Subject: [bess] Suresh Krishnan's Discuss on draft-ietf-bess-mvpn-expl-track-12: (with DISCUSS)

From: Suresh Krishnan <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2018 20:05:36 -0700

Suresh Krishnan has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-bess-mvpn-expl-track-12: Discuss

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)

Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bess-mvpn-expl-track/

----------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCUSS:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

* Section 5.2.

In the NLRI format it is not clear what the length of the "Ingress PE's IP
address" field is supposed to be. i.e. what address families does it support
and how do we determine what sort of address follows since there is no length
field in front.

---

From: "Vigoureux, Martin (Nokia - FR/Paris-Saclay)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2018 08:31:56 +0000

Hello Suresh,

thank you for your review.
This NLRI is in fact defined in 6514 and the determination of the length 
of the IP address field is clarified in 6515, section 2 item 3.

-m

---

From: Suresh Krishnan <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2018 13:14:39 +0000

Hi Martin,

> On Oct 25, 2018, at 4:31 AM, Vigoureux, Martin (Nokia - FR/Paris-Saclay) <[email-masked]> wrote:
> 
> Hello Suresh,
> 

That makes more sense but this is not clear from the draft at all. The only prelude to the format says

"The "route key" field of the NLRI will have the following format:”

with no further explanations that this format is simply repeated from RFC6514(I am guessing it is the S-PMSI A-D Route defined in Section 4.3). Additionally, the draft does not even have a reference to RFC6515. I think it would be really good to put some pointers into this draft. Suggest something like this

OLD:

The "route key" field of the NLRI will have
   the following format:

NEW:

The "route key" field of the NLRI uses
   the following format as defined in Section 4.3 of [RFC6514]:

OLD:

   o  The "ingress PE" address is taken from the "originating router"
      field of the NLRI of the S-PMSI A-D route that is the match for
      tracking.

NEW:

   o  The "ingress PE" address is taken from the "originating router"
      field of the NLRI of the S-PMSI A-D route that is the match for
      tracking. The length of the Ingress PE's IP address is computed
      using the procedure described in Section 2 Item 3 of [RFC6515]

Thanks
Suresh