Re: Fwd: [mpls] New Liaison Statement, "LS on the consent of draft Recommendation ITU-T Q.3962 (ex. Q.joint_tr) Requirements and Reference Model for optimized traceroute of joint Internet Protocol/Multi-Protocol Label Switching
Joel Halpern <[email protected]> Wed, 21 Feb 2024 10:28:40 -0500
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.opsawg,gmane.ietf.mpls |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
I checked with the IETF's liaison manager for ITU-T. It turns out, process-wise, that the underlying document this refers to was fully approved by ITU-T in December. So there is nothing to respond to and no benefit for the IETF in generating a response. Yours, Joel On 2/17/2024 12:13 AM, [email protected] wrote: > Greg, > > I'm not the expert on ICMP, but as far as I see you are correct. > > I very much would like an ICMP expert to look at this, but I don't know > who to contact. Can anyone help me? > > /Loa > > >> Hi Loa, >> thank you for bringing to the discussion this liaison. I've looked through >> the prescribed processing and I have concerns about the scenario when an >> ICMP packet arrives at PE1 with the TTL=3. If I understand the process >> correctly, IP TTL is decremented and since it is non-zero, the ICMP packet >> is encapsulated in MPLS with MPLS TTL set to 2. If the MPLS network has >> more than one P node, that MPLS TTL expires at the second downstream P >> node. That node discovers the ICMP packet with TTL=2. And here I see two >> cases: >> >> - IP Dst is unknown to the P node >> - IP Dst is, somehow, known to the P node >> >> In the latter case, the P node will route the ICMP packet. In the former, >> as I understand it, will drop its ICMP Host unreachable. Either case is >> troublesome. >> Am I missing something in the process described in the liaison? Do you see >> a mistake in my thinking? >> >> Regards, >> Greg >> >> On Fri, Feb 16, 2024 at 2:08 AM <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> All, >>> >>> We have the liaison: >>> >>> "LS on the consent of draft Recommendation ITU-T Q.3962 (ex. Q.joint_tr) >>> Requirements and Reference Model for optimized traceroute of joint >>> Internet Protocol/Multi-Protocol Label Switching". >>> >>> I have tried to read the Recommendation, still have some concerns and >>> questions. >>> >>> The liaison was addressed to the OPSAWG, but Tianran (OPSAWG co-chair) >>> sent this to the MPLS WG that seem better fitted to respond if we want >>> to. >>> >>> One questions for the OPSAWG is that if the MPLS WG decides to respond >>> would the OPSAWG want to join in on the response? >>> >>> My concerns at moment are (possible there will be more) are rather high >>> level. >>> >>> The consented document is about "IP/MPLS" traceroute. This is core >>> IETF/IP >>> areas, and within the IETF design authority.. If the intention is to >>> align SG-11 protocols with IETF technology that is OK. >>> >>> If it is it is a bit odd that neither STD5 (which include ICMP) nor >>> RFC >>> 8029 are mentioned. In fact a consented Recommendation on IETF core >>> technology does not mention a single RFC. >>> >>> If the intention is to create an ITU-T owned version of traceroute we >>> are >>> back in the discussion on honoring design authorities. >>> >>> The terminology is not well aligned with the IETF RFC. There are >>> "MultiProtocol Label Switch" rather than "MultiProtocol Label >>> Switching", >>> MPLS tags (sic!), CE is said to be expanded as "Customer Equipment", >>> while >>> the common IETF usage is "Customer Edge", and there is more. >>> >>> Figure 6-1 deserves some scrutiny >>> >>> - the PEs seem to belong to both carrier and enterprise network >>> - half of the CE seem to belong to the enterprise network and the >>> other half to something undefined. >>> >>> Also figure 6-1, a normal MPLS network deployment would have IP >>> connectivity end to end and traceroute would just work over IP. >>> >>> Havin said that there is not always IP, e.g. MPLS-TP is built on the >>> assumption. that IP connectivity is not necessary. >>> >>> >>> I think we have good reason to respond even though the Liaison is "For >>> Information". >>> >>> I don't know where the responsibility for STD5/ICMP lies, but possibly >>> someone that know could forward. >>> >>> And I think it would be a good idea to call on Scott to coordinate a >>> response. >>> >>> /Loa >>> >>> >>>> <html><head><meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; >>>> charset=utf-8"></head><body dir="auto"><br >>>> id="lineBreakAtBeginningOfSignature"><div dir="ltr">Sent from my >>> iPhone</div><div dir="ltr"><br>Begin forwarded >>>> message:<br><br></div><blockquote type="cite"><div >>> dir="ltr"><b>From:</b> >>>> Greg Mirsky <[email protected]><br><b>Date:</b> 29 October >>> 2023 >>>> at 04:21:17 GMT+8<br><b>To:</b> Tony Li >>>> <[email protected]><br><b>Cc:</b> [email protected], Henk Birkholz >>> <[email protected]>, [email protected], >>> Tianran Zhou <[email protected]>, Warren >>> Kumari <[email protected]>, Joe Clarke <[email protected]>, >>> [email protected], Robert Wilton <[email protected]>, >>>> [email protected], [email protected]<br><b>Subject:</b> <b>Re: >>> [mpls] >>> New Liaison Statement, "LS on the consent of draft Recommendation ITU-T >>> Q.3962 (ex. Q.joint_tr) “Requirements and Reference Model for >>> optimized >>>> traceroute of joint Internet Protocol/Multi-Protocol Label >>>> Switchingâ€"</b><br><br></div></blockquote><blockquote >>> type="cite"><div >>> dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr">Hi Tony,<div>it appears to me that what this >>> recommendations describes is Uniform tunneling model (<a >>>> href="https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc3443">RFC 3443</a>) for >>> treating ICMP over MPLS (not sure whether the proponents of the >>> recommendation argue for using the uniform model for subscriber traffic >>> in >>> general).</div><div><br></div><div>Regards,</div><div>Greg</div></div><br><div >>> class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Sat, Oct 28, >>> 2023 >>>> at 10:35 AM Tony Li <<a >>>> href="mailto:[email protected]">[email protected]</a>> >>>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px >>> 0px >>>> 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><br> >>> Perhaps a pointer to IOAM-DEX and a “thanks, already doneâ€?<br> <br> >>>> T<br> >>>> <br> >>>> <br> >>>> > On Oct 28, 2023, at 10:14 AM, Adrian Farrel <<a >>>> href="mailto:[email protected]" >>>> target="_blank">[email protected]</a>> wrote:<br> >>>> > <br> >>>> > Thanks Tianran,<br> >>>> > <br> >>>> > I think you're right that these requirements are something the >>> MPLS >>> working group may want to look at.<br> >>>> > <br> >>>> > Working group: unless you have ITU-T internal access, look at the >>> copy of Q.3982 that was attached and can be seen at <a >>>> href=" >>> https://www.ietf.org/lib/dt/documents/LIAISON/liaison-2023-10-24-itu-t-sg-11-opsawg-ls-on-the-consent-of-draft-recommendation-itu-t-q3962-ex-qjoint_tr-requirements-and-reference-model-for-optim-attachment-1.pdf >>> " >>> rel="noreferrer" >>>> target="_blank"> >>> https://www.ietf.org/lib/dt/documents/LIAISON/liaison-2023-10-24-itu-t-sg-11-opsawg-ls-on-the-consent-of-draft-recommendation-itu-t-q3962-ex-qjoint_tr-requirements-and-reference-model-for-optim-attachment-1.pdf >>> </a> >>> Don't follow the URL in the liaison statement.<br> >>>> > <br> >>>> > The liaison is "for information", but we might want to look to >>> see >>> whether there is anything we can learn from the requirements presented, >>> whether we think there are existing ways of solving the problem >>> presented, >>>> and whether there is any response we want to send.<br> >>>> > <br> >>>> > Thanks,<br> >>>> > Adrian<br> >>>> > <br> >>>> > -----Original Message-----<br> >>>> > From: mpls <<a href="mailto:[email protected]" >>>> target="_blank">[email protected]</a>> On Behalf Of Tianran >>> Zhou<br> >>>> > Sent: 28 October 2023 10:10<br> >>>> > To: Liaison Statement Management Tool <<a >>>> href="mailto:[email protected]" >>>> target="_blank">[email protected]</a>>; Henk Birkholz <<a >>> href="mailto:[email protected]" >>>> target="_blank">[email protected]</a>>; Joe Clarke >>> <<a >>>> href="mailto:[email protected]" >>> target="_blank">[email protected]</a>>; >>>> <a href="mailto:[email protected]" target="_blank">[email protected]</a>; <a >>> href="mailto:[email protected]" >>>> target="_blank">[email protected]</a><br> >>>> > Cc: Tatiana Kurakova <<a >>> href="mailto:[email protected]" >>> target="_blank">[email protected]</a>>; Henk Birkholz <<a >>> href="mailto:[email protected]" >>>> target="_blank">[email protected]</a>>; <a >>>> href="mailto:[email protected]" >>>> target="_blank">[email protected]</a>; Robert Wilton <<a >>> href="mailto:[email protected]" >>> target="_blank">[email protected]</a>>; >>>> <a href="mailto:[email protected]" >>>> target="_blank">[email protected]</a>; Joe Clarke <<a >>>> href="mailto:[email protected]" >>> target="_blank">[email protected]</a>>; >>>> Operations and Management Area Working Group Discussion List <<a >>> href="mailto:[email protected]" target="_blank">[email protected]</a>>; >>> Warren Kumari <<a href="mailto:[email protected]" >>>> target="_blank">[email protected]</a>><br> >>>> > Subject: Re: [mpls] New Liaison Statement, "LS on the consent of >>> draft Recommendation ITU-T Q.3962 (ex. Q.joint_tr) “Requirements and >>> Reference Model for optimized traceroute of joint Internet >>>> Protocol/Multi-Protocol Label Switchingâ€"<br> >>>> > <br> >>>> > Hi MPLS WG,<br> >>>> > <br> >>>> > I forward this LS to MPLS because I believe it not really belongs >>> to >>>> OPSAWG.<br> >>>> > I think MPLS WG should be the right place to receive.<br> >>>> > <br> >>>> > Best,<br> >>>> > Tianran<br> >>>> > <br> >>>> > <br> >>>> > -----Original Message-----<br> >>>> > From: Liaison Statement Management Tool [mailto:<a >>>> href="mailto:[email protected]" >>> target="_blank">[email protected]</a>] >>>> <br> >>>> > Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2023 11:23 PM<br> >>>> > To: Henk Birkholz <<a >>>> href="mailto:[email protected]" >>>> target="_blank">[email protected]</a>>; Joe Clarke >>> <<a >>>> href="mailto:[email protected]" >>> target="_blank">[email protected]</a>>; >>>> Tianran Zhou <<a href="mailto:[email protected]" >>>> target="_blank">[email protected]</a>><br> >>>> > Cc: Henk Birkholz <<a >>>> href="mailto:[email protected]" >>>> target="_blank">[email protected]</a>>; Joe Clarke >>> <<a >>>> href="mailto:[email protected]" >>> target="_blank">[email protected]</a>>; >>>> Operations and Management Area Working Group Discussion List <<a >>> href="mailto:[email protected]" target="_blank">[email protected]</a>>; >>> Robert Wilton <<a href="mailto:[email protected]" >>>> target="_blank">[email protected]</a>>; Scott Mansfield >>>> <[email protected]>; Tatiana Kurakova <<a >>>> href="mailto:[email protected]" >>>> target="_blank">[email protected]</a>>; Tianran Zhou <<a >>> href="mailto:[email protected]" >>>> target="_blank">[email protected]</a>>; Warren Kumari <<a >>> href="mailto:[email protected]" >>> target="_blank">[email protected]</a>>; >>>> <a href="mailto:[email protected]" >>>> target="_blank">[email protected]</a>; <a >>>> href="mailto:[email protected]" >>>> target="_blank">[email protected]</a><br> >>>> > Subject: New Liaison Statement, "LS on the consent of draft >>> Recommendation ITU-T Q.3962 (ex. Q.joint_tr) “Requirements and >>> Reference >>>> Model for optimized traceroute of joint Internet >>> Protocol/Multi-Protocol >>> Label Switchingâ€"<br> >>>> > <br> >>>> > Title: LS on the consent of draft Recommendation ITU-T Q.3962 >>> (ex. >>> Q.joint_tr) “Requirements and Reference Model for optimized traceroute >>> of joint Internet Protocol/Multi-Protocol Label Switchingâ€<br> > >>> Submission Date: 2023-10-24<br> >>>> > URL of the IETF Web page: <a >>>> href="https://datatracker.ietf.org/liaison/1869/" rel="noreferrer" >>> target="_blank">https://datatracker.ietf.org/liaison/1869/</a><br> > >>> <br> >>>> > From: Denis ANDREEV <<a href="mailto:[email protected]" >>>> target="_blank">[email protected]</a>><br> >>>> > To: Henk Birkholz <<a >>>> href="mailto:[email protected]" >>>> target="_blank">[email protected]</a>>,Joe Clarke >>> <<a >>>> href="mailto:[email protected]" >>>> target="_blank">[email protected]</a>>,Tianran Zhou <<a >>>> href="mailto:[email protected]" >>>> target="_blank">[email protected]</a>><br> >>>> > Cc: Robert Wilton <<a href="mailto:[email protected]" >>>> target="_blank">[email protected]</a>>,Warren Kumari <<a >>>> href="mailto:[email protected]" >>>> target="_blank">[email protected]</a>>,<a >>>> href="mailto:[email protected]" >>>> target="_blank">[email protected]</a> <<a >>>> href="mailto:[email protected]" >>>> target="_blank">[email protected]</a>>,Joe Clarke <<a >>>> href="mailto:[email protected]" >>>> target="_blank">[email protected]</a>>,Scott Mansfield >>>> <[email protected]>,Operations and Management Area >>> Working Group Discussion List <<a href="mailto:[email protected]" >>> target="_blank">[email protected]</a>>,Henk Birkholz <<a >>>> href="mailto:[email protected]" >>>> target="_blank">[email protected]</a>>,Tianran Zhou >>> <<a href="mailto:[email protected]" >>>> target="_blank">[email protected]</a>> Response Contacts: >>> Tatiana >>>> Kurakova <<a href="mailto:[email protected]" >>>> target="_blank">[email protected]</a>> Technical Contacts: >>> <br> >>>> > Purpose: For information<br> >>>> > <br> >>>> > Body: This liaison statement provides information about the >>> consented >>>> item as a result of the ITU-T SG11 meeting (Geneva, 10-20 October >>> 2023).