From nobody Mon Jul 2 03:19:47 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pals@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pals@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D4DE130EB5; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 03:19:39 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id TbHgGcSzV_nT; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 03:19:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-wm0-x22c.google.com (mail-wm0-x22c.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c09::22c]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 83E50130DF4; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 03:19:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-wm0-x22c.google.com with SMTP id n17-v6so8128076wmh.2; Mon, 02 Jul 2018 03:19:37 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:content-language; bh=aus1NLv7lEFIlshY35dCW6eZ1nBDZivE+MwLtWolaWc=; b=fKQqEw+oFn49V3MTLH/IGlwKW+QiGARRn/YPQl0Okm2XgDz+l9aSEwVOqmmyswPIuA YfLQcO+K8weOjN5OIz3D4/ECvusm44igYChzc6DtCALxLdi6jupypHtBKnQnlOV3HoE+ mJeHAXCKRTPmIBJEj+qLE5O/47JkkEAEH9f9COy/2Tz7x1EELVOiCKEMWtUoAQOQsrNn /uHRMpNfIbgv86YRCXKQ7u3w0dEzVGMmKklH0i2ZnPFEVWlBtjlj+LO8PpuJiICqURZ2 OnFvoeIsF41Yz2fRes/drjdSKgjP9Weg7PH71jV4p/5O6+RZEdU5cTkyOFBRI5IuW1C+ m+Og== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding :content-language; bh=aus1NLv7lEFIlshY35dCW6eZ1nBDZivE+MwLtWolaWc=; b=W5R8GcPZWqS8kZgKsPsdwhKmZGIn4PQUkC+gUG/I52I/NlOUTSVlGC9107ZjRN1oF+ e+iDNL031LpsMveL4Nu+vE8TzILKMZ4q88DD1KQIiQqsa3SFapuwDrcJC6khJ7lOpr70 5GYPKpvcgggkDd+6eDzve/6Z9BuHYBXH2MDnq6JbgJQCBcTIw+iPXRxRHvw+vDhNvM8G fduLL8phpr5fyGBBG4I4+YXNPsDINZel7HBcb7/UL4fNL1kT2yYlILrBG1tk9oT8kcJS 677REZxqGx7rQ+fho49vPA164lsYr4ZxSY6UtFEuEh/uf436wrh2RKyXJjhQMOLGtHVg dfMw== X-Gm-Message-State: APt69E1LbeL4Jis1ECY/BXUMTBNfV4HvDKzOSENjpZTjDa9CByMB23FS fGaiMfNOHxVQMM0Uk+EHUNE092aO X-Google-Smtp-Source: AAOMgpciv1fD99PBpN5KrIBLqqERRp/7N245XDmAzufXVUQtywhqy5Oq4rtr4ZiAHz8FPOgn3xxEBg== X-Received: by 2002:a1c:46c2:: with SMTP id t185-v6mr7529071wma.56.1530526775402; Mon, 02 Jul 2018 03:19:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.2.105] (host213-123-124-182.in-addr.btopenworld.com. [213.123.124.182]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 143-v6sm9861024wml.37.2018.07.02.03.19.34 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 02 Jul 2018 03:19:34 -0700 (PDT) To: Brian Carpenter , gen-art@ietf.org Cc: draft-ietf-pals-ethernet-cw.all@ietf.org, pals@ietf.org References: <152877425096.2652.654313340478370473@ietfa.amsl.com> From: Stewart Bryant Message-ID: Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2018 11:19:33 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <152877425096.2652.654313340478370473@ietfa.amsl.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Language: en-GB Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Pals] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-pals-ethernet-cw-06 X-BeenThere: pals@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: "Pseudowire And LDP-enabled Services dicussion list." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2018 10:19:40 -0000 Hi Brian Thank you for your review comments. Please see inline. On 12/06/2018 04:30, Brian Carpenter wrote: > Reviewer: Brian Carpenter > Review result: Ready with Nits > > Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-pals-ethernet-cw-06 > > I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area > Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed > by the IESG for the IETF Chair. Please treat these comments just > like any other last call comments. > > For more information, please see the FAQ at > . > > Document: draft-ietf-pals-ethernet-cw-06.txt > Reviewer: Brian Carpenter > Review Date: 2018-06-12 > IETF LC End Date: 2018-06-15 > IESG Telechat date: 2018-06-21 > > Summary: Ready with nits > -------- > > Comments: > --------- > > This (with RFC4928) is a wonderful example of why layer violations are a Bad Thing. > > Nits: > ----- > >> 1. Introduction > ... >> This document recommends the use of the Ethernet pseudowire control >> word in all but exceptional circumstances. > That's wrong, it *mandates* this usage with a MUST (first paragraph of section 4). The text with the MUST is "This document updates {{RFC4448}} to state that where both the ingress PE and the egress PE support the Ethernet pseudowire control word, then the CW MUST be used." This is conditional on both equipments supporting the feature. During WG discussion there was a lot of discussion on the degree to which we would mandate the migration to CW.  