Re: BFD WG adoption for draft-haas-bfd-large-packets

Reshad, On Sat, Nov 17, 2018 at 01:58:25PM +, Reshad Rahman (rrahman) wrote: > Hi authors., > > This document has passed adoption as a BFD WG document. > > Please resubmit the doc as draft-ietf-bfd-large-packets. Please also note > that while there was strong support for adopting the docume

BFD WG adoption for draft-haas-bfd-large-packets

ot; Date: Wednesday, October 17, 2018 at 9:06 PM To: "rtg-bfd@ietf.org" Subject: BFD WG adoption for draft-haas-bfd-large-packets Hello BFD WG, We have received an adoption request for “BFD encapsulated in large packets”. https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-haas-bfd-large-packets/ The ad

Re: Re: BFD WG adoption for draft-haas-bfd-large-packets

Les, On Mon, Oct 29, 2018 at 06:13:53PM +, Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) wrote: > The fact that the problem is not detected on protocol adjacency formation > does not mean the problem gets introduced afterwards. Unless you are > saying that folks change the link MTU AFTER the link comes up and has b

RE: Re: BFD WG adoption for draft-haas-bfd-large-packets

draft-haas-bfd-large-packets Hi Les, > Jeff/Albert - > > Given the MTU issue is associated with a link coming up - and the use of Echo > would allow the problem to be detected and prevent the BFD session from > coming up - > and you are acknowledging that the protocol allows p

Re: BFD WG adoption for draft-haas-bfd-large-packets

Hi Les, > Jeff/Albert - > > Given the MTU issue is associated with a link coming up - and the use of Echo > would allow the problem to be detected and prevent the BFD session from > coming up - > and you are acknowledging that the protocol allows padded Echo packets today > ... > > is there

Re: BFD WG adoption for draft-haas-bfd-large-packets

Les, On Mon, Oct 29, 2018 at 04:55:05PM +, Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) wrote: > I note that no one supports "large-packets" today. A vapid phrase that I generally loathe hearing on IETF mailing lists. We need our own version of [1]. When meant pleasantly, sometimes implies, "no, I'm not aware o

RE: BFD WG adoption for draft-haas-bfd-large-packets

8 9:42 AM > To: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) > Cc: Reshad Rahman (rrahman) ; Naiming Shen > (naiming) ; rtg-bfd@ietf.org > Subject: Re: BFD WG adoption for draft-haas-bfd-large-packets > > On Mon, Oct 29, 2018 at 04:39:04PM +, Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) wrote: > > Given the MTU issu

Re: BFD WG adoption for draft-haas-bfd-large-packets

On Mon, Oct 29, 2018 at 04:39:04PM +, Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) wrote: > Given the MTU issue is associated with a link coming up - and the use of Echo > would allow the problem to be detected and prevent the BFD session from > coming up - > and you are acknowledging that the protocol allows pa

RE: BFD WG adoption for draft-haas-bfd-large-packets

anything more? Les > -Original Message- > From: Jeffrey Haas > Sent: Monday, October 29, 2018 8:36 AM > To: Reshad Rahman (rrahman) > Cc: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) ; Naiming Shen (naiming) > ; rtg-bfd@ietf.org > Subject: Re: BFD WG adoption for draft-haas-bfd-large-packets

Re: BFD WG adoption for draft-haas-bfd-large-packets

Hi Jeff, I'd be fine with the text below on BFD echo in the discussion section. Regards, Reshad. On 2018-10-29, 11:36 AM, "Jeffrey Haas" wrote: Reshad, On Fri, Oct 26, 2018 at 06:32:26PM +, Reshad Rahman (rrahman) wrote: >On 2018-10-25, 11:38 AM, "Jeffrey Haas" wrote:

Re: BFD WG adoption for draft-haas-bfd-large-packets

Reshad, On Fri, Oct 26, 2018 at 06:32:26PM +, Reshad Rahman (rrahman) wrote: >On 2018-10-25, 11:38 AM, "Jeffrey Haas" wrote: > > The draft I had previously worked on with Xiao Min discussing probing > > using > > BFD Echo had the concept of probes that would happen wherein the > > s

Re: BFD WG adoption for draft-haas-bfd-large-packets

Hi, Inline . On 2018-10-25, 11:38 AM, "Jeffrey Haas" wrote: Les, I *think* the following text is yours. On Mon, Oct 22, 2018 at 12:36:52AM +, Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) wrote: > [Les:] So, this has some implications: > > We have both a transmit interva

