►
From YouTube: MPLS WG Interim Meeting, 2020-09-16
Description
MPLS WG Interim Meeting, 2020-09-16
B
B
D
D
D
So
there
is
a
increased
requirement
to
run
single
protocol
in
sr
networks
to
simplify
implementation
and
development
cost,
to
simplify
the
deployment
and
the
operational
complexity
in
in
the
network
avoid
the
interrupt
issues,
so
no
reflector
dependencies
make
it
stateless
on
the
reflector.
So
it's
unaware
of
the
monitoring
protocol.
D
D
So
this
draft
was
presented
at
spring
working
group
at
the
last
itf,
and
previously
it
was
presented
at
mpls,
a
virtual
meeting,
pls
working
group
meeting
as
well
in
april,
but
we
ran
out
of
time
at
that
time.
So
hopefully
we
are
the
first
one,
so
we
have
a
good
good
chunk
of
time
today.
Next
slide,
please.
D
So
the
enhanced
performance
monitoring
uses
pm
approves
in
loopback
mode.
So
this
is
an
example
of
for
sr
policy
where
we
have
sender
and
reflector
originating
or
the
hidden
and
the
talent
of
the
policy
probes
are
sent
in
look
back
mode
using
the
segment
list
after
sr
policy
and
in
look
back
mode
probe
messages
are
not
pointed
on
the
reflector
or
not
injected
back.
They
are
just
forwarding
in
the
first
part.
D
D
D
And
the
loopback
mode
is
enhanced
for
enhanced
performance
monitoring
using
network
programming
functions,
so
this
is
to
optimize
the
operational
point
and
time
stamp
and
inject
the
packets
on
the
reflector
node,
and
they
are
fast.
They
are
forwarded
on
fast
path
to
detect
the
any
performance,
degradation
or
liveness
failure
very
quickly.
D
D
The
in
terms
of
notifications,
the
query
node
monitors
the
sr
path
and,
if
consecutive
say,
m,
number
of
probe
messages
or
delay
values
crossing
some
locally
configured
thresholds,
then
delay
matrix
are
notified
if
consecutive
n
number
of
say
messages
are
not
received
and
the
heartbeat.
Basically
loudness
failure
is
notified
as
soon
as
probes
start
to
flow,
then
liveness
is
declared
success
that
there
is
a
heartbeat
is
restored,
so
it
allows
a
pretty
fast
and
simple
notifications
for
the
various
performance
degradations
next
slide.
Please.
D
So
some
of
the
mechanics
involved,
so
this
one
shows
the
tvamp
probe
message
formats
and
this
is
to
leverage
the
existing
wide
deployment
of
t1
implementations,
as
well
as
all
the
operational
tooling
around
this,
and
in
this
case
there
is
a
time
step
offset
16.
This
is
where
the
reflector
would
have
the
received
timestamp,
the
carrier
would
add
the
transmit
timestamp,
and
this
will
allow
to
monitor
the
end-to-end
delay
for
the
sr
path
and
next
slide.
Please.
D
So
this
is
achieved
for
sr
mpls
using
the
timestamp
label,
a
special
purpose,
timestamp
label
which
is
used
for
timestamp
and
forward
network
programming
in
srmpls,
the
in
inner
ip
header.
The
addresses
are
swap
so
it
will
come
back
to
the
source
who
sends
the
message
once
the
mpls
header
is
removed
by
the
reflected
node
and
next,
like
this.
D
D
D
So
the
the
solution
also
allows
to
explore
the
ecmp
parts
which
are
typical
for
sr
network
for
sr
policy.
For
example,
it's
done
using
the
taking
to
take
advantage
of
the
hashing
function
in
forwarding
plane,
so
it
could
be
sweeping
the
loopback
addresses
ipv4
127
address
or
for
ipv6,
for
example,
sweeping
flow
label
in
the
header
next
slide.
Please.
D
So
this
is,
there
is
no
signaling
involved
in
bootstrapping
those
sessions,
unlike
other
monitoring
protocol,
so
this
is
achieved
using
the
provisioning
model
where
the
sender
and
reflector
nodes
in
the
network
are
provisioned,
you
would
have
look
back
mode
or
enhance
mode.
The
measuring
measurement
protocol,
the
packet
count,
the
timestamp
format,
threshold
values,
udp
ports
and.
D
D
D
B
E
D
D
D
So
the
the
the
mechanism
is
similar
to
other
monitoring
protocol
for
liveness
detection,
where
you,
the
querier,
would
send
the
packet
and
it
will
wait
for
the
response
to
come
back
at
the
querier
and
if
x,
number
of
packets
are
not
received
back,
then
it
declares
the
liveness
down.
So
this
it's
no
different
than
other
protocol.
E
D
So
it's
it's
up
to
the
query
on
how
to
send
the
probe
messages
to
control
the
reverse
path
as
well.
So
if,
for
a
srm
pls
example,
it
can
put
reverse
sr
part
in
the
mpls
header,
as
well
in
case
of
srv6,
also
in
the
srh
to
receive
a
reply
back
on
a
specific
reverse
path
and
the
first
question
that
you
had
it.
It
would
return
back
from
the
intended
responder
node,
because
responder
only
responds
if
the
address
matches
its
local
address.
E
E
D
E
D
So
gal
is
usually
at
the
bottom
of
the
stack
and
it
has
a
purpose
of
punting.
The
pro
asset
pro
message,
the
use
case
here
is
not
it's
just
to
do
opposite
of.
That
means
not
to
point
the
packet
but
forward
it
at
line
rate
with
network
programming
function
to
add,
received
timestamp.
So
the
gal
gal
is
the
complete
opposite
of
what
you
want
to
achieve.
E
D
So
the
hardware
on
the
reflector
node
adds
the
timestamp
at
the
right
location,
so
on
reflector
today,
packets
is
punted,
then
the
control
plane
has
time
stamp
at
the
right
location
and
injects
it
back.
This
whole
process
is
a
very
heavy
processing,
work
and
complexity
and
interop
issue
and
many
other
things,
and
this
is
the
simplification
that
comes
from
the
network
programming
function
in
segment,
routing
networks.
B
F
E
B
C
C
C
D
Yeah,
so
there
are
so,
the
requirement
is
to
have
network
programming
label
that
reflector
node
understands
and
this
when
it
receives
a
packet
with
that
label.
It
knows
what
to
do
put
the
timestamp
and
forward
the
packet.
There
are
two
ways
of
achieving,
maybe
could
be
more
than
two
ways,
but
at
least
two
ways.
One
is
that
we
we
have
ayanna
allocated
the
special
purpose
label
and
this
way
all
nodes
know
this.
D
What
this
label
is
for,
and
the
second
is
that
controller
allocates
a
global
label
and
it
programs
the
nodes
in
the
network,
and
then
this
way
the
reflector
also
knows
that
this
label
is.
This
is
the
purpose
of
this
label.
So
there
are
multiple
ways
of
allocating
this
label
and
I
think
the
this
is
similar
to
some
of
the
other
concepts.
For
example,
iom
schemes
also
talk
about
similar
models
and,
but
I
think
the
more
standard
way
or
is
to
allocate
a
label-
and
this
way
it's
it's
all.
D
D
D
C
D
C
C
D
B
Okay,
going
back
to
the
queue-
and
you
know
I'm
trying
to
manage
the
time
you
keep
track
of
the
time.
I
was
in
the
queue
next
I'll
ask
my
question
very
quick:
there
is
in
the
liveless
detection.
This
is
stark
from
juniper,
so
I'm
on
slide
six.
I
think
why
there
we
have
something
called
sbft
that
does
live:
liveness
detection,
a
seamless
bfd.
D
So
there
is
increased
push
for
simplification.
Sr
brings
a
lot
of
simplification
in
the
network
and
having
multiple
protocols
the
development
cost,
as
well
as
deployment
operational
cost
in
networks.
