Bier Status PagesBit Indexed Explicit Replication (Concluded WG)
Rtg Area: Alvaro Retana, Deborah Brungard, Martin Vigoureux | 2015-Mar-24 — 2015-Mar-24Chairs:
IETF-105 bier minutes
Session 2019-07-24 1330-1530: Sainte-Catherine - Audio stream - bier chatroom
Meeting notes: BIER Wed Jul 24 1:30 PM WGLC Drafts waiting for last call. Need more activity on the mailing list. Hooman Bidgoli Nokia Last call on ietf-pim-signaling Stig Cisco Should we make addition to mld-signaling Will be presented today 1-draft-ietf-bier-pmmm-oam, Greg Mirsky Tony Have all markings been disclosed Greg Mirsky yes Alvaro This draft does not talk about requirement draft How many requirements are met? Looks like only 2 are currently met. Need to explain why others are not met. Will the requirement draft be published? Or is it informational? Greg Shepherd Not one tool will address all requirements More of a semantic discussion. Process was in order; publication may not have been Draft can be informative Tools can be published Room agrees Toerless Don’t agree. Akbar Cannot make requirements normative Alvaro Tools cannot be published without the requirements Alternative can be publish them together BIER header has 2 bits that can be used for OAM; does not explain how. This draft is taking ownership of the bits and not leaving room for others. Can the bits be used by any mechanism or are we going to assign ownership to a specific mechanism and is this the mechanism Take it to the list WGLC Take it to list with issues and do LC after. 2-draft-zzhang-bier-tether-02, Jeffrey Zhang Greg Shepherd Cannot follow the example for illustrating SPF rooted at BFRx Why would there be a loop if there is no bit set for BFR1? Jeffrey Can happen if BFRx decides path to go to BFR3 is through BFR1 Greg Shepherd Who thinks it is ready for adoption? People who read it agree Sam Non BFR capable router X; will it hold state for BFERs Can we call BFRx a proxy? Jeffrey Proxy is used in another draft to to mean something else Helper does not keep any additional information other than saying it is the helper for X Other BFRs only need to remember the helper for a non bier-capable router. Hooman Most of the examples show only one router that is not BIER capable. How realistic is this in a provider network? If the one router becomes a cluster like a ring. How will we bypass it? Where will this be handy? Jeffrey Usually there are many BIER incapable routers. In theory, we could pick one for each or a few to satisfy all of them This will be handy in any network where we want to do BIER Daniel Awduche Tethering can be used anywhere to enable BIER capable network Hooman Prefer approach that avoids non-bier capable router Jeffrey If you want to get around, you still need to ensure connected graph to reach all BFERs Sometimes you may not be able to do that. Tethering helps here. Sandy Zhang Two types of nodes are defined in the draft. Reminds of graceful restart. Should we just define “helper” and not “helped” Jeffrey Two way to advertise helping information. With the second approach “I am the helper of X” the helped node need not do anything. Greg Shepherd Example to show incremental deployment as opposed to tail-end would be useful 3-draft-hb-bier-mldp-signaling-over-bier, 10 mins Hooman Bidgoli WG-adoption 4 ppl have read it and support Take it to list 4-draft-ietf-bier-multicast-http-response-01, 10 mins, Dirk Trossen WGLC 2 ppl have read it and support Take it to list 5-draft-ietf-bier-te-arch 10min, Toerless Eckert WGLC Please read the draft and respond on the list 6-draft-ietf-bier-mld-02, 10min, Stig Venaas Stig Should we extend IGMP/MLD messages to include sender info Hooman Isn’t this the same comments made for PIM. It is fine the way it is Jeffrey We should do this for IGMP since we did it for PIM/MVPN Stig Discuss on mailing list 7-draft-zhang-bier-bierin6-03, Sandy Zhang Toerless Partial deployment capabilities? Cost of copying entropy to flow-id. Sandy/Tony Primary intended use is HOMENET Includes auto-discovery Tony Intended purely to be hop-by-hop but not directly-connected routers are an unintended consequence Greg Shepherd Entropy is just a tag. WG adoption People who read agree (around 5 ppl in the room) Take it to list 8-draft-zhang-bier-source-protection-00, 15min, Sandy Zhang Jabber BIER ping or traditional ping? Sandy Either can be used Greg Shepherd Is there a reason not to run BFD between both BFIRs and BFERs It is quicker to know all my neighbors ahead of time Is there an example where this is better Jeffrey MVPN fast failover already handles this for BGP-MVPN You can use unicast FRR to switch faster. This method can take longer timer? Stig Agree with Jeffrey. Maybe do forwarder election between BFIRs to decide when to forward on a failure. Greg Shepherd Need to discuss all failure scenarios Need to adopt? Few hands up Alia MLDP FRR RFC talks about detecting link vs node failures. Might be interesting. 9-draft-hu-bier-bfd-04, 5min, Sandy Zhang Greg Take it to list 10-draft-ietf-bier-ipv6-requirements, 15min, Mike McBride Mike Please provide comments/pros/cons if solutions is in the document.