Re: [mpls] Regarding adopting draft-song-mpls-extension-header - do we need post stack data?

Hi Haoyu,
can you refer me to the announcement by Chairs of the WGs that chartered
the ODT of the "consensus"? Or your claim reflects your personal opinion?

Regards,
Greg

On Tue, Feb 21, 2023 at 3:46 PM Haoyu Song <[email protected]> wrote:

> Greg,
>
>
>
> I said it’s the ODT consensus and decision to progress the two draft as a
> unified MNA solution. Of course, once they are adopted, it’s MPLS WG’s duty
> to progress them.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Haoyu
>
>
>
> *From:* Greg Mirsky <[email protected]>
> *Sent:* Tuesday, February 21, 2023 11:38 AM
> *To:* Haoyu Song <[email protected]>
> *Subject:* Re: [mpls] Regarding adopting draft-song-mpls-extension-header
> - do we need post stack data?
>
>
>
> Hi Haoyu,
>
> can you point out the poll conducted by WGs Chairs that is the basis for
> your claims of the "consensus"?
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Greg
>
>
>
> On Tue, Feb 21, 2023, 11:33 Haoyu Song <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Greg, answers to your two questions: ODT, and the documents under adoption
> call.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Haoyu
>
>
>
> *From:* Greg Mirsky <[email protected]>
> *Sent:* Tuesday, February 21, 2023 11:29 AM
> *To:* Haoyu Song <[email protected]>
> *Cc:* Tony Li <[email protected]>; mpls <[email protected]>
> *Subject:* Re: [mpls] Regarding adopting draft-song-mpls-extension-header
> - do we need post stack data?
>
>
>
> Hi Haoyu,
>
> can you please clarify which group you have in mind when stating that
> there's a consensus? I think that the consensus was demonstrated on the MNA
> drafts adopted by the MPLS WG. Which documents you consider also having the
> same level of support?
>
>
>
> Regards
>
> Greg
>
>
>
> On Tue, Feb 21, 2023, 11:19 Haoyu Song <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Hi Tony and Joel,
>
> All those issues have been discussed many times and now the documents
> reflect the consensus. I don’t think it's a wise idea to rewind the
> discussion back to the state as two years ago.
>
> Best regards,
> Haoyu
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tony Li <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Tony Li
> Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2023 10:59 AM
> To: Haoyu Song <[email protected]>
> Cc: Joel Halpern <[email protected]>; [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [mpls] Regarding adopting draft-song-mpls-extension-header -
> do we need post stack data?
>
>
> Hi Haoyu,
>
>
> > IOAM is not the only use case. You can check the use case document for
> more examples.
>
>
> I checked. I didn’t see any. Section 2.5.1 does specify that ISD or PSD
> could be used. That certainly doesn’t seem like a compelling use case for
> PSD.  In fact, in latency sensitive applications, I would think you would
> want to use ISD simply for the performance benefits.
>
>
> > I'm sure there are even more use cases once we have this mechanism.
> Actually, IOAM DEX, which is a postcard method, also need post stack
> encapsulation for the instruction header.
>
>
> I believe that there are changes in IOAM DEX that will remove that
> requirement.
>
>
> > As for the complexity, I've evaluated that and given presentations that
> post stack data parsing is simpler than in-stack data parsing. The action
> processing is a property of the action itself so it's location is out of
> consideration.
> > During the ODT discussion, many people actually raised the question that
> weather the ISD is necessary because PSD can basically support all use
> cases, regardless the size of the data. The conclusion is still true:
> considering all the possible use cases, if only one mechanism exists, it
> should be PSD. We resort to having both because ISD can handle some use
> cases with small data.
>
>
>
> As we’ve discussed MANY times, PSD will have a significant performance
> impact on several architectures, most notably legacy (i.e., currently
> deployed) hardware. As a result, MNA is effectively undeployable without
> ISD.  And given ISD, we have no need for PSD.
>
> Tony
>
> _______________________________________________
> mpls mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls
> <https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ietf.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fmpls&data=05%7C01%7Chaoyu.song%40futurewei.com%7C4535682d046d4686d57308db14432865%7C0fee8ff2a3b240189c753a1d5591fedc%7C1%7C0%7C638126050951578260%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=OICpJ%2ByAUjvuA8%2Bd044pHPM4sQURrfODU5XtS3eiIBk%3D&reserved=0>
>
>

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