The problem is that the use of the CW has hardware implications. At one stage we went so far as to recommend the the phasing out of equipment that could not support the CW, but we got strong pushback from a specialist part of the vendor community. This led us to a compromise position where we RECOMMEND the use of the CW, but only  mandate that the CW be used if it is available in the equipment used at both ends of the PW. >> 3. Background > ... >> A recent posting on the Nanog email list has highlighted this >> problem: >> >> https://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/2016-December/089395.html > No, it's no longer recent. How about: > > For example, a posting on the N email list highlighted this > problem: I have changed the text to: A posting on the NANOG email list highlighted this problem: > >> 7. Operational Considerations >> >> CW presence on the PW is controlled by the configuration and may be >> subject to default operational mode of not being enabled. > That sentence is hard to parse. Try this: > > A configuration switch might determine whether the CW is used on the PW. > The default configuration might be to disable use of the CW. This now says: In some cases, the inclusion of a CW in the PW is determined by equipment configuration. Furthermore, it is possible that the default configuration in such cases is  to disable use of the CW. - Stewart From nobody Mon Jul 2 03:23:15 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pals@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pals@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B2827130EB5; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 03:23:12 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id eFmqtx6wKKlp; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 03:23:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-wr0-x22c.google.com (mail-wr0-x22c.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c0c::22c]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ADEA4130DF4; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 03:23:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-wr0-x22c.google.com with SMTP id p1-v6so14975189wrs.9; Mon, 02 Jul 2018 03:23:10 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:content-language; bh=jNFl9CEh+2loSqVjT3tbzsJZoxa18WWnt+3rQ/NCgWE=; b=RrmU3/1iuBIJRXjeZLSC5PZnCvRWimbTmmfcJAFDawW2N7V0IL6Bg9VYmi6bsLsILQ yx5K89Mm8E7a5DIOpEiLKGwknKPZwgkbAmQa9+1Vk2sg4Z7zTUv0FpPHIxJCFjWQQKH/ I+UeBVhQOwWlB+u2pPZgzxK7uvTQnyteo9KDLgA3uqsasuOUQc4STEw8Ar05FtMVhBU9 d2LQ2I5tIrU5sj3nRXTrWsgrzhewgI8Cq6NhQgdGwcXCvmmWAHyoOjIEteNwPT7Z/6p7 xFtM+SSGxdBP9nUzZUXxgUu3Ct6FmyaCKweHQlsPu7kDVQeRCY80kI16AUr3yVaPqHVa bIGA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding :content-language; bh=jNFl9CEh+2loSqVjT3tbzsJZoxa18WWnt+3rQ/NCgWE=; b=CVBJM0yQA7IX8Ei7NF71OPaqJgQeSK7UN1B/RZwgKaYgLvBOsOIGJhP2NFPCVYPEia Hp6nYUEgvVHztZtuRe0sc8jQJ6XRcrMKGXdphXnmQEUJBBxcIg5wnMRCOwcMI6i/HpQy XZFgoBpLjWASgWIDJdBbY69Ov+TLikxfji5mW/3krP0e8fr3aanA90ZTLmTDtRA27bem jexUF+v+wmI31/kmmCBlrQr5XUifSF2cPiJvyhvYAneoQXhdVGn2jGz9h7q0UB2SDTAB D/JjC0afQy50cjgfgn+wLURVRfCv35c8ZgCCGNEO+s2SDRV4He6wjXghUC5a9WsJi1Jr iM7Q== X-Gm-Message-State: APt69E0SEriJuSHLgbxttd/o8wGTlCp3oRdOyCbGjUJBqE+tn2vVkFfA HvD3nthFyUiRvG20/hnE2aZ1HpFM X-Google-Smtp-Source: AAOMgpeJAW7L0098nu+RAk8sw8KCUdI8SgI6T3FUGBHrGeeORCWhGZqmJwphWcJKoBtEPSaG17FvkQ== X-Received: by 2002:adf:ab95:: with SMTP id s21-v6mr19966152wrc.90.1530526988959; Mon, 02 Jul 2018 03:23:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.2.105] (host213-123-124-182.in-addr.btopenworld.com. [213.123.124.182]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id y8-v6sm14783495wrs.0.2018.07.02.03.23.07 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 02 Jul 2018 03:23:08 -0700 (PDT) To: =?UTF-8?Q?Mirja_K=c3=bchlewind?= , The IESG Cc: draft-ietf-pals-ethernet-cw@ietf.org, Matthew Bocci , pals-chairs@ietf.org, pals@ietf.org References: <152931851750.2709.5220766914924187998.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> From: Stewart Bryant Message-ID: Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2018 11:23:06 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <152931851750.2709.5220766914924187998.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Language: en-GB Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Pals] =?utf-8?q?Mirja_K=C3=BChlewind=27s_No_Objection_on_draft-?= =?utf-8?q?ietf-pals-ethernet-cw-06=3A_=28with_COMMENT=29?= X-BeenThere: pals@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: "Pseudowire And LDP-enabled Services dicussion list." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2018 10:23:13 -0000 On 18/06/2018 11:41, Mirja Kühlewind wrote: > Mirja Kühlewind has entered the following ballot position for > draft-ietf-pals-ethernet-cw-06: No Objection > > When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all > email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this > introductory paragraph, however.) > > > Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html > for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. > > > The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-pals-ethernet-cw/ > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > COMMENT: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > One minor recommend edit: > Given that this drafts updates RFC4448 to a MUST, maybe s/This document > recommends /This document requires/ > > Hi Mirja There is some history here, that I explained in my response to Brian's GenArt review, but which you may not see: The text with the MUST is "This document updates {{RFC4448}} to state that where both the ingress PE and the egress PE support the Ethernet pseudowire control word, then the CW MUST be used." This is conditional on both equipments supporting the feature. During WG discussion there was a lot of discussion on the degree to which we would mandate the migration to CW.  The problem is that the use of the CW has hardware implications. At one stage we went so far as to recommend the the phasing out of equipment that could not support the CW, but we got strong pushback from a specialist part of the vendor community. This led us to a compromise position where we RECOMMEND the use of the CW, but only  mandate that the CW be used if it is available in the equipment used at both ends of the PW. Best Regards Stewart From nobody Mon Jul 2 03:35:14 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pals@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pals@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 69855130E06; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 03:35:07 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id FuDnCzFL-fDM; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 03:35:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-wm0-x244.google.com (mail-wm0-x244.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c09::244]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B684213107F; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 03:35:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-wm0-x244.google.com with SMTP id p11-v6so8133423wmc.4; Mon, 02 Jul 2018 03:35:03 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:content-language; bh=bus0Lem/nwXwEVZNzbUpMuX2vvei2bB/VTuTBAHCX24=; b=PxbgfQZkWggieoZHxYeAcvMY2rOWjYlL/0mlfUiGoEnsEiTgQYHxD0ZJ61JwPTzxIU YxD9D99jJg6X9YktWcctCC12SAbBE8/e+qZtGj3n3WKbL/T+a9Eb2LK9Ai20y9X9rmdu 1Nl2xoVCDMMKJ1xp8FFdV33RI6oR5FMv/2C2XedV1NfgVqRrbwCMhjbygIQ9nPnHgALg QrWf7VOetfD/RVghqIE+3UKD5R+/Sl5QCjQ8rbJ7HrT4QbNP5Lbhih/H2FRuHKJ6N4yF G+aCd5zTOgRmZizQ8rpw3d15HZblH1FGTKocPTgcc/BFxz+D0WDLSuu6AmourwdO9KNR p1Jw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding :content-language; bh=bus0Lem/nwXwEVZNzbUpMuX2vvei2bB/VTuTBAHCX24=; b=QkEBL4jNJbY31/tT652zhCa4G0J8UVdfTm706eIRmS2kKK6mqiPm3U08v+OFWwhD8B