They
are
quite
heavy
with
multiple.
You
know.
Monitoring
protocols,
tvamp
is,
is
heavily
implemented.
Hardware,
a
lot
of
vendors,
actually
most
vendors,
support
them
and
is
deployed
and
tooling
and
operational
is
well
understood
and
there
is
increased
push
for
latency
based.
D
You
know,
monitoring
in
5g
networks.
So
with
the
you
know,
innovation
and
the
push
of
new
requirements,
especially
coming
from
5g
using
it's
using
t1
message
formats.
I
would
say
that
it
can
use
different
message
formats
too,
but
the
the
solution
allows
to
do
enhance
it's
a
leap
forward,
leapfrog
for
them
monitoring
protocol,
for
that
does
multiple
things
in
one
shot.
B
B
F
Adrian,
I
think
adrian
is
here:
yeah
thanks
thanks
rakesh
for
this,
I'm
not
sure
whether
your
slides
have
got
ahead
of
your
draft
or
something.
But
anyway,
if
in
your
draft,
you
were
able
to
fix
figure
six,
I
think
there
might
be
two
fixes
here.
The
first
is
to
show
that
this
is
an
extended
special
purpose
label.
F
D
D
D
So
if
there
are
different
use
cases,
then
we
either
we
have
a
different
label
or
we
change
the
network
function
for
it.
At
this
point,
we
are
not
aware
of
it,
but
working
with
the
working
group
and
if
the
innovation
we
can
do
to
solve
an
you
know,
a
bigger
problem
or
bigger.
You
know
use
case.
We
can
definitely
work
together
and
develop
the
solution.
D
B
Okay,
thank
you.
I
see.
Greg
is
back
in
the
queue
we
have.
Rakesh
is
up
next
for
another
presentation,
I'll
consider
greg
to
ask
the
question.
Maybe
after
rakesh
finishes
his
next
presentation
just
to
make
sure
we
have
enough
time,
probably
we're
running
out
of
time
so
rakesh
I'll
flip
to
the
next
set
of
slides
and
and
and
sorry
if
I
cut
off
anyone
in
the
queue
so
go
ahead,.
D
D
D
So
before
adoption,
mplsrt
expert
review
was
done
and
we
have
updated
draft
to
address
the
comments
and
the
comments
were
to
combine
support
the
combined
dm
plus
lm
message
format.
There
were
some
questions
about
p2mp,
so
we
have
added
details
for
p2mp
srmpls
parts
added
a
section
on
backwards.
Compatibility
iona
was
missing
a
registry
for
the
return
sub
tlv
returned
parts
of
tlv,
so
this
was
added
in
the
draft
and
various
editorial
changes
suggested
by
the
experts.
D
D
B
D
B
E
B
G
Yes,
yes,
can
you
hear
me?
Yes,
ma'am?
Okay,
thank
you.
Actually,
as
one
of
the
one
of
the
authors
of
this
draft,
I
I
need
to
do
the
presentation
instead
of
billion,
because
here
she's
joining
another
itot
meeting
right
now
so-
and
this
is
a
this-
is
a
new
draft.
Zero
version
draft
of
about
the
signal
degree
degree
date,
indication
used
in
the
npr's
network
actually
not
last
time.
G
Last
itf
meeting,
we
present
another
problem
statement
about
this
same
topic
and
and
we
I
know
that
we
states
that
it
is
more
special
for
the
sr
or
sro
mpls
network.
But
here
maybe
we
we
can
have
some
discussion
about
the
scope,
because
maybe
we
can
maybe
in
this
draft
that
we
propose
a
general
proposal
for
general
solution
for
the
mps
network,
but
we
can
discuss
it
later.
G
And
in
this
draft
that
we
solved
some
problem
from
the
last
last
draft
that
we
think
that
there
is
some
basic
understandings
because-
and
this
signal
degrade
is
is
brings
significant
impact
to
the
networks
and
especially
to
the
services,
and
it
should
be
noticed
and
detected
and
maybe
reported
to
to
to
the
controller
or
to
the
other
protocols
to
to
trigger
the
other
particles
and
yes,
and
in
this
new
drafted,
we
proposed
two
protocol.
Extensions.
G
G
G
G
And
I
have
some
actually
I
have
some
questions
here
and
that
I
I
know
that
there
are
in
two
different
ways
or
two
different
proposals
in
my
draft
and
I
I
I
need
to
and
figure
out
that
for
the
bfd
extension
that
should
be.
Should
this
work
be
done
in
the
mps
working
group
or
the
bfd
working
group.
Should
I
split
the
the
split
to
different
parts
to
two
parts
of
this
draft,
and
that
is
one
question
another
is
to.
G
I
would
like
to
collect
the
interest,
especially
from
the
operators
and
the
the
vendors
and
the
equipment
vendors,
if
they,
if
they
are
interested
in
the
signal,
degrading
the
great
indication
the
internet
works,
because
I
I
I
feel
that
during
the
offline
discussion
I
feel
there
there
are
different
operators
that
do
need.
This
signal
degrading
indication
that,
in
the
amperes
or
in
the
layer,
3
network
in
the
internet,
in
the
layer,
3
particles-
and
there
are
also
some
minor
issues-
maybe
related
to
the
signal
degrade.
G
G
Any
new
parameters
be
defined
here
because
I
see
there
is
maybe
a
related
topic
in
another
draft,
and
I
haven't
talked
to
the
authors
there,
but
maybe
that
could
be
a
a
new
some
some
discussion
here
and
and
also
these
other
thoughts
about
the
the
indication
to
to
the
indication
of
the
signal
degrading
to
used
in
the
performance
measurement
yeah.
But
there
are,
there
are
minor
discussions
besides
the
proposals
in
the
draft
okay.
Next,
please.
G
Yes,
I
actually
we
we
up.
We
up.
We
have
already
observed
some
suggestions
from
the
other
from
the
other
offline
discussions
or
from
the
previous
meetings,
and
we
would
like
to
to
have
more
discussion
and
to
collaborate
with
other
with
the
the
authors
from
other
related
topic,
related
topics,
jobs,
and
we
also
want
to
hear
more
comments
about
this
new
draft
and
that's
it.
Thank.
B
C
C
G
E
B
E
G
G
A
G
B
H
H
Please
mpls
can
be
used
to
realize
service
function
path.
So
far,
there
are
two
methods:
one
is
based
on
sr
service
programming,
where
each
service
function
is
related
with
an
mps
label.
Another
is
defining
ifc8595
an
npr's
label
stack
is
used
to
carry
the
logical
presentation
known
as
edge.
The
basic
unit
of
the
label.
Step
comprises
two
labels.
H
One
provides
a
context
within
the
sfc
scope
and
the
other
carries
the
label
to
show
which
service
function
is
to
be
enacted
and
in
nprs
the
iosp
ping
is
used
to
verify
the
data
plan
against
the
control
plan,
and
this
draft
proposes
extensions
of
lsp
ping
to
show
to
allow
verification
of
the
correlation
between
the
control
or
management
plan
and
the
data
plan
state
in
mps
based
sfc
next
slide.
Please.
H
H
H
H
H
And
and
generally
the
packet
processing
functions,
support
supported
by
service
functions
are
limited
service
functions
main
such
as
fio
may
not
support,
nprs
or
and
protocols
like
lsvp,
so
service
function
for
orders
are
responsible
for
ampere
cycle
request,
processing
and
and
a
service
function
for
order
sends
an
sfc
echo
requests
to
its
control
plan.
When
the
receiver
is
a
terminal
sff
for
an
sfp
or
the
mpl's
ttl
expires
in
ifc8595.
H
H
Folder
sends
better
reply
message,
including
sff
and
sf
information
recorded
in
sfc
info
subtly,
as
we
defined
before
as
we're
defining
this
document
and
after
all,
service
function
for
orders
on
the
service
learning
path
send
back
appears
equal
reply.
The
sender
collects
information
about
all
the
transverse
sffs
and
sf's
on
the
random
service
parts.
H
Next
slide,
please,
and
so
this
is
a
summary,
and
this
draft
proposes
extensions
to
ampere
amperes
as
lspp
mechanics,
including
a
new
fax
of
trv,
for
mps
based
on
sh,
a
new
sfc
validation
tv,
including
sub
trvs
for
osr
service
programming
and
nps,
based
on
sh
and
there's
also
an
update
of
ic
or
ifc8595
next
slide.
Please.
H
B
H
B
Okay
yeah,
my
feedback
on
this
is:
it
has
an
mpls
aspect
and
you
are
presenting
it
in
the
mpls.
We
are
interested
in
in
keeping
you
know,
updating
and
getting
this
work
done
here,
but
but
this,
given
that
you
are
also
allocating
specific
service
function,
sids
or
that's,
my
understanding
is
a
spring
working
group
might
be
interested
in
this
work
as
well.
B
H
H
H
Gets
from
the
control
protocols
such
as
bgp,
so
the
sender
may
be
know
the
that
she
can
get
from
bgp
the
rd
and
the
sf
type.
It
is
advertised
so
bgp,
so
he
it
can
use
flex
up
to
v
to
check
if
the
data
plan,
if
the
the
the
data
get
from
the
control
plan
is,
is
the
same
from
the
control
plane
and
so
that.
C
H
D
B
I
I
I
I
Yeah,
so
there
are
some
of
the
to-do
items
we
need
to
actually
update
on
the
draft.
So
one
of
the
assumptions
which
we
had
was
on
the
lr
replay
today
we
only
send
an
alar
and
the
there's
an
implicit
assumption
that,
on
the
specific
interface
we
have
a
single
lab
server
or
a
gateway,
and
so
this
lap
label,
which
is
returned
by
the
lab
server,
is
bound
to
that
specific,
the
ip
address
of
that
gateway.
I
I
Yeah,
so
we
do
have
some
of
these
things
to
iron
out,
but
we
believe
that
the
overall
approach
is
solid,
considering
we
have
like
a
working
prototypes
and
there
has
been
interest
from
service
providers
on
this,
and
based
on
that,
we
believe
that
our
document
is
ready
for
a
networking
group
production
code-
yeah-
okay,
that's
it
yeah.
Thank
you.
B
Let
me
see
if
there
are
questions
and
there
are
no
questions
in
the
queue.
Thank
you
regis,
and
I
think
this
was
presented
multiple
times
now
to
the
working
group
and
yeah.
We
can
progress
it
to
the
process
of
getting
it
adopted.
You
know
a
review
from
the
mpls
review
team
and
then
yeah.
We
we
can
progress
the
document
if
there
we
encourage
the
working
group
to
give
feedback.
B
C
I
J
J
Those
are
the
only
things
that
you're
going
to
allow
for
so
I
mean
there
is,
of
course,
always
a
problem
with
arp
in
general,
in
terms
of
who
do
you
connect
to,
but
if
this
server
needs
to
connect
to
a
hundred
other
servers,
it
should
be
sized
for
that
if
it
needs
to
connect
to
a
thousand
other
servers.
The
arp
entry,
I
don't
think,
is
the
big
problem.
It's
the
whole
bunch
of
other
issues
that
there
would
be
internal
scaling,
but
it
is
a
very
much
constrained
thing.
J
C
J
J
They
could
be
a
land,
but
it's
unusual,
but
it's
limited,
the
arp
regular
arc
will
be
limited
to
whatever
is
on
that
land.
The
larp
goes
beyond
because
the
car
is
acting
as
a
proxy
server
for
all
the
remote
computes
that
this
this
particular
server
needs
to
talk
to.
So
in
fact,
the
larp
table
will
probably
be
be
bigger
than
the
regular
arp
table,
especially
if
you
have
compute
connected
point-to-point
with
the
tor.
B
J
J
In
this
case,
we
we
would
really
like
an
a
special
purpose
label,
not
an
extended
special
purpose
label.
So
what
you
know,
what
should
we
do
to
get
that
going?
And
the
second
thing
is
in
this
draft
also,
I
think
it's
I
mean
it
has
not
been
a
whole
lot
of
discussion,
but
it
is
reasonably
stable
and
I
think
we've
put
in
the
in
the
document
several
use
cases
for
the
no
further
fast
readout
label.
C
J
Not
ready
to
respond
just
now.
No,
no,
so
I
I
guess
the
question
I
had
was
I
mean
I
do
want
that
label.
The
question
I
had
is:
how
do
I
proceed?
What
is
the
process
for
getting
an
extended
special
purpose
label?
Do
I
make
a
request
to
the
list?
Do
I
do
it
via
you
know
and
update
to
the
top?
The
draft
already
asked
for
one
do
I
I
don't
know
what
the
process
is.
J
J
So
in
fact,
since
the
draft
was
written
since
the
rfc
was
written,
so
I'm
not
sure
what's
different
today
from
I
mean
if,
in
the
last
three
years
or
four
years,
we've
had
like
two
or
three
such
requests,
that
would
be
a
quarter
of
the
space.
That's
left,
but
right
now
we
actually
haven't
seen
any
new
requests.
I
am
not
tracking
it
really
closely,
but
at
least
if
I
go
to
ayana,
I
don't
see
anything
there.
B
C
J
B
F
J
J
K
One
thing
one
thought
I
had
you
know
for
assuming
assuming
we
allocate
this
best
first
label:
do
you
think
this
label
should
be
a
label
that
used
for
a
form
of
mpls
looping
where
the
use
case
has
to
be
described,
and
this
is
the
first
use
case.
I'll
put
this
comment
out
when
corey
asks
for
allocation
as
well.
J
Much
looping,
but
it's
that
if
you've
done
a
fast
readout
and
you
do
another
fast
layout,
then
you
could
get
yourself
in
trouble
because
you
might
cause
a
loop.
You
might
cause
other
things.
So
it's
not
you're
trying
to
prevent
looping
per
se
you're
trying
to
prevent
a
second
pass
data
which
could
have
a
bad
result
and
and
the
the
thing
is
it
could
arise,
and
the
document
says
multiple
ways
that
it
could
arise
and
it
can
arise
also
in
the
in
the
context
of
a
label
stacked
with
adjacency
says
so.
J
K
I'm
not
debating
that.
I'm
just
saying
you
know
terminology.
When
we
allocate
this
label,
could
it
be?
Could
it
be
used
for
detecting
this
type
of
loop
condition?
It
seems
to
me
when
I
maybe
maybe
maybe
it
maybe
it
couldn't,
but-
and
this
would
be
the
first
use
case
of
using
this
label
for
detecting
looping.
J
J
K
J
I
appreciate
that
and
I
mean
if
you,
if
you
have
an
example,
I
think
it's
worth
thinking
about.
But
the
thing
is
the
semantics
is
you've
done.
I
mean
this
thing
already
has
done
a
fast
fair
if
you
were
planning
to
do
a
password,
don't
and-
and
so,
if
you
add
to
that
semantics,
then
you
can
use
a
label
for
multiple
things,
that's
great,
but
I
I
think
then
you
might
actually
not
achieve
the
first
case.
I.
K
B
Okay,
thank
you
keniti
and
yeah.
We
expect
you
know
an
update
on
the
mailing
list
with
with
what
you
promised
and
we
will
take
the
adoption
further
perfect
and
with
this
this
was
the
last
presentation
on
our
agenda
today.
We
thank
you
for
attending
the
session
and
looking
forward
to
seeing
you
in
the
next
ietf
meeting
before
we
adjourn,
if
nick
or
loa
want
to
say
anything
feel
free
right
now,.