Re: BFD WG adoption for draft-haas-bfd-large-packets

An interesting question for the large-packets draft is whether we want to support a periodic probing mode, perhaps leveraging the stability draft's ideas. Or, should it instead only be consistent? I can see how using BFD to detect an MTU failure and doing the reroute can make sense,

Re: BFD WG adoption for draft-haas-bfd-large-packets

(* sorry, resend ING with updated subject *) Hi Les, > [Les:] I have read this draft - not sure how relevant it is. > > Naiming had suggested that MTU sized packets need not be sent all the time > but only occasionally - > and that a failure might not be used to take the BFD session down - >

Re: BFD WG adoption for draft-haas-bfd-large-packets

Hi Acee, >> Commenting specifically on the OSPF case, when you have such misconfigured >> MTUs, this manifests as weird protocol hiccups.B You don't so much detect >> that there's an MTU issue - you just see OSPF failing to make progress. > > However, when implementations start supporting ietf-os

Re: BFD WG adoption for draft-haas-bfd-large-packets

On Thu, Oct 25, 2018 at 10:28:52PM +, Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) wrote: > > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-bfd-stability-02 > > [Les:] I have read this draft - not sure how relevant it is. Mostly, the idea being that it's possible to do probing in BFD without necessarily having to commit

RE: BFD WG adoption for draft-haas-bfd-large-packets

Jeff - Inline - hopefully more readable than before... > -Original Message- > From: Jeffrey Haas > Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2018 8:38 AM > To: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) > Cc: Naiming Shen (naiming) ; Reshad Rahman > (rrahman) ; rtg-bfd@ietf.org > Subject: Re: BFD

Re: BFD WG adoption for draft-haas-bfd-large-packets

Hi Jeff, Although technically BFD doesn’t seem like the right hammer, I can see the advantages of using it in specific use cases since all the notification machinery is already in place. See one inline. > On Oct 25, 2018, at 11:29 AM, Jeffrey Haas wrote: > > Note that I'm choosing this mess

Re: BFD WG adoption for draft-haas-bfd-large-packets

Les, I *think* the following text is yours. On Mon, Oct 22, 2018 at 12:36:52AM +, Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) wrote: > [Les:] So, this has some implications: > > We have both a transmit interval and a multiplier for a BFD session because > we allow that some BFD packets may be dropped for reas

Re: BFD WG adoption for draft-haas-bfd-large-packets

Note that I'm choosing this message out of a mixed thread to give a reply. So, not all of this is targeted as a response to you, Acee. On Tue, Oct 23, 2018 at 04:30:52PM +, Acee Lindem (acee) wrote: > Hi Albert, Les, > > I tend to agree with Les that BFD doesn’t seem like the right protocol f

Re: BFD WG adoption for draft-haas-bfd-large-packets

Les, A brief note, and one worn as a chair: Despite having strong personal preferences about mail quoting, I realize that not everyone gets a chance to choose a client of their own choice. But that said, your responses in this thread have been impossible to parse out from the surrounding reply in

Re: BFD WG adoption for draft-haas-bfd-large-packets

Naiming, A specific comment on the crypto overhead: On Mon, Oct 22, 2018 at 07:38:18PM +, Naiming Shen (naiming) wrote: > > Probably just bandwidth increase, and if you need encryption/decryption on > the packets, > then large packets will cost more in CPU. The BFD protocol has you check t

RE: BFD WG adoption for draft-haas-bfd-large-packets

can also enable padding on WAN circuits, and use default for back-back intra-site links. Thanks Albert From: ginsb...@cisco.com At: 10/23/18 19:52:53To: Albert Fu (BLOOMBERG/ 120 PARK ) , rtg-bfd@ietf.org Subject: RE: BFD WG adoption for draft-haas-bfd-large-packets Albert - From

RE: BFD WG adoption for draft-haas-bfd-large-packets

Albert - From: Albert Fu (BLOOMBERG/ 120 PARK) Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2018 8:45 AM To: rtg-bfd@ietf.org; Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) Subject: RE: BFD WG adoption for draft-haas-bfd-large-packets Hi Les, Given that it takes relative lengthy time to troubleshoot the MTU issue, and the

Re: BFD WG adoption for draft-haas-bfd-large-packets

-bfd@ietf.org, ginsb...@cisco.com Subject: Re: BFD WG adoption for draft-haas-bfd-large-packets I understand in some networks (such as in the network Albert mentioned about) it may need sub-second detection if the MTU has been impacted on the path, but that should only be an implementation

Re: BFD WG adoption for draft-haas-bfd-large-packets

ARK ) <mailto:af...@bloomberg.net> , rtg-bfd@ietf.org<mailto:rtg-bfd@ietf.org>, ginsb...@cisco.com<mailto:ginsb...@cisco.com> Subject: Re: BFD WG adoption for draft-haas-bfd-large-packets Hi Albert, Les, I tend to agree with Les that BFD doesn’t seem like the right protoc

Re: BFD WG adoption for draft-haas-bfd-large-packets

Hi Acee, Please see comments in-line. Thanks, Albert From: a...@cisco.com At: 10/23/18 13:02:49To: Albert Fu (BLOOMBERG/ 120 PARK ) , rtg-bfd@ietf.org, ginsb...@cisco.com Subject: Re: BFD WG adoption for draft-haas-bfd-large-packets Hi Albert, From: "Albert Fu (BLOO

Re: BFD WG adoption for draft-haas-bfd-large-packets

Hi Albert, From: "Albert Fu (BLOOMBERG/ 120 PARK)" Reply-To: Albert Fu Date: Tuesday, October 23, 2018 at 12:45 PM To: "rtg-bfd@ietf.org" , "Les Ginsberg (ginsberg)" , Acee Lindem Subject: Re: BFD WG adoption for draft-haas-bfd-large-packets Hi Acee, You are

Re: BFD WG adoption for draft-haas-bfd-large-packets

From: "Albert Fu (BLOOMBERG/ 120 PARK)" Reply-To: Albert Fu Date: Tuesday, October 23, 2018 at 1:23 PM To: "Les Ginsberg (ginsberg)" , Acee Lindem , "rtg-bfd@ietf.org" Subject: Re: BFD WG adoption for draft-haas-bfd-large-packets (* Resending smaller me

Re: BFD WG adoption for draft-haas-bfd-large-packets

tf.org" , "Les Ginsberg (ginsberg)" Subject: Re: BFD WG adoption for draft-haas-bfd-large-packets Hi Albert, Resending due to a related problem – message was too big for IETF filter and I pruned part of the thread at the end. From: "Albert Fu (BLOOMBERG/ 120 PARK)" Reply-

Re: BFD WG adoption for draft-haas-bfd-large-packets

(* Resending smaller message *) Hi Acee, Please see comments in-line. Thanks, Albert From: a...@cisco.com At: 10/23/18 13:02:49To: Albert Fu (BLOOMBERG/ 120 PARK ) , rtg-bfd@ietf.org, ginsb...@cisco.com Subject: Re: BFD WG adoption for draft-haas-bfd-large-packets Hi Albert

Re: BFD WG adoption for draft-haas-bfd-large-packets

sberg (ginsberg)" , Acee Lindem Subject: Re: BFD WG adoption for draft-haas-bfd-large-packets Hi Acee, You are right in that this issue does not happen frequently, but when it does, it is time consuming to troubleshoot and causes unnecessary network downtime to some applications (e.

Re: BFD WG adoption for draft-haas-bfd-large-packets

*"rtg-bfd@ietf.org" , "Les Ginsberg (ginsberg)" < > ginsb...@cisco.com> > *Subject: *RE: BFD WG adoption for draft-haas-bfd-large-packets > > > > Hi Les, > > > > Given that it takes relative lengthy time to troubleshoot the MTU issue, > and

Re: BFD WG adoption for draft-haas-bfd-large-packets

been established, and without any network alarms. Thanks Albert From: a...@cisco.com At: 10/23/18 12:30:55To: Albert Fu (BLOOMBERG/ 120 PARK ) , rtg-bfd@ietf.org, ginsb...@cisco.com Subject: Re: BFD WG adoption for draft-haas-bfd-large-packets Hi Albert, Les, I tend to agree with

Re: BFD WG adoption for draft-haas-bfd-large-packets

ot;Les Ginsberg (ginsberg)" Subject: RE: BFD WG adoption for draft-haas-bfd-large-packets Hi Les, Given that it takes relative lengthy time to troubleshoot the MTU issue, and the associated impact on customer traffic, it is important to have a reliable and fast mechanism to detect the iss

RE: BFD WG adoption for draft-haas-bfd-large-packets

detect this, and also divert traffic around the link quickly. I feel BFD is a good method for this purpose. Thanks Albert From: ginsb...@cisco.com At: 10/23/18 10:45:02To: Albert Fu (BLOOMBERG/ 120 PARK ) , rtg-bfd@ietf.org Subject: RE: BFD WG adoption for draft-haas-bfd-large-packets

RE: BFD WG adoption for draft-haas-bfd-large-packets

October 22, 2018 at 4:40 PM To: "Reshad Rahman (rrahman)" mailto:rrah...@cisco.com>>, "Naiming Shen (naiming)" mailto:naim...@cisco.com>> Cc: "rtg-bfd@ietf.org<mailto:rtg-bfd@ietf.org>" mailto:rtg-bfd@ietf.org>> Subject: RE: BFD WG adoption fo

Re: BFD WG adoption for draft-haas-bfd-large-packets

Rahman (rrahman)" , "Naiming Shen (naiming)" Cc: "rtg-bfd@ietf.org" Subject: RE: BFD WG adoption for draft-haas-bfd-large-packets Reshad – Inline. From: Reshad Rahman (rrahman) Sent: Monday, October 22, 2018 1:02 PM To: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) ; Naiming Shen (naiming)

RE: BFD WG adoption for draft-haas-bfd-large-packets

reach the person managing the list at rtg-bfd-ow...@ietf.org<mailto:rtg-bfd-ow...@ietf.org> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of Rtg-bfd digest..." Today's Topics: 1. RE: BF

RE: BFD WG adoption for draft-haas-bfd-large-packets

fd digest..." Today's Topics: 1. RE: BFD WG adoption for draft-haas-bfd-large-packets (Les Ginsberg (ginsberg)) -- Message: 1 Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2018 20:40:49 + From: "Les Ginsberg (ginsberg)&qu

RE: BFD WG adoption for draft-haas-bfd-large-packets

Reshad – Inline. From: Reshad Rahman (rrahman) Sent: Monday, October 22, 2018 1:02 PM To: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) ; Naiming Shen (naiming) Cc: rtg-bfd@ietf.org Subject: Re: BFD WG adoption for draft-haas-bfd-large-packets Hi, 1) From Albert’s presentation @ IETF102, the motivation for

Re: BFD WG adoption for draft-haas-bfd-large-packets

discussions. Regards, Reshad. From: "Les Ginsberg (ginsberg)" Date: Sunday, October 21, 2018 at 8:36 PM To: "Naiming Shen (naiming)" Cc: "Reshad Rahman (rrahman)" , "rtg-bfd@ietf.org" Subject: RE: BFD WG adoption for draft-haas-bfd-large-packets Naiming -

Re: BFD WG adoption for draft-haas-bfd-large-packets

<mailto:rtg-bfd@ietf.org> Subject: Re: BFD WG adoption for draft-haas-bfd-large-packets Les, On Oct 21, 2018, at 3:26 PM, Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) mailto:ginsb...@cisco.com>> wrote: Naiming – Inline… From: Naiming Shen (naiming) Sent: Sunday, October 21, 2018 3:12 PM To: Les Ginsberg

Re: BFD WG adoption for draft-haas-bfd-large-packets

Cc: Reshad Rahman (rrahman) mailto:rrah...@cisco.com>>; > rtg-bfd@ietf.org <mailto:rtg-bfd@ietf.org> > Subject: Re: BFD WG adoption for draft-haas-bfd-large-packets > > > Les, > > On Oct 21, 2018, at 3:26 PM, Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) <mailto:ginsb...@cisco.com>>

RE: BFD WG adoption for draft-haas-bfd-large-packets

Naiming - Thanx for the good discussion. Responses inline. From: Naiming Shen (naiming) Sent: Sunday, October 21, 2018 3:36 PM To: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) Cc: Reshad Rahman (rrahman) ; rtg-bfd@ietf.org Subject: Re: BFD WG adoption for draft-haas-bfd-large-packets Les, On Oct 21, 2018, at 3

Re: BFD WG adoption for draft-haas-bfd-large-packets

..@cisco.com>>; rtg-bfd@ietf.org<mailto:rtg-bfd@ietf.org> Subject: Re: BFD WG adoption for draft-haas-bfd-large-packets It probably should say “the payload size MAY be increased to this value and it is not recommended for a BFD session to always use the large size packet for padding. How