NdLRZYL4Mp0yK4syQwS0yYoRpSX8gHBNi0Xnp01ZQH5Egho4RDxZXsDElBdjiHxlg5qz fMh1k7sodg1tISSmtpR5f/gMtp1788AXO62xYa/OKrIe5q5SVmxugMbKO07kTYydnH3B kbpIUD5xBGkcdF10MpcfA5YcQNGhZ1F/c4+pK8CdmNFEs8MKcpk1cKyWHkaPJ0bfYipg 64K6r9YAo5UN2USeupNDN7Y8TfNr3Mk06s8AmQxvRYshBiELN6Yh9gLKlVLKQ3CH1XaV IP1w== X-Gm-Message-State: APt69E0R7HSS4r8/ifS5Rm5ijuuCky09HZoQ/c4zTYZj1Luc9AZ1Lydn qOnpG8lx9C8FU0DIH5I0hZ5REjyY X-Google-Smtp-Source: AAOMgpev5u9BuDcF1JU5llfR+OjnBlhvOF1Yl2V/boF45IoxZ37HUNMViCxkzcYg7saB3EnTa56+Og== X-Received: by 2002:a1c:f46:: with SMTP id 67-v6mr5199812wmp.122.1530527702057; Mon, 02 Jul 2018 03:35:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.2.105] (host213-123-124-182.in-addr.btopenworld.com. [213.123.124.182]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id r10-v6sm17515614wrm.66.2018.07.02.03.35.01 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 02 Jul 2018 03:35:01 -0700 (PDT) To: Alvaro Retana , The IESG Cc: draft-ietf-pals-ethernet-cw@ietf.org, Matthew Bocci , pals-chairs@ietf.org, pals@ietf.org References: <152935430237.3319.17853470555066073876.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> From: Stewart Bryant Message-ID: <53aa663a-b8c3-b037-0abb-96f0333d6987@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2018 11:35:00 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <152935430237.3319.17853470555066073876.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Language: en-GB Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Pals] Alvaro Retana's No Objection on draft-ietf-pals-ethernet-cw-06: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: pals@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: "Pseudowire And LDP-enabled Services dicussion list." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2018 10:35:09 -0000 On 18/06/2018 21:38, Alvaro Retana wrote: > Alvaro Retana has entered the following ballot position for > draft-ietf-pals-ethernet-cw-06: No Objection > > When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all > email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this > introductory paragraph, however.) > > > Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html > for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. > > > The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-pals-ethernet-cw/ > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > COMMENT: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > The title of the document is "Use of Ethernet Control Word RECOMMENDED", which > hints at the corresponding rfc2119 keyword: > > 3. SHOULD This word, or the adjective "RECOMMENDED", mean that there > may exist valid reasons in particular circumstances to ignore a > particular item, but the full implications must be understood and > carefully weighed before choosing a different course. > > That seems to be in line with the description in the Introduction: "This > document recommends the use of the Ethernet pseudowire control word in all but > exceptional circumstances." > > However, the qualified recommendation is that if "both the ingress PE and the > egress PE support the Ethernet pseudowire control word, then the CW MUST be > used". What are the "exceptional circumstances"? Should that "MUST" be a > "SHOULD"? Should the use be further qualified? > > This comment is not a showstopper, just a minor misalignment. > Hi Alvaro One exceptional circumstance that I have heard is that the network is so bandwidth constrained that the extra four bytes are a problem. I think this may occur with some satellite/radio links, but I am not sure whether this continues to be the case. I think that this is a case where ambiguity may be stronger than proscriptivity. - Stewart From nobody Mon Jul 2 04:02:17 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pals@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pals@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5B56A130F37; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 04:02:09 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id z3YUlcO32ruW; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 04:02:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-wr0-x235.google.com (mail-wr0-x235.