Re: [trill] draft-ietf-trill-transport-over-mpls - WG LC (11/11 to 11/25)

2018-02-19 Thread R Parameswaran
Hi,


I support the draft in this process, please see inline:

This begins a 2 week WG LC for draft-ietf-trill-transport-over-MPLS
(11/11/2017 to 11/25/2017).  Please consider if this draft is ready for
publication.   In this consideration please consider:



1)  Does TRILL need to run over MPLS?  Some data centers are
interconnected over MPLS.  Does this capability aid in deployment of TRILL?

[RP]: Yes to both questions.

2)  Is this specification ready for publication?


[RP]: I have no objection to it being published, but have some review
comments below. From an high-level/overview perspective, it seems
reasonably clear/complete in terms of providing a problem statement
and specifying the technologies needed to resolve the problem
statement.

3)  Do you know of any problems with this specification?


[RP]:

a . I think the draft may need to be more clear on how it maps an
incoming (control and/or data-plane) packet to a specific tenant in
either approach. Are pseudo-wires/MPLS circuits shared between
tenants? Specifically if two or more tenants have the same switch-id
on the Rbridge side, how does the solution differentiate between them
based on the incoming packet?

b. How does multi-topology Trill fit into this draft?


c. Typos in figures 2, 4. Under "Rbat2" on the left-side of each
figure, the label should probably be "Tenant 2 Site 1" (as opposed to
"Tenant 2 Site 2")?

thanks,

Ramkumar









Susan Hares

(co-chair, document shepherd)
___
trill mailing list
trill@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/trill


Re: [trill] draft-ietf-trill-transport-over-mpls - WG LC (11/11 to 11/25)

2017-11-21 Thread Susan Hares
Andy:

 

Thank you for letting me know about this problem.  I will work with the authors 
to address it. 

 

sue

 

From: trill [mailto:trill-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Andrew G. Malis
Sent: Tuesday, November 21, 2017 2:21 PM
To: Susan Hares
Cc: Donald Eastlake; Alia Atlas; Jon Hudson; trill@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [trill] draft-ietf-trill-transport-over-mpls - WG LC (11/11 to 
11/25)

 

Sue,

 

I found that this draft has several places where interoperability between 
implementations could be difficult because there are several implementation 
choices that can be made, and the draft doesn’t make any particular 
recommendations or require any of the choices to be implemented.

 

1. There are two models defined, the VPLS and VPTS models, and the draft 
doesn’t recommend which to use for each of the two problem statements. If it 
were me, I would recommend the VPTS model as the default, as it is an emulated 
TRILL service.

 

2. When using the VPTS model, section 4.3 says that either the PPP or Ethernet 
encapsulation from RFC 7173 can be used, and makes no recommendation between 
them. However, RFC 7173 defines the PPP encapsulation as the chosen default, 
and that encapsulation should be used here as well.

 

I recommend that these be addressed before the draft is sent to the IESG.

 

Thanks,

Andy

 

 

On Sat, Nov 11, 2017 at 7:21 PM, Susan Hares  wrote:

This begins a 2 week WG LC for draft-ietf-trill-transport-over-MPLS (11/11/2017 
to 11/25/2017).  Please consider if this draft is ready for publication.   In 
this consideration please consider:

 

1)  Does TRILL need to run over MPLS?  Some data centers are interconnected 
over MPLS.  Does this capability aid in deployment of TRILL?

2)  Is this specification ready for publication?  

3)  Do you know of any problems with this specification?

 

 

Susan Hares 

(co-chair, document shepherd) 


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

 

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


Re: [trill] draft-ietf-trill-transport-over-mpls - WG LC (11/11 to 11/25)

2017-11-21 Thread Andrew G. Malis
Sue,

I found that this draft has several places where interoperability between
implementations could be difficult because there are several implementation
choices that can be made, and the draft doesn’t make any particular
recommendations or require any of the choices to be implemented.

1. There are two models defined, the VPLS and VPTS models, and the draft
doesn’t recommend which to use for each of the two problem statements. If
it were me, I would recommend the VPTS model as the default, as it is an
emulated TRILL service.

2. When using the VPTS model, section 4.3 says that either the PPP or
Ethernet encapsulation from RFC 7173 can be used, and makes no
recommendation between them. However, RFC 7173 defines the PPP
encapsulation as the chosen default, and that encapsulation should be used
here as well.

I recommend that these be addressed before the draft is sent to the IESG.

Thanks,
Andy


On Sat, Nov 11, 2017 at 7:21 PM, Susan Hares  wrote:

> This begins a 2 week WG LC for draft-ietf-trill-transport-over-MPLS
> (11/11/2017 to 11/25/2017).  Please consider if this draft is ready for
> publication.   In this consideration please consider:
>
>
>
> 1)  Does TRILL need to run over MPLS?  Some data centers are
> interconnected over MPLS.  Does this capability aid in deployment of TRILL?
>
> 2)  Is this specification ready for publication?
>
> 3)  Do you know of any problems with this specification?
>
>
>
>
>
> Susan Hares
>
> (co-chair, document shepherd)
>
> ___
> trill mailing list
> trill@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/trill
>
>
___
trill mailing list
trill@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/trill


Re: [trill] draft-ietf-trill-transport-over-mpls - WG LC (11/11 to 11/25)

2017-11-21 Thread Mohammed Umair
Support as a Co-Author.

I think this draft is ready for publication.

Datacenter Interconnection is critical part of any Data center design, this
draft provides a solution where trill DCI works over MPLS network.


Regards,
Umair

On Nov 12, 2017 5:51 AM, "Susan Hares"  wrote:

This begins a 2 week WG LC for draft-ietf-trill-transport-over-MPLS
(11/11/2017 to 11/25/2017).  Please consider if this draft is ready for
publication.   In this consideration please consider:



1)  Does TRILL need to run over MPLS?  Some data centers are
interconnected over MPLS.  Does this capability aid in deployment of TRILL?

2)  Is this specification ready for publication?

3)  Do you know of any problems with this specification?





Susan Hares

(co-chair, document shepherd)

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