Subject: [Bier] WG Minutes

From: Greg Shepherd <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2016 08:11:53 -0700

Below are the minutes from Tuesday's WG meeting. Please review and provide
feedback before I upload them.

Thanks,
Greg (chairs)

-----
== Chairs ==
Discussion about Future encapsulation is from, quote, one more encap, in
the charter. Mpls ok, so discuss here which one to be.
Documents are still in the experimental track, demands to go for standard
track. Need at least live deployment to do so.
Alia : wglc and review as a first serious conversation to go forth
GregS: how to handle doc publication
Alia: leave in the queue without requesting publication. Allow row modify
the status on the fly

== BGP-LS ==
No comments. Raise of hands show support for adoption. Validation to go on
the mailing list

== DR/DF Election ==
Slide 6 : ".G" in the formula to be clarified later
Discussion on inconsistency periods, shall we go for a sticky behavior or
not ?
Ice answer: both are possible
GregS: reason for the doc is not only bier, but people are asking for
PIM-free networks, so it was ask to gather and discuss requirements in
bier. Can be troublesome is some way, at least a review in other wg such as
ospf or isis is needed to avoid to break the protocols. Furthermore as we
don't want in bier to solve a global problem but to fit bier requirements,
so maybe go for information and address the general problem in IGMP.
PIM chair: people in PIM may be happy with that, just potential discussion
on the hashing function.
Ice answer : don't forget the draft also addresses the DF function, not
just DA.

== FRR extension ==
No questions.
GregS: Expectation to ask for adoption? - Yes
GregS: feedback is welcome and really needed

== Discussion on encapsulation exploration ==
1st question: what can't be addressed with the current architecture?

Tony: New Encapsulation helps how? Bier is 2.5
Pierre Pfister: don't see bier as 2.5 but as layer-3. Really like BIER but
sad not to be able to use natively in IPv6, need for another technology,
and between bier with MPLS and crappy-old multicast I choose the latter
because MPLS is too complicated
Ice+Andrew Dolganow: MPLS use needs clarification. No MPLS control-plane
machinery here, just a reuse of bits

X.HU <http://x.hu/> : need of more analysis to choose the right ones
GregS: wg is experimental, not standard track. It is not about the multiple
required encapsulation but just one to choose.

PierreP: choice of IPv6 in spring was for good reason.
GregCauchie: Simplicity is sought by everyone but simplicity is from where
you stand, for ISP-folks it is usually MPLS and for datacenter folks it is
more IPv6... so maybe there is no answer to "where MPLS breaks" as MPLS
encoding can be pushed anywhere, but rather this is a question of "which
one is the more natural candidate", and from spring discussions + bier
history that followed segment-routing for multicast, maybe at the end IPv6
is the more natural candidate for a second encap.

Alia: beware of IPv6 use, may not work today, so charter says one more
encap but need for the group to achieve the charter and not be too
distracted.

Tony: after all the discussion it seems second encap will be a fork lift.

Many body count to participate in a design team, will ask officially in the
list to throw things around. Interim WG meeting for design team to be
announced on the list - target is late Sept.