+1

On Thu, Feb 17, 2022 at 1:11 PM Rabadan, Jorge (Nokia - US/Sunnyvale) <
[email protected]> wrote:

> I agree with Vasilenko.
>
>
>
> The meaning of the label is given by the encapsulation, e.g. for the EVPN
> family, label=VNI if the bgp encapsulation extended community indicates
> VXLAN, and label=MPLS-label if the encapsulation indicates MPLS.
>
>
>
> In this document, the label is a transposed function if the encapsulation
> indicates SRv6 (given by the SRv6 Services TLV). So it is consistent with
> the approach used by SAFIs that support different identifiers in the label
> field.
>
>
>
> Thanks.
>
> Jorge
>
>
>
> *From: *Vasilenko Eduard <[email protected]>
> *Date: *Thursday, February 17, 2022 at 8:30 AM
> *To: *Warren Kumari <[email protected]>, Ron Bonica <[email protected]>
> *Cc: *[email protected] <
> [email protected]>, [email protected] <
> [email protected]>, [email protected] <[email protected]>, [email protected] <
> [email protected]>
> *Subject: *RE: [bess] [Last-Call] Intdir telechat review of
> draft-ietf-bess-srv6-services-10
>
> Hi all,
>
> About this point:
>
> 1) In Section 3.2.1, the draft transposes bits into the MPLS Label field.
> This
> is surprising because MPLS appears nowhere in the forwarding plane. Maybe
> we
> shouldn't advertise an MPLS label?
>
>
>
> I have seen in some BESS documents that this field is called “Service
> Label”, not “MPLS label”.
>
> Because MPLS does not exist in VxLAN too, but the same label is used.
>
> Hence, 1) is easy to resolve. It is just a terminology correction that
> makes sense in principle for all BESS documents.
>
> Eduard
>
> *From:* BESS [mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Warren Kumari
> *Sent:* Thursday, February 17, 2022 4:37 AM
> *To:* Ron Bonica <[email protected]>
> *Cc:* [email protected]; [email protected];
> [email protected]; [email protected]
> *Subject:* Re: [bess] [Last-Call] Intdir telechat review of
> draft-ietf-bess-srv6-services-10
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Feb 14, 2022 at 11:20 AM Ron Bonica via Datatracker <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
> Reviewer: Ron Bonica
> Review result: Not Ready
>
> I am an assigned INT directorate reviewer for
> draft-ietf-bess-srv6-services.txt.
> These comments were written primarily for the benefit of the Internet Area
> Directors. Document editors and shepherd(s) should treat these comments
> just
> like they would treat comments from any other IETF contributors and resolve
> them along with any other Last Call comments that have been received. For
> more
> details on the INT Directorate, see
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/group/intdir/about/
> <https://datatracker.ietf.org/group/intdir/about/>.
>
> Major issues:
>
> 1) In Section 3.2.1, the draft transposes bits into the MPLS Label field.
> This
> is surprising because MPLS appears nowhere in the forwarding plane. Maybe
> we
> shouldn't advertise an MPLS label?
>
> 2) In Section 3.2.1 the draft says:
>
>   BGP speakers that do not support this specification may misinterpret,
>    on the reception of an SRv6-based BGP service route update, the part
>    of the SRv6 SID encoded in MPLS label field(s) as MPLS label values
>    for MPLS-based services.  Implementations supporting this
>    specification SHOULD provide a mechanism to control the advertisement
>    of SRv6-based BGP service routes on a per-neighbor and per-service
>    basis.  The details of deployment designs and implementation options
>    are outside the scope of this document.
>
>
>
> Much thanks to Ron for this OpsDir review -- I'd completely missed the
> above points, and they are important to address.
>
>
>
> W
>
>
>
>
>
> s/BGP speakers that do not support this specification/Legacy BGP
> implementations
>
> It seems that this isn't backwards compatible unless either:
>
> - the SHOULD becomes a MUST
> - the mechanism is described in this document
>
> 3) I concur with Warren Kumari's DISCUSS
>
>
>
> --
> last-call mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> The computing scientist’s main challenge is not to get confused by the
> complexities of his own making.
>   -- E. W. Dijkstra
>
_______________________________________________
BESS mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess

Reply via email to