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c0c::235]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9ABF1130F13; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 04:02:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-wr0-x235.google.com with SMTP id s11-v6so5843291wra.13; Mon, 02 Jul 2018 04:02:06 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:content-language; bh=PNsnymtR9RgYOrMNTTamD5/fptACf5CuTlA0XXRfgkk=; b=edxCxIrA0eKngRxsFq6bxmb8fEWc1qANvIksRxCthQ1mU4SmPNptiIiJ/JE0oJ1Aac C3KDsvSsfK2mtNLRY1DjjJMNjSwNe5aVmbstEYOZ6ky7kFEz+CdBF3PsL8r597L4Kajb 4lGdKp5M8phP67VXdZyN3ydkKEyEutYChmQmE28YGZvtQ06OzrSwclfixR9yFHul1kyT EeX6h01qM3h2CHPXzHEf6+HYLcNykZfB7m/IBjQl7DN/B8vwAYzeFqtTjXZTg50ZPqoe n5qdvVTGhcsxDDLnHiaFewNnXOpMTrOBYPSttcMVmi2ksOdL+uycJQ/9rpFvuh37Am4D HFlw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding :content-language; bh=PNsnymtR9RgYOrMNTTamD5/fptACf5CuTlA0XXRfgkk=; b=OiyZY5++j/3bodMdAy+D3ZzXt0+2CcxMl1+NdCRBe/ACgNa54GOR0cli7FdD1fqQ7y DIBEfrmkWAhuP5OtSpEufrVz6NbiHOBbinKDex9iMMZDqEz8h+GDVWmnstk48XUeP6qg z40z6yfRJgVRtIymp0ahpLZrGV57fX4drG8nKyKKP9lkP3KC84sbXl87WHu3cOxteNye mwloEc9E7N4lyPkIi+p5ctl4I46ViniRG3E+rnyX/nXoN0NLX0n5nOZ+BxR6ZlKV86uZ AuIhD3YAHRnWZMnCQq43UDYFAyT21a6fPJ9WDP0F6PHxlheyq79NFnyEevAE8JjWK2LI OvLg== X-Gm-Message-State: APt69E1TEM3P8156opH5kEFtIFFDhQn/lCykdDQWwapTu4SMtN5nNiRr KzSwmmTmPJ2t5wNbMCLZ0/wkiiz5 X-Google-Smtp-Source: AAOMgpdGxDl18cE8x127TvJpVIzikn0q2s3K1K8pZJbMJf4fohOfgK3HuIGqUSW6GngrbUS16w71yQ== X-Received: by 2002:adf:8ab0:: with SMTP id y45-v6mr18429115wry.98.1530529324652; Mon, 02 Jul 2018 04:02:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.2.105] (host213-123-124-182.in-addr.btopenworld.com. [213.123.124.182]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id a2-v6sm6432895wmb.6.2018.07.02.04.02.03 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 02 Jul 2018 04:02:04 -0700 (PDT) To: Spencer Dawkins , The IESG Cc: draft-ietf-pals-ethernet-cw@ietf.org, Matthew Bocci , pals-chairs@ietf.org, pals@ietf.org References: <152951875020.28521.17434622502794226440.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> From: Stewart Bryant Message-ID: <9c3e4096-0c0d-1818-017f-fa650461e7a8@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2018 12:02:01 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <152951875020.28521.17434622502794226440.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Language: en-GB Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Pals] Spencer Dawkins' No Objection on draft-ietf-pals-ethernet-cw-06: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: pals@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: "Pseudowire And LDP-enabled Services dicussion list." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2018 11:02:10 -0000 On 20/06/2018 19:19, Spencer Dawkins wrote: > Spencer Dawkins has entered the following ballot position for > draft-ietf-pals-ethernet-cw-06: No Objection > > When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all > email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this > introductory paragraph, however.) > > > Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html > for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. > > > The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-pals-ethernet-cw/ > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > COMMENT: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > In this text, > > This problem has recently become more serious for a number of > reasons. Firstly, due to the deployment of equipment with Ethernet > MAC addresses that start with 0x4 or 0x6 assigned by the IEEE > Registration Authority Committee (RAC). Secondly, concerns over > privacy have led to the use of MAC address randomization which > assigns local MAC addresses randomly for privacy. Random assignment > results in addresses starting with one of these two values one time > in eight. > > the problem caused by the second case is explained well, but the problem caused > by the first reason is not. Would it be correct to say > > This problem has recently become more