Hi Gyan, Thank you for the support. Pls see inline or replies
Juniper Business Use Only From: Gyan Mishra <[email protected]> Sent: Saturday, August 15, 2020 11:54 AM To: Ketan Talaulikar (ketant) <[email protected]> Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: Re: [spring] WG adoption call for draft-hegde-spring-node-protection-for-sr-te-paths [External Email. Be cautious of content] I support WG adoption adoption of this draft. For operators moving towards SR technology, RSVP FRR is widely deployed by operators, so SR node protection is a critical feature for operators. >From the thread started by Joel Halpern I think path protection is as well >critical to operators. With regards to SR FRR node protection, how does TI-LFA FRR work in conjunction with SR FRR node protection for the same PLR junction to the merge point bypass loop. <Shraddha>SR path consists of a stack of labels. At any node the forwarding in based on top label. When there is node failure, the PLR of the failure node applies the procedures described in drat-hegde-spring-node-protection-for-sr-te-paths When the top label is adjacency SID or when the top label is a node-sid which is the nexthop. If the top label is a node-sid which is multiple hops away TI-LFA protection is applied. Is the concept of context table a requirement for node FRR as it will consume more resources. <shraddha> It is not absolutely necessary. Section 5 of the draft explains a mechanism that does not use context tables. In the bypass loop if their is only one next next hop path Neighbor or a few would a context table be necessary. <shraddha> Context table is generally necessary if the SRGB in the network is not uniform and if there are locally significant adjacency-sids used in the network. Since SR uses IGP SIDs and the paths for the labels change based on cost change etc The concept of next-nexthop is very dynamic. The recommendation is to use non context table based solution only when the Whole network has same SRGB and has global adj-sids deployed. For the node protection this does seem similar conceptually to RSVP node protection with the additional label to signal lsp to the merge point. <shraddha> You are right, this draft solves the same problem that RSVP node-protection solved. Kind Regards Gyan On Fri, Aug 14, 2020 at 8:25 AM Ketan Talaulikar (ketant) <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: Hi All, I believe this topic is relevant and something for the WG to adopt and work on. I have some concerns though on it's applicability and more specifically it's implications on existing deployments/use-cases. I've share the same on the thread started by Joel on this specific aspect [1]. Some discussion and clarity on this would help before adoption. One other bit, for the example in Sec 2.3, perhaps some text is required to clarify that this applies only for segments signalled via IGPs and if the 9054 was a BSID or BGP-EPE SID then this approach would not work. May I suggest to add a section 2.4 to capture these aspects (it would be some what on the lines of Sec 3.4 but not related to the context table solution). The document is well-written and detailed. It does a very good job of describing the node protection scenarios and options. Thanks, Ketan [1] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spring/8UIcjT9HMPc4XUp_WAiClFwpOmM/<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spring/8UIcjT9HMPc4XUp_WAiClFwpOmM/__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!QzQI1170ozGt2-POB1lhKY0DsjgDQPWB4RHkvxot707UY1_o3x7ZuestASWY56dz$> From: spring <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> On Behalf Of [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Sent: 30 July 2020 17:55 To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Cc: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Subject: [spring] WG adoption call for draft-hegde-spring-node-protection-for-sr-te-paths Hi SPRING WG, Authors of draft-hegde-spring-node-protection-for-sr-te-paths [1] have asked for WG adoption. Please indicate your support, comments, or objection, for adopting this draft as a working group item by August 20th 2020. (*) Could those who are willing to work on this document, please notify the list. That gives us an indication of the energy level in the working group to work on this. Thanks, Regards, Bruno, Jim, Joel [1] https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-hegde-spring-node-protection-for-sr-te-paths-07<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/tools.ietf.org/html/draft-hegde-spring-node-protection-for-sr-te-paths-07__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!QzQI1170ozGt2-POB1lhKY0DsjgDQPWB4RHkvxot707UY1_o3x7ZuestAXKFzg0B$> (*) 3 weeks to account for the IETF meeting week and the august/summer period. _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration, Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci. This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law; they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments. As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified. Thank you. _______________________________________________ spring mailing list [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!QzQI1170ozGt2-POB1lhKY0DsjgDQPWB4RHkvxot707UY1_o3x7ZuestARYLRezd$> -- [http://ss7.vzw.com/is/image/VerizonWireless/vz-logo-email]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/www.verizon.com/__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!QzQI1170ozGt2-POB1lhKY0DsjgDQPWB4RHkvxot707UY1_o3x7ZuestAXMBxTLz$> Gyan Mishra Network Solutions Architect M 301 502-1347 13101 Columbia Pike Silver Spring, MD
_______________________________________________ spring mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring
