Subject: Re: [Bier] I-D Action: draft-ietf-bier-bgp-ls-bier-ext-00.txt

From: <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2017 10:44:27 +0800 (CST)

Hello all,

We would like to request comments on the draft

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-bier-bgp-ls-bier-ext 

We would really appreciate any comments and questions about the draft.

Best Regards.

Ran

原始邮件

发件人： ＜[email-masked]＞
收件人： ＜[email-masked]＞
抄送人： ＜[email-masked]＞
日 期 ：2017年01月19日 00:26
主 题 ：[Bier] I-D Action: draft-ietf-bier-bgp-ls-bier-ext-00.txt

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
This draft is a work item of the Bit Indexed Explicit Replication of the IETF.

        Title           : BGP Link-State extensions for BIER
        Authors         : Ran Chen
                          Zheng Zhang
                          Vengada Prasad Govindan
                          IJsbrand Wijnands
    Filename        : draft-ietf-bier-bgp-ls-bier-ext-00.txt
    Pages           : 8
    Date            : 2017-01-10

Abstract:
   Bit Index Explicit Replication (BIER) is an architecture that
   provides optimal multicast forwarding through a "BIER domain" without
   requiring intermediate routers to maintain any multicast related per-
   flow state.  BIER also does not require any explicit tree-building
   protocol for its operation.  A multicast data packet enters a BIER
   domain at a "Bit-Forwarding Ingress Router" (BFIR), and leaves the
   BIER domain at one or more "Bit-Forwarding Egress Routers" (BFERs).
   The BFIR router adds a BIER header to the packet.  The BIER header
   contains a bitstring in which each bit represents exactly one BFER to
   forward the packet to.  The set of BFERs to which the multicast
   packet needs to be forwarded is expressed by setting the bits that
   correspond to those routers in the BIER header.

   This document specifies extensions to the BGP Link-state address-
   family in order to advertising BIER information.

The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bier-bgp-ls-bier-ext/

There's also a htmlized version available at:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-bier-bgp-ls-bier-ext-00

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.

Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/

_______________________________________________
BIER mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bier

---

From: Greg Mirsky <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2017 13:29:24 -0700

Hi Ran, Authors,
thank you for the very good and timely work. Please kindly consider my
notes to the draft:

   - section 3.1
      - for consistency of format definition add Type with reference to the
      appropriate sub-section in IANA Considerations;
      - add definition of the value in Length field, e.g. "equals number of
      octets of the Value field";
      - you may describe the Reserved field and note that is MUST be set to
      0 on transmit and ignored on receipt;
      - I think that meaning and use of subdomain-id and MT-ID need more
      discussion. E.g., how these id's assigned, managed? What they signify?
      - how the value of BSL field defined? Is it the same as Len field in
      the BIER Header (Section 3 in
draft-ietf-bier-mpls-encapsulation)? You may
      add the reference to encaps draft.
      - I think that Set Identifier (SI) should be included in the BIER
      TLV. According to Section 3 of the BIER Architecture document,
SI value may
      be in the [0, 255] range. Then one octet seems sufficient for SI field.
      - I'd suggest to keep format to four octet alignment and add reserved
      field after the BFR-id field.
   - Section 3.1.1
      - you can add reference to the sub-section in IANA Considerations for
      Type field;
      - add definition of the value of Length field;
      - is 255 range sufficient for Label Range advertisement?Is it because
      SI is limited to 255? Would be helpful to clarify;
      - would BS Length in the sub-TLV be the same as BSL field in the BIER
      TLV?

Regards,
Greg

On Thu, Apr 6, 2017 at 7:44 PM, <[email-masked]> wrote:

> *发件人：* ＜[email-masked]＞;
> *收件人：* ＜[email-masked]＞;
> *抄送人：* ＜[email-masked]＞;
> *日 期 ：*2017年01月19日 00:26
> *主 题 ：**[Bier] I-D Action: draft-ietf-bier-bgp-ls-bier-ext-00.txt*
>
>
>