bit field to a
five-bit field.
*** OLD Text
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Type=0x06 | Sub-Type(0x06)| DF Alg | Bitmap |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Bitmap | Reserved |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
o DF Alg (1 octet) - Encodes the DF Election algorithm values
(between 0 and 255) that the advertising PE desires to use for the
ES. This document requests IANA to set up a registry called "DF Alg
Registry" and solicits the following values:
- Type 0: Default DF Election algorithm, or modulus-based algorithm
as in [RFC7432<https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7432>].
- Type 1: HRW algorithm (explained in this document).
- Types 2-254: Unassigned.
- Type 255: Reserved for Experimental Use.
***NEW Text
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Type=0x06 | Sub-Type(0x06)| RSV | DF Alg | Bitmap |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Bitmap | Reserved |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
o DF Alg (5 bits) - Encodes the DF Election algorithm values
(between 0 and 31) that the advertising PE desires to use for the
ES. This document requests IANA to set up a registry called "DF Alg
Registry" and solicits the following values:
- Type 0: Default DF Election algorithm, or modulus-based algorithm
as in [RFC7432<https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7432>].
- Type 1: HRW algorithm (explained in this document).
- Types 2-30: Unassigned.
- Type 31: Reserved for Experimental Use.
The remaining 3-bits of that octet (bits 16, 17, and 18 in the above figure)
will be used by per-mcast-flow-df-election and will be expanded and described
there and will be discussed in the next IETF as usual at the BESS WG session.
Regards,
Ali & other co-authors
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations
confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc
pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce
message par erreur, veuillez le signaler
a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages
electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,
Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou
falsifie. Merci.
This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged
information that may be protected by law;
they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.
If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete
this message and its attachments.
As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been
modified, changed or falsified.
Thank you.
_______________________________________________
BESS mailing list
BESS@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess
