Internet Engineering Task Force 99, 21 Jul 2017

Previous Meeting Next Meeting

⏯

youtube image

►

From YouTube: IETF99-TRILL-20170721-1150

Description

TRILL meeting session at IETF99
2017/07/21 1150

https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/99/proceedings/

A

Smart endnotes, you look at Gillian's response.

A

Responsibilities.

B

What we do need to make it working. We have 17 rats.

B

Have you done anything.

B

C

B

Would never I know the idea, so she did the the cruise trip without a ticket. My own fault.

C

B

B

They kept food in order to get maximum foots of pepper. I've, never listened to. Yes, you did. He listens to nice. You skip ego, often debate. You don't need me to tell you how to defeat skilled workers. Yeah you've done it. I really deserve it.

B

So you know the debates so by studying these moves become a bigger opening for some of the meetings and once they give ya.

C

Once they give you yet.

C

B

B

How would you smart, pretty okay,.

B

B

All right am I talking in the middle of box, hit them.

B

Yours Margaret is the big one. The IQ the matricis review was awesome, but Wow yeah.

B

Aliyah side note got the tickets reserved.

B

That's fine, it doesn't sound like there's a problem, adding I just made sure we got the ones you want.

B

Okay, you let me start with this. I love this screen, it's like totally paused.

B

That's fine, that's its height! It's just you know. Oh the other. Slight. All the other screens have been better than this room.

A

A

B

Trill, oh you're in the right place, trill good, good, umm I, don't know your name, so I'm sue.

B

You you're welcome to sit up front you're welcome to sit in back, but this is a discussion, so um you can do whatever you want, I'm, very flexible. We should go back to the note. Well, yeah, yeah, that's good! Okay! This is a note. Well, this is a new note. Well, just in case you didn't know, so you should read it.

B

There is more included and I. Think that's the best thing. I can say: we've got it in the notes. Anyone who want to ask any questions about it, we'll just go in good thing way: I'm glad you're here Donald sent a message to the list. You should look at it because we'll come back to you, okay, so after the trill note well go ahead.

B

Okay, 17th! We are, we are trying to get everybody's documents through trill in the next six months, so I need your help. We're going to have we're gonna ask for reviews. Donald will help me and John and I will ask for review. So, if you'd like your documents to go through help everybody else's, please it's gonna. Take time. Do you want to say something brilliant, yeah.

D

Oh yeah, let's yeah so one thing that says: reviews really help and also being extremely proactive as authors.

D

Usually, when I do an ad you review, if you reply back and get it fixed up really quickly, I can schedule it had it last call and on the teletype iesg tell a chat is planned if you're not responsive, it could take a lot longer and we're trying to get these things all done, while I'm still AJ. Thank.

B

You, okay, the other thing is as Feng lei experienced, you must read the new reviewers like the ARP optimization we fixed one set of reviewers, then we got a new set because we got a new is G. You have to read the reviews and you have to answer them.

B

If you have problems, Donald and I will help you write texts, it isn't. Is a group thing right, you know if you need help, ask mostly what we're doing is I'm sending you to Donald for rewrite, because I usually am doing the reviews along with John.

B

So if I tell you that I'll give you my own review, but Donald has graciously offered to help with rewrites and you've experienced that before you're gonna have to help us with the review and last call when I do the last call there'll be questions so that we indicated that there's interest okay, so let's go through the documents. We're gonna work on there is excuse me for my phone.

B

This morning it needed to be very loud, so we've gotten thanks to Aaliyah and Donald, and all your review we got to RFC's through we've got one in our fcq, but now we're going to talk about the draft up optimization and the draft MTU, because some things come back to us for review go ahead.

B

Then there are some there's a draft in publications but needs to change, because the LEAs got some really good comments. Now we have drafts past the working group last call, but we had significant comments late now, there's a good reason for this and that Ally, if corrected I, think is a politically correct way. The review process in the routing area trill usually gets at least around QA review. It gets an Operations review and make it a security review.

B

We weren't getting them quickly. All and thrill over IP got a transport review. If these reviews get behind and that's my job is to press the button and Donnell and I will track it, it will happen what happened with 12 over IP drill, p2 and pbft and resilient Rios. If we get the comments late, then we have to resolve it right and you're sort of like. Where was this draft, so we're gonna, try to really increase the cycle time by taking the input and then trying to track you down to get the response again.

B

We've got 17 drafts to get through the is G. Yes, they'll love us. After a while, so drill over IP we're gonna discuss. We don't have it on the agenda but same way. If we get a chance, we're going to talk about smart end notes, okay, drill, ARP is on the agenda.

B

We don't have trill p2 MP on the agenda. Do we.

E

B

Think we're good on that one and I think trill and the resilient real trees is fine, I'm being yeah yep we're both good on that Donald and I are trying to help that go ahead for the next status. That's it! Okay, we're in working group last call and we've left. The working group last call to have a discussion on the changes same way. The EC and support I haven't seen any crumbs with and the directory assisted in caps.

B

We got some private reviews that we'll call it so we're going to leave those in reviews to see if we can clean it up rapidly. If not- and you don't fix it rapidly, then we've got to stop and do another two-week last fall. I really want to try to keep pushing it. We have two calls for adoption that we talked about last time, which is the group King and the Archaea parent selection. Now for Donald as the main author for Rakesh yep, Rakesh, good I,.

A

B

A

F

C

B

Sorry I should have said Rama instead of Rakesh. My apologies wrong Kumar. When we get this adopted. This has to go fast through the process, because it's just being about that donal already got warned. So what you're going to get is you're going to get an immediate set of QA reviews once we adopt it as far as I can tell this one's good for adoption, but just to warn everybody.

B

I am before as a chair, I'm pulling this in I'm warning everybody we're on the last six months of all these documents, we're trying to get all the documents through because a lot of our workers through and into product, and then we're trying to wrap up all the documentation again. The reason why we have all this back load is we weren't getting QA reviews. Now we thanks to alia, we fixed that process, I'm going to depend on you to help me, get it through. Okay.

B

Next, all of these other drafts, you notice a despot, Rev DCI. We need to know if there's real usage for DCI or whether it's going away. If it's some, some of the guys, said the use case in the need, it might be going away again. Some of these use cases come out of India and some of their networks are changing the topology, the multi SiC single level and unique multi level.

B

Nicknames now focus on those ones, mainly on sand and he's out these two you may be receiving on the single and unique some comments from Donald I. Don't know, I met early this week and walked through all the documents. Please pay attention when we go through the revision, because we'll do one more revision into working group last call I, don't think, there's much technically but Donald alive. The drafts needed a little bit of fixing.

B

Yep so that one we're probably just gonna drop one off the list: oh yeah, trill yang, om I, have a lot to say on so I'll put that on, but we're caught there between the revised data stores. um I mean we ease up. You know if the trill yang is been implemented in Huawei I talked to Deepak about Cisco. You know these implemented. The reason is the yang debate. We've got the revised data store anything that I do I'm having to do like I did with the BGP stuff I have to.

B

If it's out there, I need to publish what's there and then I need to move at the same time to the revise Davis North. That's why I need to know if somebody's got it out there I will put the revised draft out with the BGP mem for admin with the BGP yang, modelled there were 15 people and I know that cisco has the yang in the OEM and so I'm tending to put it out there.

B

But I just need to know if there's more than one okay, so you don't have to answer on list unless you I'm, not the young people, but I'd like to go back to check whether it if you would do that. That would be very helpful um and I'll check with Cisco to see if they're still Des Moines.

G

East, the Ming also this young yeah.

B

G

Who is the main officer Deepak? Who is the main author of statist yeah? Deepak's? Okay, oh okay? Okay,.

F

B

It's just different I think they say this time in the end: okay go ahead, Donnell to the next one; okay, those are all the rest of our drafts. There's our C's Thank You Donald.

B

Yes, so we've completed the milestones and we're doing well on that. Let's go to the next one. We have overdue ones, but again those are based on the reviews that we didn't get into late. So we're gonna try to focus on trill over IP focus on T, multi-level and the our bridge stuff. So I think we've got drafts for everything and we'll go from there. Okay,.

H

I'm comin broken I, don't have anything to present I just wanted to ask if the draft is ready and we can advance it. I.

C

H

Wanted to ask if the draft the parent selection draft is ready and we can advance it as a adopt it in the okay.

B

The only thing the only reason I wanted to talk about in the working group is to let everybody know it's got a fast turn and we're good. Okay.

B

Now comes our real substantive Margaret. If you help us go through this.

I

So I'm gonna talk about trill over IP next, we'll do a very brief. Is there anybody here who hasn't already seen the presentation on what trill over IP is about? Anybody has not seen that presentation already all right.

I

We will go through it quickly, but I think a lot of people already know that then we'll talk about where we are on it and what all the outstanding issues are with the document right now next, so the point of trill over IP is to treat an IP network as a leak as a link connecting trill switch ports, thus providing a method to connect trill sites into a single trill campus on there's two scenarios described in the draft.

I

One of them is the remote office scenario that would be I have a big drill, site I have a remote office that runs trill and I use trill over IP to turn that all into one big trill campus there's also the IP backbone scenario, which is that say: I have a trill network on each floor of my building or in each building of a campus, and then I have a big IP backbone and I run trill over IP over that backbone to connect all those floors or buildings.

I

The draft specifies the packet format and the security it tries to cover transport considerations, but we'll find when we bring up the issues that we missed, some of them MTU fat flows, quality of service and middle boxes. Next, the existing draft specifies three formats for trill and it's extensible so that there can be more formats in the future if they're needed.

I

There are this is trying to give us a sense of what they are on the wire there's trill encapsulated in UDP over the link, there's trill encapsulated in Ethernet in VX, LAN and UDP over the link and there's trill encapsulated in TCP over the link. Those are the three formats that are defined next page.

I

Yeah that allowed them to use existing hardware I think with with drill over IP. We uh we started this in well. We started this before October of 2011. That's when the first draft was posted. The first working graph group draft was in 2014.

I

We passed working group last call in 2017, but we've gotten a bunch of comments and there was a transport area Directorate review on June 15th of 2017. If you wanted to see the message you can find it there, but we're gonna bring out the issues during this presentation.

I

So next slide are the current outstanding comments on the draft are about and I'm gonna go into each of these in more detail but they're about zero checksum, explicit congestion, notification, quality of service, the tcp transport that I mentioned the third of those three formats, fragmentation, congestion control and that okay, so next slide in order to run at line, speed and be efficient, people are gonna want to run trill over IP without IP header checksums.

I

This is allowed now, even in ipv4 for RFC 69 36 and it's allowed when there's gonna be IP inside the tunnel. So you actually don't need the external checksum to find out if the correct end destinations like the correct end destination was met, and so we need to make the draft clearer about- and we mentioned it in the draft that we could use zero check sums. But we need to make it clearer about when drill over IP meets the conditions for our C 69 36 and when it doesn't. That was the feedback.

I

So we're gonna make a change to make that clear.

I

I mean I, guess it could be conceived of as a textual as a technical change. If someone had turned off checksums in a case where they shouldn't have, but it it's mostly a clarification, because I don't think that would that people would probably have done that congestion control. The current draft has a good start, uncongested control. It doesn't just ignore the topic among other things, but there are a couple of things that we need to do we look at what the effect is of using serial unicast instead of multicast on congestion, and what that is.

I

Is that normally you multicast okay and you multicast on a link, and it goes everywhere I'm in some cases, when either link doesn't support multicast or you have some other reason to do so. You serialize multicast, so you send a message to every one of the other trill nodes on the link that obviously is going to create more traffic and we need to at least write text that explains the impact and I suppose in doing that, we might find there's a problem, but I don't anticipate that I just think we're gonna.

I

Just this is about making the transport considerations text correct more than it is about the protocol itself.

I

The other thing is that we always have a problem in the IETF with anything that tunnels drill over IP is effectively tunneling right, we're tunneling tril in IP, and whenever we tunnel things we get the question. How do we know that the traffic inside the tunnel is congestion, control? There's a rule in the IETF that anything that runs over IP needs to provide congestion control.

I

Okay, TCP provides congestion control, MMP TCP provides congestion, control quic provides congestion, control HTTP because it's over TCP does but UDP does not, and applications running above UDP arp required to provide it. Okay, like like all the ietf applications running above UDP, there are two cases where we can run into traffic, that isn't: congestion, controlled.

I

Okay, that's um UDP applications developed by someone else where they didn't bother to do congestion, control or non IP traffic, and so this has come up in a lot of tunneling situations before the question is: how can we tell if it is congestion, controlled and typically in the IETF, we've kind of waved our hands and said? Well, if it's IP, it's all congestion controlled, even though we know that isn't entirely true.

I

Okay and the answer is you can't necessarily tell and I don't know we'll have to figure out exactly what to say about this in the spec right, because you really can't tell if a UDP application, you know nothing about. Has congestion control I mean that you'd have to be like a mind. Reader I mean so it's unclear, um I think we'll just have to say that's a risk or something, but the.

I

Right but it because we're tunneling: okay, if that's just on your local link, it's okay right, because well, it's not okay, but you're gonna figure it out. You're gonna be able to figure out what node is doing it you're gonna be able to walk into their office, but when you start putting stuff in a tunnel and sending it across the internet, then you're possibly congesting the Internet, not just your own office, and so it is.

I

You know a reasonable question to ask I think if we look at the wording in the CAF web draft, for instance, we had basically broken apart and an access point and you could put it across an internet right.

I

It's controlling provisioning of wireless access points, okay and it breaks an AP into two parts. It allows an IP tunnel between them and we had to deal with the same issue and I think we should go look at what the wording was in that draft and see if it's still considered sufficient I I, don't know.

I

Yeah I mean that issue originally came from Dave Borman in kallab and it's it's it's a potential real issue, but it's unclear what the right thing is to do about it. So we'll have to figure that out.

I

Yeah I mean between vacations and stuff. We haven't resolved all these issues since June 15th, all right, so we're gonna resolve them, hopefully in the next month or so, yeah.

F

I

I mean it's unlikely that aspect change is gonna, come out of this, because it's not like we're going to suddenly divine a way to tell if the traffic is congestion controlled. So.

D

You know we atlas, so this is one of the documents where we talked about a while ago and it's not sorry we are doing it in the trail working group because there's the expertise here, because it will get the review even though it's slightly out of Charter and that's fine but and I would much prefer to see it done, but if it becomes necessary for it to be ad sponsored due to time constraints, I, don't that's an alternative, but please continue there.

D

You can consider yourself to have the same degree of pressure trying to finish in the next six months. Well,.

I

We really we really want to finish, and most of these are, although in some cases they're gonna require some working out they're, not really spec changes. They're they're, like doing your homework, checking that things are act, that there is no real concern and documenting that I understand next side.

I

Ecm drool over IP is a tunneling protocol, as I just said, and there's specific restrictions or rules, guidance, I, don't know what you would call it in RC 6040, for what tunneling protocols are supposed to do with ECM and I only found out about that like on June I, don't know eighteenth or something when.

G

I

Man and it's a real thing- I mean it's a fairly recent RFC. We say nothing about it. We need to actually say- and- and in this case it is a spec change, because we need to do what RFC 60-40 says we're supposed to do. It's a little trickier that then just follow the RC 6040. So explain. The plan such as it is so a trill over IP link is an IP tile. It should support ECM when the trill campus supports ECM.

I

The trill over IP header should be easy and marked based on EC and marking in the trill header of the packet being transport. Those pictures for this, so you don't have to just get this the first time packet being transported with IP. If ecn is not supported in the trill campus, it does not seem worth while to dig past the trill layer to get ecn from into the inner IP traffic. So we're gonna propose this next slide.

I

If you got in our bridge and some IP routers, because this is your tunnel- the green line to another, our bridge, so you're running trill over IP in this middle green line. Right and over here on the sending our bridge, the the ingress of the tunnel for this particular packet, you have a link, header and a trill header, and that trill header has a vcn mark in it and payload.

I

Then we will copy the ecn mark from that trill header into the outer IP header, so that ECM can be tracked across the tunnel and then we will combine them back into the trill header ecn mark okay, because while it's pasta passing through the IP routers, if there's congestion, they're not going to put the ECM mark in the trill header to them- that's just payload. They're gonna put it in the IP header, the outer IP header right. So we want to recombine them so that if either of them is showing congestion, we show congestion.

I

Okay, that way the further traffic can act on. You know that the destination whatever in the other side of the trail campus can act on that congestion. Now next slide. If the original our bridge is doing trill and inside the the trill header, the IP header has ecn marks and the ECM mark can just be I support.

I

Acn or it can be that there is congestion, I, don't remember what the two codes are for that, but they're actually three codes, two of them are I support, ECM and one of lutely has there's congestion, but but that's just for historical reasons. If the IP payload there has a nice en mark, okay, we never parse into that IP payload they're, like some of the hardware that supports trill, doesn't like look at that IP payload at all to decide what to do with this packet.

I

It's looking at the trill header, so we're proposing- and we will see if this is acceptable- that in that case we would not take that in or ecn mark and copy it into the outer IP header and then copy it back into the payload when we get to the other side, because we suspect that that's going to be a very costly thing to do for trill hardware, and we don't think it's gonna be worth doing like it might be one of those cases where you write a spec.

I

This is to do something and nobody does it right, and so we need to talk to the transport area and see if they can live with that that level of support for EC yet- and he said it was okay, so probably it'll be okay, because Bob Briscoes, the one who who wrote RFC 6040 or whatever it was so so anyway. So that's our proposed, fix, Frisian, I. Think we'd, like probably to know. If anybody here has any legally strong thoughts about that one way or the other.

B

Okay, now you can hear me better. Okay, does everyone guys? This is a real interactive because we're trying to get the specs through anybody have questions about the problem? Okay, any please go wrong.

H

Tomorrow, Brooke.

H

I'm, sorry, could you speak in.

I

The mic there's much more noise than you would think right here, and so, if you don't speak into the mic, I can't hear you so.

H

For the case, we're into.

I

G

H

For the case, where you have chill control plane, frames like this does not apply or.

J

Control plane is the is, is stuff, that's all one hop stuff. It doesn't reply. Yeah.

I

So any other comments or questions on this particular topic. Well, next slide: quality-of-service trill uses well primarily uses a three bit priority field for quality of service. There's also a one bit drop eligibility indicator. um Ip uses a 6-bit dscp field.

I

This is a common, that's a differentiated services code, point I, think I I, don't like to use acronyms without saying what they are. Trill over IP provides a mapping from trill QoS, so the sort of four bits to the dscp bit that mapping needs to be reviewed based on the latest are sees. Apparently we may not have gotten it entirely right, based on the latest are sees, or maybe we've been overtaken by events.

I

J

A there's, a Deborah narrative, coming up with a new dscp explicitly for low effort service, which might be appropriate in one case.

I

But also, we need to say in our draft now. This is kind of this is one of these things. I sometimes object to in the ITF. Actually we're gonna say in a draft that no one who is running this service is likely to read that they should be aware that if they use troll over IP, the actual QoS they get over, the Internet may be different than the kind of QoS they get over trip.

I

But we will say that because people want us to a typing, the sentence takes less time, then arguing with them.

D

Sometimes things that seem obvious to us, not as obvious to the readers of the documents after you've been I reminded so I. Just when I first took electrical engineer, you know, like magnetism stuff, my TA claimed that if you just looked at the charge distribution, you could totally see what the field lines were and by the end of the class we got there I think there's a lot of IETF work like that where we think all of the implications are obvious. Yeah.

I

But the thing is the person who's gonna be reading. Our spec is the one who is implementing the bit mapping all right and they should not get confused by the sentence. They should do what we said. Okay, it's a problem is in operations right in operations. If you drill over IP the depending on how your routers that we don't even know the brand of interpret dscp colored points, you may get different quality of service than you expect, because yeah.

J

I think the problem is that some providers interpret them differently and we do say that you that you have to be able to configure this, giving you a hint that, if that's your problem, maybe what you want to do is configure the mapping to be different from what we give is the default. But the other problem is that if you go through multiple providers, kudos.

I

But we will say that in the spec, because I appreciate that.

H

Because you're good jubie's.

I

Yes longer and not better, but it will not hurt the spec, so we will say the spec in the case of transport, in a case of transport using TCP, so that case, where trill over IP is using TCP. So it's drill over TCP, / IP, a separate TCP connection, / provided QoS level is needed in order for the QoS stork.

I

This is because a typical one connection is going to be cached with the QoS that first presents with, and so, if you don't do separate connections for the separate QoS values, all the traffic will get. If you put it all in one, TCP connection will get the same QoS and it will be whichever one. The router first happened to notice and associate with this flow, which is not what you want.

I

Is that a that's about it to say on this? So next slide TCP transport? um We offer the TCP transport as one of the format options. They said that they would prefer that we call it a transport when we run it in TCP instead of an encapsulation, since there is no one to one mapping between tril, packets and TCP packets, and that is very interesting because they demanded in banana that I call it an encapsulation when we put it in mp PCP, because we aren't the transport MP. Tcp is.

J

Not from the transport every review, this is from Joe touch well,.

I

Joe and and Mary I probably ought to talk to each other, but we will call it a transport and not an encapsulation, because it's not actually each packet. Each trill packet isn't encapsulated in one TCP packet that isn't how it works. Tcp is flow based, and so there won't be a one-to-one mapping, and so he is correct. It is not properly an encapsulation.

I

We will I need a third word for this, because I need it for banana. So if anyone has one, please see me later, we add framing with the length field so that the incoming TCP packets can be parsed and reassembled, if necessary, to back to the original trilogy, and you have to do this over TCP, because TCP does not provide any packetization. So 3/4 of your packet might be in one TCP packet, the other quarter and the first half of the next one might be in the next TCP packet.

I

And so, if you don't put in some kind of length or or delineator demarcation, you don't know where your original packet started and stopped. So we will do that and- and there apparently some things we can do to achieve better performance and we will take those on her visor and try to see what we should put in the and the draft about that. So, as I just said when, when a tcp is used to trill packet can be split across multiple TCP packets.

I

Thus the MT use end up being less than the campus-wide minimum MTU and.

I

So we need MTU discovery to extend down to small a smaller configurable limit when you're using trill over TCP / IP.

I

I'm, not sure I, don't you wanna.

J

We have this empty, you thing and if you're doing UDP or other things, then you really do the this this campus-wide minimum. Do you do, though you want the fact you want to be sure that your link-state packets get through or else I Esaias won't work, okay, but the problem is: if you have a TCP link, at least in principle, everything I mean you've configured it to calculate everything in TCP, then even your control claim packets over that one link can be chopped up into a smaller TCP packet.

J

So if that link for some reason, let's say it's sort of a 1500 byte MTU link, but there's a bunch of other encapsulation that occurs in the middle of the link. So.

G

J

Pushes you down to 13-under it or 1200, then you still what you can still get everything over it. So it's in fact useful to know if the MTU on this link to trill appears to be a thousand bytes. That's still a useful link if you're using TCP all right as you can so so the current neck.

J

I

Need some wording about that? It will probably still keep sort of the MTU for the reassemble trill packet, the same as it is now the causality in in what we say here. What we said, what you just said is could be turned around right. It could be that if you have a lower MTU link between your sites, you should encapsulate in PCP, because they'll be reassembled into the full-size packets and you don't have to.

E

I

So but I mean it would allow us to support lower MTU links right. So next fragmentation we shouldn't have any.

I

There are a lot of reasons why fragmentation is bad. They include middleboxes where there's state and they don't always make sure that the two fragments sometimes they're blocked. Sometimes you get issues where the two fragments don't take the same path. There can be a lot of problems with fragmentation in the network. There also are less efficient. They you can get into these silly packets, where, if your MTU is like five larger than will fit every time, you do something you get full-sized packet and a five byte packet and so they're inefficient.

I

Within a data center, use of UDP with fragmentation is generally consistent with a trill philosophy of mostly worrying about the routing messages and not worrying about the lower layer messages, but TCP is actually a better way to avoid fragmentation on lower empty links and and also will then allow the fragments front like that. We're gonna reassemble into full trail packets to get through Nats and firewalls. Next now,.

K

I

You need to use static bindings for that, and we need to write up what you have to do in order to get trill to work over a net neighbor. Our bridge addresses, as reported in the source IP addresses, need to be mapped using the static binding into actual remote IP addresses before being listed in the is is neighbor TLD. So, basically we we can't count on a NAT having an Al g4 trill, where it would translate these inter addresses. We need to make sure we're using the correct dinner addresses across a net.

I

We generally need keepalive messages which we haven't needed in order to make sure that the NAT state stays active in. If there's a long interval between trill packets. We also see fragmentation and there's an interaction with security as well, which is that I have I piece. Aqui SP packets need to be encapsulated in UDP IP to go through an ACK.

B

J

Is an ia IB second UDP gret RFC, so we just have to cite that.

B

I

I mean there's going to have to be I, wouldn't say it's new technology, but it is going to change implementations because there's gonna be a question as to whether they get configured to be not compatible or not, or do they all run that compatible? We have to define these keepalive messages and say how often to send them right. I, don't know.

I

She's asking that you use the microphone.

B

Oh I'm, sorry John, I'm, sorry I missed this. Can you hear me now.

B

Okay, I apologize John. My question here is this sounds like this may. Take more work, I mean I.

I

Do think this would be some work, but I don't think it's it's work, I think it's well understood. Work like I think it's siting RFC's, it would change implementations, but I, don't think it's gonna be a lot of spec work. I mean.

J

As you can tell, there's actually quite a few things here, but any each one of them is all pretty straightforward. So this significant.

G

Amount of work.

J

To you know, get to our milestone, but and lean I'd say it's always a judgement calls to whether, for example, we need another working group last call for a short working with Westfall or something I, don't know. Probably. Okay,.

I

There's some I mean I, suppose, there's a possibility of saying something like it doesn't work over now. But that probably is not what we want to say, because if we want to be able to do like the remote office scenario, those might be behind a DSL link with an app right. I mean you. So probably we want to support it. Working over Nats.

D

D

Yeah, let's see I guess question is I, agree with you on that. But my question is: what are the actual deployment scenarios that folks are envisioning and do they have a need for it? Because this does add complexity right.

I

In the IP backbone scenario, we could say that there can't be in that right, I mean because you completely control that right if you've got five buildings on a campus and you want to connect them with an IP backbone. You know you decide whether or not there's an that on your campus I.

I

Think it's a remote office scenario that we would need the support, Nats and I I. Don't have any real visibility into how much of the interest in trill over IP is one or the other. Do you donal I mean and.

D

That's our most common 4v4 right. So if you have a fair amount, you know, depending on how much v6 your home networks are using and so on.

J

In the current graph, we do talk a little bit our fragmentation and recommend using v6, because music fragments are more robust. If you end up with you know, it's even worse, to have flaky fragments.