RE: BFD WG adoption for draft-haas-bfd-large-packets

Naiming – Inline… From: Naiming Shen (naiming) Sent: Sunday, October 21, 2018 3:12 PM To: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) Cc: Reshad Rahman (rrahman) ; rtg-bfd@ietf.org Subject: Re: BFD WG adoption for draft-haas-bfd-large-packets It probably should say “the payload size MAY be increased to this

Re: BFD WG adoption for draft-haas-bfd-large-packets

rahman) Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2018 6:06 PM To: rtg-bfd@ietf.org<mailto:rtg-bfd@ietf.org> Subject: BFD WG adoption for draft-haas-bfd-large-packets Hello BFD WG, We have received an adoption request for “BFD encapsulated in large packets”. https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-haas-bfd-l

RE: BFD WG adoption for draft-haas-bfd-large-packets

. Les From: Rtg-bfd On Behalf Of Reshad Rahman (rrahman) Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2018 6:06 PM To: rtg-bfd@ietf.org Subject: BFD WG adoption for draft-haas-bfd-large-packets Hello BFD WG, We have received an adoption request for “BFD encapsulated in large packets”. https

Re: BFD WG adoption for draft-haas-bfd-large-packets

Yes/Support. This draft provides a concise and practical way to perform path mtu detection and verification. Best Regards, Xiao Min 原始邮件 发件人：ReshadRahman(rrahman) 收件人：rtg-bfd@ietf.org ; 日 期 ：2018年10月18日 09:06 主 题 ：BFD WG adoption for draft-haas-bfd-large-packets Hello BFD WG

Re: BFD WG adoption for draft-haas-bfd-large-packets

Support. Regards, Nagendra From: Rtg-bfd on behalf of "Reshad Rahman (rrahman)" Date: Wednesday, October 17, 2018 at 9:06 PM To: "rtg-bfd@ietf.org" Subject: BFD WG adoption for draft-haas-bfd-large-packets Hello BFD WG, We have received an adoption request for “BFD e

RE: BFD WG adoption for draft-haas-bfd-large-packets

Hello, I support. The feature is useful and the solution simple. Thanks Regards, --Bruno From: Rtg-bfd [mailto:rtg-bfd-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Reshad Rahman (rrahman) Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2018 3:06 AM To: rtg-bfd@ietf.org Subject: BFD WG adoption for draft-haas-bfd-large-packets

Re: BFD WG adoption for draft-haas-bfd-large-packets

Yes/support. Regards, Reshad. From: Rtg-bfd on behalf of "Reshad Rahman (rrahman)" Date: Wednesday, October 17, 2018 at 9:06 PM To: "rtg-bfd@ietf.org" Subject: BFD WG adoption for draft-haas-bfd-large-packets Hello BFD WG, We have received an adoption request for “BFD e

Re: BFD WG adoption for draft-haas-bfd-large-packets

Support. -- Enke On 10/17/18 6:06 PM, Reshad Rahman (rrahman) wrote: > Hello BFD WG, > >   > > We have received an adoption request for “BFD encapsulated in large packets”. > >   > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-haas-bfd-large-packets/ > >   > > The adoption call will end on Frida

Re: BFD WG adoption for draft-haas-bfd-large-packets

Support. - Naiming On Oct 17, 2018, at 6:06 PM, Reshad Rahman (rrahman) mailto:rrah...@cisco.com>> wrote: Hello BFD WG, We have received an adoption request for “BFD encapsulated in large packets”. https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-haas-bfd-large-packets/ The adoption call will end on

Re: BFD WG adoption for draft-haas-bfd-large-packets

Yes/support Regards, Greg On Wed, Oct 17, 2018, 18:06 Reshad Rahman (rrahman) wrote: > Hello BFD WG, > > > > We have received an adoption request for “BFD encapsulated in large > packets”. > > > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-haas-bfd-large-packets/ > > > > The adoption call will end

Re: BFD WG adoption for draft-haas-bfd-large-packets

Support. > On Oct 17, 2018, at 6:06 PM, Reshad Rahman (rrahman) > wrote: > > Hello BFD WG, > > We have received an adoption request for “BFD encapsulated in large packets”. > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-haas-bfd-large-packets/ >

BFD WG adoption for draft-haas-bfd-large-packets

Hello BFD WG, We have received an adoption request for “BFD encapsulated in large packets”. https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-haas-bfd-large-packets/ The adoption call will end on Friday Nov 9th. Please send email to the list indicating “yes/support” or “no/do not support”. If you do not