* WGs marked with an * asterisk has had at least one new draft made available during the last 5 days

Bier Status Pages

Bit Indexed Explicit Replication (Active WG)
Rtg Area: Alvaro Retana, Deborah Brungard, Martin Vigoureux | 2015-Mar-24 —  
Chairs
 
 


IETF-105 bier minutes

Session 2019-07-24 1330-1530: Sainte-Catherine - Audio stream - bier chatroom

Minutes

minutes-105-bier-01 minutes



          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.
          
          



Generated from PyHt script /wg/bier/minutes.pyht Latest update: 24 Oct 2012 16:51 GMT -