Subject: [trill] Fwd: Shepherd review question for draft-ietf-trill-esadi

From: Erik Nordmark <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2013 14:00:47 -0800

Hello,

I've reviewed the document before sending it off to the AD, and the
document is in good editorial shape. Thanks.

The ESADI draft expands the fragment field to 2 bytes for the
ESADI-LSP,CNSP,PSNP, which is something we need to handle large sets of
MAC addresses.

After TRILL started working on this something similar appeared in IS-IS
in the form of fs-lsp - first as a personal draft but now as an IS-IS WG
draft: draft-ietf-isis-fs-lsp

I just wanted to raise this question to see if the WG might want to
change to use that format for ESADI. My understanding is that it would
mean an incompatible change for ESADI implementations, but I don't know
how many (if any) ESADI implementations are out in the wild.

Thus I just wanted to let the WG weigh in on whether the format in
draft-ietf-isis-fs-lsp would make sense for ESADI.

Thanks,
    Erik

---

From: Donald Eastlake <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 17 Nov 2013 23:44:59 -0500

(Sorry for the previous empty message)

Hi Erik,

On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 5:00 PM, Erik Nordmark <[email-masked]> wrote:
> ESADI-LSP,CNSP,PSNP, which is something we need to handle large sets
> of MAC addresses.
>
> After TRILL started working on this something similar appeared in
> IS-IS in the form of fs-lsp - first as a personal draft but now as
> an IS-IS WG draft: draft-ietf-isis-fs-lsp
>

Speaking as a WG participant, I think that would be a good idea for
two reasons:

(1) It would improve re-use of code by making the ESADI and IS-IS
encoding more similar.

(2) There are flooding scoes in draft-ietf-isis-fs-lsp that permit the
use of 16-bit length in TLVs as well as more fragments. The current
8-bit Lengths limit the Value to 255 bytes. Even with classic Ethernet
frames, let alone jumbo-frames, would could put at least 5 times that
into one frame. This would cause a minor increase in efficiency by
spreading the "TL" over a larger V.

> draft-ietf-isis-fs-lsp would make sense for ESADI.

I think so.

Thanks,
Donald
=============================
 Donald E. Eastlake 3rd   +1-508-333-2270 (cell)
 155 Beaver Street, Milford, MA 01757 USA
 [email-masked]

>    Erik
Thanks,
Donald
=============================
 Donald E. Eastlake 3rd   +1-508-333-2270 (cell)
 155 Beaver Street, Milford, MA 01757 USA
 [email-masked]

On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 5:00 PM, Erik Nordmark <[email-masked]> wrote:
> _______________________________________________
> trill mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/trill

---

From: Erik Nordmark <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2013 11:18:57 -0800

I'd like to hear some more voices from the WG on this proposed change to 
the ESADI LSP format.

If the WG is OK with this change then it would make sense to respin the 
draft, redo a WG last call, and then send it to the IESG.

Thanksm
    Erik

---

From: Ayan Banerjee <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2013 11:52:02 -0800

I agree that we should strive to keep the formats similar and support
another respin of the draft.

Thanks,
Ayan

---

From: Radia Perlman <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2013 12:09:12 -0800

It's OK with me to switch.  Only downside is whether it would disrupt
current ESADI implementations, but as long as nobody complains about that,
might as well make the formats the same.

Radia

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Tue, 19 Nov 2013 09:08:26 +0800

It is Ok with me to downside to WG LC. 

I hope it could been finished soon ,then we could submit to IESG and 
request for publication.

Thanks for your comments and suggestion.

Regards.
Fangwei

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Tue, 19 Nov 2013 09:23:51 +0800

Although we have almost finished the implementation of this protocol, but 
we would change it after the respin of this draft. So I am OK with the 
proposed change.

Thanks,
Hongjun Zhai

Erik Nordmark <[email-masked]> 
发件人:  "trill" <[email-masked]>
2013-11-19 03:18

收件人
Donald Eastlake <[email-masked]>, Erik Nordmark <[email-masked]>
抄送
"[email-masked]" <[email-masked]>
主题
Re: [trill] Fwd: Shepherd review question for draft-ietf-trill-esadi

Thanksm
    Erik