D

Right so a nice, my perspective would be really good to get feedback on the mailing list as to whether the NAT use case is critical for folks who are looking at deployment or implementation. If that's something that they're targeting or if the focus is more on v6 networks and such where NAT is not an issue, do.

I

We know if common DSL providers actually provide on that at ipv6.

D

Offhand at this time in ITF, no I think.

I

I could ask around that if we find that because it's DSL where you're stuck with an app because it's actually done by the operator and so um I, could ask around and see if DSL providers adding ipv6 or not right and if not, we could say our answer to NAT in the remote office. Space is if your ipv4 services and added use ipv6.

D

Right I mean I, guess. Part of my question was also geographical, so my understanding of where a lot of the locate regions where trill is more deployed tend to be a little more v6 centric and we'll see that over time, and certainly we're focusing more towards v6 yeah.

I

But I mean I think at least we could at least ask some of the BBF guys or whatever. If this is something we even have to worry about in v6 yeah I'm trying for.

G

I

So next any other feedback questions comments. Anything just.

B

Just to summarize for the chair, we're going to I'd like you to ask on the list for feedback on the deployment scenarios. We do that. Okay, if you do that today, maybe we'll get some feedback within a week or so. Okay,.

I

Just specifically with regard to that, or which scenarios they're using or just.

B

Ask if the net scenario is necessary, namely their deployment scenarios then give an example of the campus scenario.

G

B

The own remote office scenario try to be as explicit as possible, so we can get a clear definition to know whether we're gonna spend time on this I'm. Okay, I'm. Never, if I sound like a broken record, we're gonna get these drafts through I'm known to be very focused, I mean.

I

Some of this is T crossing and I dotting. Some of it is like the EC n is a spec change, but it's like to comply with an IETF thing. This net1 is the biggest change that is possibly useless. So, let's make sure it's useful before we do it.

J

Hopefully, this will be a really short presentation of a simple feature, especially since we're so winding down activity in the working group. This provides an escape channel whereby vendors can define their own control messages, uses the arbitral facility, which is a way you can send control messages between our bridges or between the end stations, and there are bridge that's either they're, both or when they're, both on the same link and there's an RFC specifying how it works and everything there's a couple examples on this slide that do make use of it.

J

So this is what they look like: there's a an ether type that identifies our bure channel message and then there's like a sub channel protocol numbers like a sub protocol within our bridge channel, and that is what specifies what the channel protocol specific data is. You could have anything over there, so the idea is very simply to let vendors extend to this by providing a way for them to define their own sorry messages and they can send their own control messages as they desire.

J

The vendors can do this in other ways and if our bridges all have IP addresses their MAC addresses are something that you can imagine other ways, those actually not required and in principle and our bridge could have only a nickname. They have all PPP ports that has no MAC addresses. You know not very likely, but it could be so anyway. This was a universal method. It's guaranteed to be able to communicate to an AR bridge based on the nickname or you can also send multicast to a label data label scope set.

J

So the idea is you basically pick up a vendor channel ie, an affix a vendor Channel and in what was the data portal protocol specific thing? We put a little vendor channel header and there could be an organizational unique identifier or a company ID I Triple E, now cells company IDs cheaper than oh you eyes, though you eye reserves, the whole block of MAC addresses and it's 24 bits. The only the CID is 48 bits, but so that's much cheaper and doesn't give you any MAC addresses.

J

So it should be really a sort of a simple format. Thing speaks it gives this facility to vendors, actually everything after the ouy or CID is really completely under the control of the vendor, but there's actually an expired graft on this, which has a recommended vendor sub protocol and and version for that sub protocol for the vendor and I easy way to report errors, and this seems like a good idea. You certainly want it. Don't want to have vendors have to use up multiple Oh UI is just because they want multiple vendor channel protocols.

J

They really should have a sub protocol identifier underneath arrow UI or whatever, so this draft will be revived very shortly and then we could do a call for adoption based on little discussion on the mailing list.

J

That's a simple thing. Any questions or comment of.

B

Donald, your mom after you revise the draft. Will you make sure Indian announced after it goes to the automatic announcement? Will you provide to the list a description worth summation of this description will be used and how it's happening so that people can make a good decision and will option sure.

J

The only change in the existing expired draft is to add the facility where you can use a company identifier in a place of a no UI in case you're, not a hardware, Ethernet manufacturer. You don't need to know. You are right.

B

That's all I'm asking is when you adopt it, remind people that that's the point and then we'll go back and ask that question I'm, trying to emphasize how we're gonna make make progress with ok.

B

Ok now comes one of the really good ones marker. Thank you. You sound you're on the approximate station.

G

This is usually I'm going to talk about this, our pin and the optimization their comments we received from the ad review. Sorry.

L

G

Target 3 review an ad review, so there it is, it has been quite a long time already. So the us. We have some outstanding comments from the general review in the ops in the securities I'm going to look at them one by one next page, so the the general review T it's a fairly lengthy review, but most of them editorial the clarification the there.

G

There is one thing we like, which is a real dis disagreement is the reviewer thinks there is something which is X and I'm trying to remember what is X X actually is a thing.

J

Right send keys to the yeah.

G

Because we suggested to use their no, we suggest we we say: there's sand can be used, so it talks about how, if, if it is used, how we are going to exchange the key from the end station to the edge a bridge. So it's we, we use the word we use a word.

G

This mechanism is out of scope in our document, but the review thinks that implies that some mechanism of this to do to do the key key exchange must be existed so, but they also think saying: there's something is out of scope for document, doesn't I anything about whether this mechanism exists or does not exists. So that's the these are one disagreement.

G

So what we are going to do, I think we are going to feedback to the reviewer. Our opinion.

I

I might try just a like a wording, change like say how to do. This is unspecified and see if they think that is good. Yeah I mean sometimes something like that can solve the problem.

G

Sounds very reasonable. Next slide: okay,.

B

The ops Directorate, oh, thank you just one suggestion. If you really get stuck against that Donald I think that that's foliat ah yeah.

J

Not to mention names with Dan Worley and his general review said that when we said, X is out of scope that him. He thought that implied to the reader that there was a mechanism to do. X.

D

So the issue with this document is the concern about the security considerations, and that is what there is a discuss on. Of course, we always really greatly appreciate the reviews and comments that are received during the Directorate, but it is up to the area directors who have those directorates to decide whether or not they are discussed worthy that is not discussed worthy and is not blocking. Thank you.

B

In other words, the chair says: if it's really, if you feel more comfortable with the original words, leave it it's that a little bit more blunt.

B

Trying to get a lot of --dress through I'm gonna get blunt and direct if I apologize ahead of time. You always may disagree with me and do something else, but I'm just right now: okay,.

G

I'll see you so this talks about the ops review, so basically, there are two paths from them. The first ones are talking about the operational considerations and the second ones, management considerations.

G

Yeah Sosa from the operational point of view now, impact on failure to optimize should be no worse than their existing case without optimization. This is I guess this is what we have done is is, let me see right, III, I, think, for from this document we have already specified right, yeah, it's no worse than without my optimization. So this they should be okay.

G

So therefore, the steady stick or counter both from the operational in that management view they talks about the statistical counters, I guess so for this one we we think we can actually it's up to the implementation, because it's not really the statistical country's try to remember. Okay, for example, how many, how many ARP Oh address requests had been received, something like that, but it's really up to the implementation, but we, we can add some text to to give more clear description on this and okay move on to the management it talks about the yam model.

G

How to configure between different policy should be covered because, okay, this talks about because we have, we can use different policies, for example, whether to reply based on the local cache or or let the address request passing to the real destination in order to do the double confirmation, so there are different policies. So this comment basically, is whether okay, ideally as a young model I, we have a gain.

B

Model and based on the fact we have to revise the a model for the revised data stores, leave it to the game. Just say our game model revisions will consider. Oh yeah.

D

Less the ops to review said ready with knits. None of these were discussed worthy, it's lovely, to put some breadcrumb trails into the egg model. Thank you. Yes,.

B

And you don't have to put that in the document you can just respond to the to the to the review. That way, we're being real blunt with these guys, no.

G

Okay sounds good to.

B

G

The the last one okay, the last, is the security from from security I suggest to need a clearer comparison of using or not using the optimizations. So what we are thinking generally, this okay, we do not think we impose ending anything worse or better by using the optimization from from this Oh. Actually, unless we are using a very reliable directory to to push and pull all this address, mappings, otherwise is we don't we? We don't have any change to current security considerations, so probably I guess we are. We just give some text explain.

G

What's our standpoint for this right, okay,.

B

Oh yeah yeah, could you give us some wisdom, and this is the one thing we really have to talk about as a group, so nature help guys. Can you tell us what the ad was really wanting on this? Do you know what Eric's mind is this one? This came from Eric risk. Oh yeah Donald. If you know yeah.

J

I mean there's further points here and in general, some of his points, which we put on the next slide. Actually, it seemed like he was asking for a thorough threat analysis of layer, 2 security, which I'm not sure we need to do like. He said what, if the you, what if the attacker creates a fake DHCP server, well sure that things get screwed up it lets you, you know, I mean there's what we're not trying to solve the problem of fake DHCP servers.

J

The extent that it should I mean you know it's not ours,.

J

D

Think we should talk offline and have the you know do a reference to that and so on. I will you know. I have not talked to Eric about this, yet if that looks like it would be, productive I can certainly do so, but I would like to have more in hand on which aspects and how they're being addressed before doing so.

J

Author interaction with them and see what maybe that'll. Maybe a look at that right.

M

G

Duplicate IP address, so let me see yeah hand on it, yeah. Basically, what we're thinking is. Unless we have a very complete, reliable directory, then we am then we, we are very sure. Okay, this add up to authorize. These appear. Ip address should be used by which one otherwise there is. There is no much thing we can do, because the duplicate address I mean waster, no mention on ARP and and either there. This is the case, but we don't do anything worse than that.

G

So so so, unless we have this real a bottle tree, then we should trust it. Otherwise we have got nothing to do with it. That's that's my that's my thought anything! You want! No, no! No! Okay! That's the last one: oh there were most likely logging. The duplicate address this. What what okay? This is to suggest whenever there is a duplicate rest being detected, probably wouldn't need to do. The logging, but I kind of think is still.

G

Implementation are specific, but we'll add the text to say. Okay, this is recommended next slide. I guess this is yeah.

K

G

I thought about the fake DHCP server yeah. This is all I, guess yeah. So currently the status is publication requested. We solve some comments, but we have some I guess two from two rivers we're going to resolve them when we resolve them and eighties have signed off then, okay, we hope it won't be released. A I've said: editor yeah. Okay, thank you.

C

B

You this is a very short. Do you have the.

B

From the top okay, this is what I mentioned before and I all of them yang models that haven't gone through the is G are being requested to do revise that the revised data storm models for yang I need the input I mentioned earlier. In order to go on, did you find it? Okay, yeah there? It is okay, just go down. It's just one slide. It was real, quick, that's that's!

B

This is my funny joke for the thing this is the pre and do in the end config, and that's how long they're debating I thought it was a cute picture. It's it's a dr. Seuss, if you're a US person, and then we think it's resolving actually into me. The revised data store the network management I, don't know what an MD a sense for, but it's something, but the revised datastore draft is actually looks like it's doing well and about completed set some more nits.

B

But the recommendation is that everything that goes before it but there'd be okay.

K

Those are the big.

J

K

J

Go ahead and change it.

K

B

Okay, it's only one more thing, a little.

L

B

Other thing: that's very I'm, more interested in talking about thin waist up. I just need to tell you that these are all free, revive straps, the connection or the mention of strap is actually making progress through the line. So I've gotta find out. Could you pack what whether he wants the trip om to go through the connection with stuff, which you know it is oh.

B

I'm, sorry, um I'm, sorry, John! Let me go through this again for you guys there the trip all the yang models. Whoa, all the yang models are being revised because the yang model structure is changing to what's called a revised data store. Unfortunately, it's at us another one of the working groups I chair, that cause that, by adding dynamic data stores in cause it okay, you want to tell me what what a correctly there sure.

D

Oh yes, yeah! No, it wasn't that it's the issue of operational and intended state versus configuration. Bias on to the point of the yang I would add a third option to what you have just to jump in yes slightly, which is to take what's implemented, and you know, do the presentation, layer, transformation to the data store and then have what's actually implemented as an appendix in the same.

B

D

B

We can do that. Those are the three options are actually two options to separate RFC's one RFC. The only thing that I have to include there is ezel.

B

If anyone's done the line drat the line om stuff in Huawei, if you just check, though you don't have to find out now, you know that the line, though I'm that's the that's Tisa's om that went from us to lime and then, where they have the centralized yeah.

J

Lima is a working group yeah.

G

Yeah I know you so you're asking whether there's any person down to the lime yam ordering idea for.

L

B

Their product, your.

G

Product personally, I, don't think.

B

So but okay I could check yeah if you just double check, I assume, not okay and does anybody have any feeling? No feeling is fine, we'll just do what's right. Okay, I see no strong feeling jumping up okay Donald. Will you bring up from ways I think we've get just enough time to talk about the smart end, notes, problem.

B

K

M

B

B

Okay, that's good I'll, be a hundred yeah.

B

B

Take the moment to read it.

B

There you go, throw the readings hard there.

B

So it's just talking about snooping. You see where it says that I'm a reef Astor than you I apologize.

B

N

mmm Yeah, it's a fun way from city, so I well so I'm, sorry that I didn't know this comments before well.

J

N

So our our try to analysis comments and the traffic is don't yeah I'd be happy there, so I'm so I'm. Sorry that some of the sensor I'm some of the some of the did I did I'm sorry that I forgot her some of the details so.

N

B

A very good answer: please check, be careful. Oh thank you. I.

J

Can I can send you some suggestive texts and things like that? Okay, so I basically commented on those smart n nodes and the correctly assistant cap drafts so.

J

And there's some editorial teams. That's.

L

The main talking make sure the technical stuff.

L

B

This is the wrap-up. If you go back to the document status for McDonald.

L

B

Think those are all taken care of I. Think we've done in notes. Okay, I'm again, my whole focus here is to get your drafts out and in to my intent, is to send all of these within two working groups. Last fall. Is there anyone that you feel I mean other than the Trillo am because I have to deal with the revised data stores? Is it and I'm not intending to send trophy CI for all the rest?

B

Is there any problem with these straps that you foresee, because otherwise, we'll do we'll start working group last fall's a really? This is.

N

Pacifica and I know that the nine current work group and and I have word I have heard rather about a year. Oh my young data model. This is the based on the my NASA furniture. So I can really the young om more the trio I'm a Yankee tomahto. You know.

B

N

N

B

Bingley and Eva Donald multi-level anything, you see that's a problem before we go to working through classical otherwise, one.

J

Of the purposes of working with less call is to give people a chance to review it again and might find something. But.

B

But I'm asking nobody sees any problems. You know I'm.

J

Not aware of when you right now, I'm.

B

Not aware of anybody, okay, these are all gonna go to a working group. Last call hey.

J

B

J

There may be some outstanding unresolved comments on transport over MPLS, okay,.

B

If you check that, but guys this will go, I will probably start sending it out tonight. I'm not waiting for any of this. Okay, we'll get all this through any other questions about any of the drafts or any things we're trying to complete.

B

Okay and your adoption call will go out once I get online again. I just want to well.

J

It would be announcement that it has been adopted. It.

B

Will be the announcement that it has been adopted? All the drafts that we mentioned go down to the adoption draft, so I can say that again those two were. These two are adopted: I just I'm, because we're in a different type of season of just getting everything done, I wanted to make sure you Donald, and the working group knew that this has got to go fast.

B

As long as there's no objection, all these things will go to working group last call if you've been a drill, graft and all the adoption stuff will go in I will do a personal review and then I will ask to go to working group last call. This is this is a different season. Okay, please respond. Your same great response. I'll. Ask you a question: I'll: ask you things about the document. My last few things about deployment you've been doing great about responding any other questions, any other thoughts. Well, I'll return.

B

The rest of the day to you enjoy.

C

C

B

B

So the they will store it is that, basically, when I have some others, a one question I have to find out someone else, no actually I'm reading through one piece of writer in and then.

F

F