Hi Stewart,

This thread started with your comment “Please see the note that I sent about 
iOAM who also want to sit after BoS … and both of you want the same space that 
PALS and DetNet is already using”, but now it seems that we’re on the same page 
– GDFH starting with 0000b is fine and is not competing with IOAM or PW/DETNET 
CW?

Thanks.
Jeffrey

From: Stewart Bryant <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, February 22, 2021 5:15 AM
To: Jeffrey (Zhaohui) Zhang <[email protected]>
Cc: Stewart Bryant <[email protected]>; [email protected]; mpls 
<[email protected]>; [email protected]; Kireeti Kompella <[email protected]>; Ron 
Bonica <[email protected]>; <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: draft-zzhang-intarea-generic-delivery-functions

[External Email. Be cautious of content]

The DetNet CW is described in RFC8964 and is





      0                   1                   2                   3

      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

     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

     |0 0 0 0|                Sequence Number                        |

     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+



                       Figure 5: DetNet Control Word



In all defined control words



The 0000 is simply ECMP defeat and has no other purpose.



0001 means ACH



An ACH is currently defined not to carry service/user data - it is a 
control/OAM channel.



You cannot assume anything about a payload starting 0000.



In MPLS the bottom label (alone) defines how you process the payload. So you 
know that you have a CW from the bottom label and by no other means.



In other words the the FEC of the bottom label and its associated parameters 
are the way that signalling protocol knows what instructions to give the 
forwarder, and the way that the forwarder knows what to do with the packet is 
from the instructions associated with the BoS label. This is the universal 
model for MPLS including for IP packets.



Stewart



On 19 Feb 2021, at 15:42, Jeffrey (Zhaohui) Zhang 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:

Hi Stewart,

I still have to read more about DetNet, but I am not sure if there is a real 
contention with PALS.

My understanding of 0000 nibble in PW control world is that it is only to 
prevent a transit node from mistaking the payload as IP. Is it supposed to 
indicate that any payload starting with 0000 is PW payload? I hope not.

Use of 0000 nibble in GDFH is also just to prevent transit nodes from mistaking 
it as IP. It does indicate it is GDFH. It should be able to co-exist with PW CW.

Thanks.
Jeffrey

-----Original Message-----
From: Jeffrey (Zhaohui) Zhang
Sent: Thursday, February 18, 2021 10:35 PM
To: Stewart Bryant <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Cc: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>; mpls 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>; 
Kireeti Kompella <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Ron Bonica 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Subject: RE: draft-zzhang-intarea-generic-delivery-functions

Stewart, all,

I apologize for not responding to this in time. I some how accidentally moved a 
few wg mailing list email folders to a place where I could not see so I missed 
all the discussions.
Let me catch up all the emails and then reply.

Thanks.
Jeffrey

-----Original Message-----
From: Stewart Bryant <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Sent: Tuesday, January 12, 2021 9:59 AM
To: Jeffrey (Zhaohui) Zhang <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Cc: Stewart Bryant <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; 
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>; mpls 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>; 
Kireeti Kompella <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Ron Bonica 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Subject: Re: draft-zzhang-intarea-generic-delivery-functions

[External Email. Be cautious of content]


Thank you Jeffery

Please see the note that I sent about iOAM who also want to sit after BoS … and 
both of you want the same space that PALS and DetNet is already using.

We plan to have a joint session on this hosted by PALS at the next IETF, but I 
think we also need to include the iOAM people.

This has scope to get very messy as we find new candidates for BoS metadata so 
we really need to take a holistic position to ensure the future health the MPLS 
protocol.

- Stewart



On 12 Jan 2021, at 14:27, Jeffrey (Zhaohui) Zhang 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:

Hi,

I just posted 
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-zzhang-intarea-generic-delivery-functions/__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!QyBnufJO58LP6Diq96EdYEe2kxFtiItOdNuXbu_RIMekK2pkpOj4Mmj7b9MseV-Y$<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-zzhang-intarea-generic-delivery-functions/__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!QyBnufJO58LP6Diq96EdYEe2kxFtiItOdNuXbu_RIMekK2pkpOj4Mmj7b9MseV-Y$>
 .

The initial version was posted to the tsvwg 
(https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-zzhang-tsvwg-generic-transport-functions-00__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!QyBnufJO58LP6Diq96EdYEe2kxFtiItOdNuXbu_RIMekK2pkpOj4Mmj7b5lS_Jea$<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/tools.ietf.org/html/draft-zzhang-tsvwg-generic-transport-functions-00__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!QyBnufJO58LP6Diq96EdYEe2kxFtiItOdNuXbu_RIMekK2pkpOj4Mmj7b5lS_Jea$>
 ). After discussions/feedback we are re-homing it to intarea wg. This new 
version also contains quite some changes based on the comments and feedback 
that we received (special thanks to Stewart).

Comments and suggestions are appreciated.

Thanks.
Jeffrey

Juniper Business Use Only


Juniper Business Use Only



Juniper Business Use Only
_______________________________________________
Int-area mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area

Reply via email to