<br> >>>> > <br> >>>> > ITU-T SG11 would like to inform ITU-T Study Group 13 and IETF >>> about >>> the draft new Recommendation ITU-T Q.3962 (ex. Q. joint_tr) >>>> “Requirements and Reference Model for optimized traceroute of joint >>> Internet Protocol/Multi-Protocol Label Switching†which was consented >>> during the ITU-T SG11 meeting (Geneva, 10-20 October 2023).<br> >>>> > <br> >>>> > The draft new Recommendation ITU-T Q. 3962 (ex. Q. joint_tr) >>> “Requirements and Reference Model for optimized traceroute of joint >>> Internet Protocol/Multi-Protocol Label Switching†is attached for your >>> convenience.<br> >>>> > ITU-T SG11 looks forward to collaborating with ITU-T Study Group >>> 13 >>> and IETF on this matter.<br> >>>> > <br> >>>> > Attachment:<br> >>>> > SG11-TD747/GEN: Consent – draft Recommendation ITU-T Q.3962 >>> (ex. >>> Q.joint_tr): Requirements and Reference Model for optimized traceroute >>> of >>>> joint Internet Protocol/Multi-Protocol Label Switching (Geneva, 10-20 >>> October 2023)<br> >>>> > Attachments:<br> >>>> > <br> >>>> > SG11-LS108-Att-TD747<br> >>>> > <a >>>> href=" >>> https://www.ietf.org/lib/dt/documents/LIAISON/liaison-2023-10-24-itu-t-sg-11-opsawg-ls-on-the-consent-of-draft-recommendation-itu-t-q3962-ex-qjoint_tr-requirements-and-reference-model-for-optim-attachment-1.pdf >>> " >>> rel="noreferrer" >>>> target="_blank"> >>> https://www.ietf.org/lib/dt/documents/LIAISON/liaison-2023-10-24-itu-t-sg-11-opsawg-ls-on-the-consent-of-draft-recommendation-itu-t-q3962-ex-qjoint_tr-requirements-and-reference-model-for-optim-attachment-1.pdf >>> </a><br> >>> > <br> >>>> > SG11-LS108<br> >>>> > <a >>>> href=" >>> https://www.ietf.org/lib/dt/documents/LIAISON/liaison-2023-10-24-itu-t-sg-11-opsawg-ls-on-the-consent-of-draft-recommendation-itu-t-q3962-ex-qjoint_tr-requirements-and-reference-model-for-optim-attachment-2.docx >>> " >>> rel="noreferrer" >>>> target="_blank"> >>> https://www.ietf.org/lib/dt/documents/LIAISON/liaison-2023-10-24-itu-t-sg-11-opsawg-ls-on-the-consent-of-draft-recommendation-itu-t-q3962-ex-qjoint_tr-requirements-and-reference-model-for-optim-attachment-2.docx >>> </a><br> >>> > <br> >>>> > <br> >>>> > <br> >>>> > _______________________________________________<br> >>>> > mpls mailing list<br> >>>> > <a href="mailto:[email protected]" >>> target="_blank">[email protected]</a><br> >>>> > <a href="https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls" >>> rel="noreferrer" >>>> target="_blank">https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls</a><br> >>> > >>> <br> >>>> > _______________________________________________<br> >>>> > mpls mailing list<br> >>>> > <a href="mailto:[email protected]" >>> target="_blank">[email protected]</a><br> >>>> > <a href="https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls" >>> rel="noreferrer" >>>> target="_blank">https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls</a><br> >>> <br> >>> _______________________________________________<br> >>>> mpls mailing list<br> >>>> <a href="mailto:[email protected]" target="_blank">[email protected]</a><br> >>> <a >>> href="https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls" rel="noreferrer" >>> target="_blank">https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls</a><br> >>> </blockquote></div> >>> <span>_______________________________________________</span><br><span>mpls >>> mailing >>>> list</span><br><span>[email protected]</span><br><span> >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls >>> </span><br></div></blockquote></body></html> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> > > _______________________________________________ > OPSAWG mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg _______________________________________________ OPSAWG mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg