[Lsr] 答复: New Version Notification for draft-wang-lsr-igp-extensions-ifit-00.txt

2020-07-22 Thread qinfengwei
Hi Chris.,
Thank you for your response.

To be clear. We are implementing IFIT, that is, the basic measurement and 
monitoring. In the deployment, we need to bound the test traffic within a 
limited domain. 
But right now we can only use manual configuration. Motivated by this, the 
protocol-based automation is required.

I think the proposed IGP extension is useful and meets our requirement well.



Thanks,
Fengwei Qin

-邮件原件-
发件人: Christian Hopps [mailto:cho...@chopps.org] 
发送时间: 2020年7月20日 19:35
收件人: qinfengwei
抄送: Christian Hopps; wangyali; lsr@ietf.org
主题: Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for 
draft-wang-lsr-igp-extensions-ifit-00.txt

So full speed ahead and ignoring the views expressed in the LSR WG? This is not 
a recipe for success if you are basing your implementation on using LSR 
protocols.

Thanks,
Chris.
[As WG member]

> On Jul 19, 2020, at 9:30 PM, qinfengwei  wrote:
> 
> Hi,
>   IFIT Capability Advertisement accurately tracks the urgent requirements 
> and real challenges when IFIT implementation.
>   Right now, the IFIT test has been performed and is under 
> implementation. We found that signaling Node IFIT capability to ingress nodes 
> is indeed helpful for determining whether IFIT header and data fields could 
> be encapsulated in packets.
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> Fengwei Qin
> 
> -邮件原件-
> 发件人: wangyali [mailto:wangyal...@huawei.com]
> 发送时间: 2020年7月16日 23:20
> 收件人: 'lsr@ietf.org'
> 主题: FW: New Version Notification for draft-wang-lsr-igp-extensions-ifit-00.txt
> 
> Dear LSR WG,
> 
> We've uploaded a new revision of draft-wang-lsr-igp-extensions-ifit-00 to 
> replace draft-wang-lsr-ifit-node-capability-advertisement. In this new 
> revision, Node and Link Attribute TLVs are extended to IGP for signaling the 
> supported IFIT capability of egress and/or intermediate nodes to the ingress 
> nodes.
> 
> The changes in this revision are:
> 
> 1. added Link Attribute TLVs extension to IGP to signal IFIT Capability at 
> link granularity.
> 2. updated Application section, which illustrates such advertisements would 
> helpful for avoiding the leak of IFIT-specific header and metadata, as well 
> as, for ingress routers to gather each router's IFIT capability for achieving 
> the computation of TE paths or loose TE paths that be able to fulfill the 
> visibility of on-path OAM data.
> 3. updated Acknowledgements sections, in which, the authors would like to 
> thank Acee Lindem, Christian Hopps, Robert Raszuk, Les Ginsberg, Jeff 
> Tantsura, Rakesh Gandhi, Tony Li and Greg Mirsky for the comments.
> 4. adding China Telecom into the author list.
> 
> We are looking forward to hearing your feedback and comments, and try to 
> achieve consensus.
> 
> Thanks,
> Yali
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: internet-dra...@ietf.org [mailto:internet-dra...@ietf.org]
> Sent: Monday, July 13, 2020 9:15 PM
> To: Tianran Zhou ; wangyali ; 
> Huanan Chen ; Liumin (Lucy) 
> ; Ran Pang ; Liumin (Lucy) 
> 
> Subject: New Version Notification for 
> draft-wang-lsr-igp-extensions-ifit-00.txt
> 
> 
> A new version of I-D, draft-wang-lsr-igp-extensions-ifit-00.txt
> has been successfully submitted by Yali Wang and posted to the IETF 
> repository.
> 
> Name:   draft-wang-lsr-igp-extensions-ifit
> Revision:   00
> Title:  IGP Extensions for In-situ Flow Information Telemetry (IFIT) 
> Capability Advertisement
> Document date:  2020-07-12
> Group:  Individual Submission
> Pages:  12
> URL:
> https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-wang-lsr-igp-extensions-ifit-00.txt
> Status: 
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-wang-lsr-igp-extensions-ifit/
> Htmlized:   
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-wang-lsr-igp-extensions-ifit-00
> Htmlized:   
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-wang-lsr-igp-extensions-ifit
> 
> 
> Abstract:
>   This document extends Node and Link Attribute TLVs to Interior
>   Gateway Protocols (IGP) to advertise supported In-situ Flow
>   Information Telemetry (IFIT) capabilities at node and/or link
>   granularity.  An ingress router cannot insert IFIT-Data-Fields for
>   packets going into a path unless an egress router has indicated via
>   signaling that it has the capability to process IFIT-Data-Fields.  In
>   addition, such advertisements would be useful for ingress routers to
>   gather each router's IFIT capability for achieving the computation of
>   Traffic Engineering (TE) paths or loose TE paths that be able to
>   fulfill the visibility of on-path OAM data.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission 
> until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.
> 
> The IETF Secretariat
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> Lsr mailing list
> Lsr@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr




___
Lsr mailing list
Lsr@ietf.org

[Lsr] 答复: New Version Notification for draft-wang-lsr-igp-extensions-ifit-00.txt

2020-07-19 Thread qinfengwei
Hi,
IFIT Capability Advertisement accurately tracks the urgent requirements 
and real challenges when IFIT implementation.
Right now, the IFIT test has been performed and is under 
implementation. We found that signaling Node IFIT capability to ingress nodes 
is indeed helpful for determining whether IFIT header and data fields could be 
encapsulated in packets.



Thanks,
Fengwei Qin

-邮件原件-
发件人: wangyali [mailto:wangyal...@huawei.com] 
发送时间: 2020年7月16日 23:20
收件人: 'lsr@ietf.org'
主题: FW: New Version Notification for draft-wang-lsr-igp-extensions-ifit-00.txt

Dear LSR WG,

We've uploaded a new revision of draft-wang-lsr-igp-extensions-ifit-00 to 
replace draft-wang-lsr-ifit-node-capability-advertisement. In this new 
revision, Node and Link Attribute TLVs are extended to IGP for signaling the 
supported IFIT capability of egress and/or intermediate nodes to the ingress 
nodes.

The changes in this revision are:

1. added Link Attribute TLVs extension to IGP to signal IFIT Capability at link 
granularity.
2. updated Application section, which illustrates such advertisements would 
helpful for avoiding the leak of IFIT-specific header and metadata, as well as, 
for ingress routers to gather each router's IFIT capability for achieving the 
computation of TE paths or loose TE paths that be able to fulfill the 
visibility of on-path OAM data.
3. updated Acknowledgements sections, in which, the authors would like to thank 
Acee Lindem, Christian Hopps, Robert Raszuk, Les Ginsberg, Jeff Tantsura, 
Rakesh Gandhi, Tony Li and Greg Mirsky for the comments.
4. adding China Telecom into the author list.

We are looking forward to hearing your feedback and comments, and try to 
achieve consensus.

Thanks,
Yali


-Original Message-
From: internet-dra...@ietf.org [mailto:internet-dra...@ietf.org]
Sent: Monday, July 13, 2020 9:15 PM
To: Tianran Zhou ; wangyali ; 
Huanan Chen ; Liumin (Lucy) 
; Ran Pang ; Liumin (Lucy) 

Subject: New Version Notification for draft-wang-lsr-igp-extensions-ifit-00.txt


A new version of I-D, draft-wang-lsr-igp-extensions-ifit-00.txt
has been successfully submitted by Yali Wang and posted to the IETF repository.

Name:   draft-wang-lsr-igp-extensions-ifit
Revision:   00
Title:  IGP Extensions for In-situ Flow Information Telemetry (IFIT) 
Capability Advertisement
Document date:  2020-07-12
Group:  Individual Submission
Pages:  12
URL:
https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-wang-lsr-igp-extensions-ifit-00.txt
Status: 
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-wang-lsr-igp-extensions-ifit/
Htmlized:   
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-wang-lsr-igp-extensions-ifit-00
Htmlized:   
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-wang-lsr-igp-extensions-ifit


Abstract:
   This document extends Node and Link Attribute TLVs to Interior
   Gateway Protocols (IGP) to advertise supported In-situ Flow
   Information Telemetry (IFIT) capabilities at node and/or link
   granularity.  An ingress router cannot insert IFIT-Data-Fields for
   packets going into a path unless an egress router has indicated via
   signaling that it has the capability to process IFIT-Data-Fields.  In
   addition, such advertisements would be useful for ingress routers to
   gather each router's IFIT capability for achieving the computation of
   Traffic Engineering (TE) paths or loose TE paths that be able to
   fulfill the visibility of on-path OAM data.





Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission 
until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.

The IETF Secretariat





___
Lsr mailing list
Lsr@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr


[Lsr] 答复: New Version Notification for draft-wang-lsr-igp-extensions-ifit-00.txt

2020-07-17 Thread Lizhenbin
Hi Les,

I add one more case for your reference. There are several SR-Policy/SR-Tunnel 
implementations which depend on the configuration on the devices other than the 
controller. If the IFIT capability is enabled for these SR-Policy/Tunnels, IGP 
will be helpful for the ingress node to learn the capabilities of other nodes 
along the SR-Policy/Tunnel.





Best Regards,

Robin










发件人: Lsr [lsr-boun...@ietf.org] 代表 wangyali [wangyal...@huawei.com]
发送时间: 2020年7月17日 20:19
收件人: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg); lsr@ietf.org
主题: Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for 
draft-wang-lsr-igp-extensions-ifit-00.txt

Dear Les,

Many thanks for your quick feedback. We are very appreciate all of your 
insightful comments and advices. ☺

Please let me clarify the one of requirements is that the ingress node cannot 
insert IFIT instruction for packets going into a path unless the egress node 
signals its capability of processing IFIT data fields.

Actually, taking your suggestions and those of others into account, we tried to 
use NETCONF for query node capability.  However, in the scenario of SR-BE, the 
ingress node controls a path along which packets are transmitted, which is not 
included in a centralized controller. Therefore, extensions to IGP for node’s 
capability advertisement is considered as an efficient way but NETCONF doesn't 
work.

Best regards,
Yali

From: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) [mailto:ginsb...@cisco.com]
Sent: Friday, July 17, 2020 5:25 AM
To: wangyali ; lsr@ietf.org
Subject: RE: New Version Notification for 
draft-wang-lsr-igp-extensions-ifit-00.txt


Yali -



While it is kind of you to acknowledge many of us for our comments, in many 
cases (myself included) what we told you is that this does not belong in the 
IGPs.

Putting out a new draft which continues to push for advertising ifit in IGPs 
(even if in different TLVs) does not indicate that you are heeding our message. 






   Les





> -Original Message-

> From: Lsr mailto:lsr-boun...@ietf.org>> On Behalf Of 
> wangyali

> Sent: Thursday, July 16, 2020 8:20 AM

> To: lsr@ietf.org

> Subject: [Lsr] FW: New Version Notification for draft-wang-lsr-igp-

> extensions-ifit-00.txt

>

> Dear LSR WG,

>

> We've uploaded a new revision of draft-wang-lsr-igp-extensions-ifit-00 to

> replace draft-wang-lsr-ifit-node-capability-advertisement. In this new

> revision, Node and Link Attribute TLVs are extended to IGP for signaling the

> supported IFIT capability of egress and/or intermediate nodes to the ingress

> nodes.

>

> The changes in this revision are:

>

> 1. added Link Attribute TLVs extension to IGP to signal IFIT Capability at 
> link

> granularity.

> 2. updated Application section, which illustrates such advertisements would

> helpful for avoiding the leak of IFIT-specific header and metadata, as well 
> as,

> for ingress routers to gather each router's IFIT capability for achieving the

> computation of TE paths or loose TE paths that be able to fulfill the 
> visibility of

> on-path OAM data.

> 3. updated Acknowledgements sections, in which, the authors would like to

> thank Acee Lindem, Christian Hopps, Robert Raszuk, Les Ginsberg, Jeff

> Tantsura, Rakesh Gandhi, Tony Li and Greg Mirsky for the comments.

> 4. adding China Telecom into the author list.

>

> We are looking forward to hearing your feedback and comments, and try to

> achieve consensus.

>

> Thanks,

> Yali

>

>

> -Original Message-

> From: internet-dra...@ietf.org 
> [mailto:internet-dra...@ietf.org]

> Sent: Monday, July 13, 2020 9:15 PM

> To: Tianran Zhou mailto:zhoutian...@huawei.com>>; 
> wangyali

> mailto:wangyal...@huawei.com>>; Huanan Chen 
> mailto:chenhu...@chinatelecom.cn>>;

> Liumin (Lucy) mailto:lucy.liu...@huawei.com>>; Ran 
> Pang

> mailto:pang...@chinaunicom.cn>>; Liumin (Lucy) 
> mailto:lucy.liu...@huawei.com>>

> Subject: New Version Notification for draft-wang-lsr-igp-extensions-ifit-

> 00.txt

>

>

> A new version of I-D, draft-wang-lsr-igp-extensions-ifit-00.txt

> has been successfully submitted by Yali Wang and posted to the IETF

> repository.

>

> Name:   draft-wang-lsr-igp-extensions-ifit

> Revision:  00

> Title:  IGP Extensions for In-situ Flow Information Telemetry 
> (IFIT)

> Capability Advertisement

> Document date:2020-07-12

> Group:  Individual Submission

> Pages:   12

> URL:
> https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-wang-lsr-igp-

> extensions-ifit-00.txt

> Status: 
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-wang-lsr-igp-extensions-

>