Subject: Re: [spring] New Version Notification for draft-mirsky-spring-bfd-08.txt

From: "Carlos Pignataro (cpignata)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2019 19:58:37 +0000

[A very late reply to this email, but since no-one else replied… to add topic diversity to the list.]

SPRING chairs,

Sending this note only for completeness, and not as indication of interest or support of draft-mirsky-spring-bfd-08.txt.
Since draft-mirsky-spring-bfd has no provenance metadata (Replaces/Replaced-by tags), I thought it useful to point to the ancestry of this text.

TL;DR:

Two big concerns:
1. Review of this text (on a different draft) in the MPLS WG is unacknowledged and undressed. Basically this text has technical showstoppers.
2. Potentially applicable IPR, as per the email below, is undisclosed.

Besides there being no apparent interest, there’s serious issues.

Longer version:

Martin, At the time you were shepherd of draft-ietf-mpls-bfd-directed, so you might remember this.

Much of the text of draft-mirsky-spring-bfd seems to be coming from earlier versions of draft-ietf-mpls-bfd-directed.

The text was removed from draft-ietf-mpls-bfd-directed during reviews in the MPLS WG, instead of fixing it, and now it seems to have found its way into a new document and a new WG, bypassing the previous review.

All the text from draft-ietf-mpls-bfd-directed about SRv6 was removed here: https://tools.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-mpls-bfd-directed-03.txt
All the text from draft-ietf-mpls-bfd-directed about SR MPLS was removed here: https://tools.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-mpls-bfd-directed-05.txt

All that text received critical review and comments that can be found for example at:

  *   https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/search/?q=%22draft-ietf-mpls-bfd-directed%22%20%22Segment%20Routing%3A%20MPLS%20Data%20Plane%20Case%22<https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/search/?q=%22draft-ietf-mpls-bfd-directed%22%20%22Segment%20Routing:%20MPLS%20Data%20Plane%20Case%22>
  *   https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/search/?q=%22draft-ietf-mpls-bfd-directed%22%20%22Segment%20Routing%22

And the authors of draft-ietf-mpls-bfd-directed decided to remove it as per: https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mpls/imnwjd0the9F-F4gdHxh_J3xzq4

This particular email to the MPLS WG has interesting text:
"
    authors decided to remove sections Segment Routing: MPLS Data Plane Case
...
    The new version has been submitted as
    draft-ietf-mpls-bfd-directed-05
    (see below) and, to the best of our knowledge and understanding, earlier
    disclosed IPR is no longer applicable to this version.
“

Basically this seems to imply that there was IPR applicable to that text, that removing it made it not applicable to the MPLS WG doc.
https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/search/?submit=draft&id=draft-ietf-mpls-bfd-directed

However, that text seems to have founds its way to this new doc, but there does not seem to be any IPR disclosures.
https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/search/?submit=draft&id=draft-mirsky-spring-bfd

There are still significant outstanding technical issues with this text, raised in the MPLS WG under a different I-D, but still apply, as for example:
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mpls/pPq_LO8E0vIKKYLiHa50z7cFWks
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mpls/iXsENQuPWmmgsueNiUMlyRCcu4U
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mpls/X1a595fcp8D-WYGO9UkVsqum23s
Etc.

Back to your regular programming (no pun intended :-)

Best,

Carlos.

On Aug 2, 2019, at 12:46 PM, Greg Mirsky <[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>> wrote:

Dear All,
with this update, we've added a section on using BFD for Multipoint Networks (RFC 8562 and RFC 8563) for proactive defect detection in Point-to-Multipoint SR Policies.
Authors believe that the draft is stable and addresses p2p, as well as, p2mp use cases of SR-MPLS. We appreciate your consideration of WG adoption poll for this specification.

Regards,
Greg

---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: <[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>>
Date: Fri, Aug 2, 2019 at 12:38 PM
Subject: New Version Notification for draft-mirsky-spring-bfd-08.txt
To: Ilya Varlashkin <[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>>, Gregory Mirsky <[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>>, Ilya Varlashkin <[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>>, Jeff Tantsura <[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>>, Mach Chen (Guoyi) <[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>>

A new version of I-D, draft-mirsky-spring-bfd-08.txt
has been successfully submitted by Greg Mirsky and posted to the
IETF repository.

Name:           draft-mirsky-spring-bfd
Revision:       08
Title:          Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD) in Segment Routing Networks Using MPLS Dataplane
Document date:  2019-08-02
Group:          Individual Submission
Pages:          13
URL:            https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-mirsky-spring-bfd-08.txt
Status:         https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-mirsky-spring-bfd/
Htmlized:       https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-mirsky-spring-bfd-08
Htmlized:       https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-mirsky-spring-bfd
Diff:           https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-mirsky-spring-bfd-08

Abstract:
   Segment Routing (SR) architecture leverages the paradigm of source
   routing.  It can be realized in the Multiprotocol Label Switching
   (MPLS) network without any change to the data plane.  A segment is
   encoded as an MPLS label, and an ordered list of segments is encoded
   as a stack of labels.  Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD) is
   expected to monitor any existing path between systems.  This document
   defines how to use Label Switched Path Ping to bootstrap a BFD
   session, control path in reverse direction of the SR-MPLS tunnel and
   applicability of BFD Demand mode in the SR-MPLS domain.

Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission
until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org<http://tools.ietf.org/>.

The IETF Secretariat

_______________________________________________
spring mailing list
[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring