Hi Daniel,

I agree w/ what you said, let the ipsec mailing list discussion this out, I
just opened the forum w/ my inputs "*instance-id".  *Since this draft is
towards keeping IKEv2/IPsec session alive when any fault is detected on
current node.

Thanks,
Yogendra Pal
(Ericssson, India)



On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 11:47 PM, Daniel Palomares <
[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi Yogendra,
>
> Thank you for your comments and pointing out the lack of the IPComp
> parameter.
> I will update the draft including the IPComp flag , as well as the IPcomp
> algo and the cpi-in/out values.
>
> I understand when you say  the draft "SHOULD capture at least
> *instance-id* or *flow-id". *However, I'm not familiar with this
> definitions as IKEv2 or IPsec standards. Please don't hesitate to address
> me to those documents if they are actually standardized.
>
> On the other hand, I could understand that those parameters you just
> mention (*instance-id* and *flow-id*), might be proprietary solutions to
> improve IPsec treatment among several processing units. If it is the case,
> I believe that our document may introduce supplementary information in the
> context prior some negotiation, but I believe we should let the whole
> mailing-list discuss about this.
>
> By now, our wish is to isolate the IKEv2 and IPsec mandatory parameters in
> order to keep an IKEv2/IPsec session alive.
>
> KR,
> Daniel Palomares
>
>
>
>
> 2014-02-18 17:25 GMT+01:00 yogendra pal <[email protected]>:
>
> Hi Daniel,
>>
>> Given that ike and ipsec can runs on different context and nodes, context
>> SHOULD capture at least *instance-id* or *flow-id*. This *instance-id*can 
>> help the node to identify which packet processing unit will process
>> this ipsec traffic or which ipsec instance out of multiple ipsec processing
>> unit will process this ipsec traffic.
>>
>> Let me take a simple example case to explain:
>>
>> On a node A, which has 10 processing unit (pu) = {1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10}
>> and out of which ike is using single unit = {1} and ipsec is using 7
>> processing unit(s) = {2,3,4,5,6,7,8} and other processing units = {9,10}
>> for general purpose.
>>
>> Each IPsec SA processing can be tied with specific processing unit and
>> can be called as *instance-id *or *flow-id*. This SA can hold *instance-id
>> *or *flow-id *information. Upon sync up of context for each IPsec SA to
>> other node B upon failure, it can process the same SA on specific
>> *instance-id* or *flow-id.*
>>
>> P.S: If your need some text around this, I can provide you a example and
>> usage of it.
>>
>> BR,
>> Yogendra Pal
>> (Ericsson, India)
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 11:20 AM, yogendra pal <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Daniel,
>>>
>>> Quickly went through your draft, have one input for you,
>>> [In section "*5. IPsec Session parameters*"]
>>>  - Consider to have case of IPCOMP also for ipsec session parameters.
>>>
>>>
>>> BR,
>>> Yogendra Pal
>>> (Ericsson)
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 7:39 PM, Daniel Palomares <
>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> Please find a draft we have Posted. They concern the definition of
>>>> IKEv2 and IPsec contexts.
>>>> Comments are welcome,
>>>>
>>>> BR,
>>>>
>>>> Daniel Palomares
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Name:        draft-plmrs-ipsecme-ipsec-ikev2-context-definition.
>>>>
>>>> Revision: 00
>>>> Title:       IKEv2/IPsec Context Definition
>>>> Document date:    2014-02-12
>>>> Group:        Individual Submission
>>>> Pages:        8
>>>> URL:
>>>> http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-plmrs-ipsecme-ipsec-ikev2-context-definition-00.txt<http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-mglt-dice-diet-esp-00.txt>
>>>> Status:
>>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-plmrs-ipsecme-ipsec-ikev2-context-definition/
>>>> Htmlized:
>>>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-plmrs-ipsecme-ipsec-ikev2-context-definition-00
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Abstract
>>>>
>>>>    IPsec/IKEv2 clusters are constituted of multiple nodes accessed via a
>>>>    single address by the end user.  The traffic is then split between
>>>>    the nodes via specific IP load balancing policies.  Once a session is
>>>>    assigned to a given node, IPsec makes it difficult to assign the
>>>>    session to another node.  This makes management operations and
>>>>    transparent high availability for end users difficult to perform
>>>>    within the cluster.
>>>>
>>>>    This document describes the contexts for IKEv2 and IPsec that MUST be
>>>>    transferred between two nodes so a session can be restored.  This
>>>>    makes possible to transfer an IPsec session transparently to the end
>>>>    user.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *Daniel* *PALOMARES*
>>>>
>>>> *Orange Labs, Issy-les-Moulineaux*
>>>>
>>>> +33 6 34 23 07 88
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> IPsec mailing list
>>>> [email protected]
>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>


-- 
Thanks and Regards,
Yogendra Pal
+919686202644
_______________________________________________
IPsec mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec

Reply via email to