Re: [mpls] draft-decraene-mpls-slid-encoded-entropy-label-id (was RE: Please review the PALS/MPLS/DetNet Joint Session minutes)

Hi Bruno, et al.,
I have several questions and would greatly appreciate your thoughts:

   - Do you see the need for extensions to the routing protocols that now
   advertise the support of RFC 6790 to avoid the scenario that John has
   pointed out?
   - As I understand the draft, using EL and Slice ID in the same stack is
   mutually exclusive. If that is the case, how entropy can be created within
   the particular network slice?
   - I think that you've agreed that the draft does not address the
requirements
   for MIAD
   <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-bocci-mpls-miad-adi-requirements/>.
   You've pointed out Jags' draft
   <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-jags-mpls-ext-hdr/> as the
   possible solution that is based on the re-definition of the ELI and may
   address MIAD ADI requirements, To that, I can make two observations:
      - re-using ELI is only one optional approach discussed
      in draft-jags-mpls-ext-hdr. I think that is not guaranteed that
that would
      be the option used if the document is published.
      - And if draft-jags-mpls-ext-hdr continues with the solution based on
      the re-definition of the ELI, it appears to me that all Tony's
concerns are
      valid.

Thank you in advance for your consideration of my notes.

Regards,
Greg

On Wed, Mar 30, 2022 at 9:59 AM <[email protected]> wrote:

>
>
>
>
> *From:* Tony Li <[email protected]> *On Behalf Of *Tony Li
> *Sent:* Wednesday, March 30, 2022 4:08 PM
>
> > [Kireeti]: suggest attending talk by Tony on danger of reusing ELI
> before making any decision.
>
> https://notes.ietf.org/notes-ietf-113-pals
>
>
>
> Done. The talk raised no “danger of reusing ELI” for draft
> draft-decraene-mpls-slid-encoded-entropy-label-id; quite the contrary.
>
> I quote: “claims of backward compatibility apply to
> draft-decraene-mpls-slid-encoded-entropy-label-id-03”. With more details on
> slide 18
>
>
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/113/materials/slides-113-mpls-05-policy-on-mpls-special-purpose-labels-reuse-00
>
>
>
>
>
> Yes, the issue with this proposal is that it has no space for in-stack
> data and not enough space for possible expansion of additional actions.
>
>
>
> [Bruno] There are two steps:
>
> - This proposal allows for carrying 8 Indicators and a slice ID while been
> backward compatible with egress LER hance providing faster deployment with
> incremental benefit.
>
> - If more in-stack data is required the proposal is extensible (e.g.
> draft-jags-mpls-ext-hdr) but at the cost of losing the above benefits for
> the ASes & uses-cases requiring more than 8 Indicators per AS or In-Stack
> Data.
>
> So we can have both worlds: simple first step and extensibility for those
> who need it.
>
>
>
> Independently, we also/already have the post stack data option to carry
> ancillary data, which may limit the need for In-Stack data extension.
>
>
>
> --Bruno
>
>
>
> Tony
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Orange Restricted
>
> _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
>
> 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.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pals mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pals
>

_______________________________________________
Pals mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pals