serious for a number of > reasons. Firstly, due to the deployment of equipment with Ethernet > MAC addresses that start with 0x4 or 0x6 assigned by the IEEE > Registration Authority Committee (RAC). > > Any addresses that start with either of these two values can be misidentified. > > Secondly, concerns over > privacy have led to the use of MAC address randomization which > assigns local MAC addresses randomly for privacy. Random assignment > results in addresses starting with one of these two values one time > in eight. > > ? > Spencer I have added a para that precedes the text that you are concerned about: IPv4 and IPv6 packets respectively start with the values 0x4 and 0x6. Misidentification can arise if an Ethernet PW packet without a CW is carrying an Ethernet packet with a destination address that starts either of these values. I think that this will provide a useful clarification to the reader as to what is happening. Best regards Stewart From nobody Mon Jul 2 04:16:14 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pals@ietf.org Delivered-To: pals@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 271331310CB; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 04:16:06 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: Cc: pals@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.81.3 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <153053016608.28262.11612244143485780783@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2018 04:16:06 -0700 Archived-At: Subject: [Pals] I-D Action: draft-ietf-pals-ethernet-cw-07.txt X-BeenThere: pals@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 List-Id: "Pseudowire And LDP-enabled Services dicussion list." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2018 11:16:13 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Pseudowire And LDP-enabled Services WG of the IETF. Title : Use of Ethernet Control Word RECOMMENDED Authors : Stewart Bryant Andrew G Malis Ignas Bagdonas Filename : draft-ietf-pals-ethernet-cw-07.txt Pages : 9 Date : 2018-07-02 Abstract: The pseudowire (PW) encapsulation of Ethernet, as defined in RFC 4448, specifies that the use of the control word (CW) is optional. In the absence of the CW an Ethernet pseudowire packet can be misidentified as an IP packet by a label switching router (LSR). This in turn may lead to the selection of the wrong equal-cost-multi- path (ECMP) path for the packet, leading in turn to the misordering of packets. This problem has become more serious due to the deployment of equipment with Ethernet MAC addresses that start with 0x4 or 0x6. The use of the Ethernet PW CW addresses this problem. This document recommends the use of the Ethernet pseudowire control word in all but exceptional circumstances. This document updates RFC 4448. The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-pals-ethernet-cw/ There are also htmlized versions available at: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-pals-ethernet-cw-07 https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-pals-ethernet-cw-07 A diff from the previous version is available at: https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-pals-ethernet-cw-07 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/ From nobody Tue Jul 3 13:37:27 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pals@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pals@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C15AD130EA2; Tue, 3 Jul 2018 13:37:09 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id BEqexdUiT0nN; Tue, 3 Jul 2018 13:37:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pg0-x244.google.com (mail-pg0-x244.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c05::244]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 879B5130E22; Tue, 3 Jul 2018 13:37:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pg0-x244.google.com with SMTP id n2-v6so1475416pgq.6; Tue, 03 Jul 2018 13:37:07 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=kXEXD7Hxnajz9r6KBwivFXR0dQxMXl1CQ6dJTLx2hNs=; b=SFEcEHj7UYtG6q09kGTrNoKMHI1Ul4fZ9f1l8op81lSHM4SudwwMnY9TXM2MJaPzOD VXV0k2YOZjBOZkdCANA0uioKjf35b2mYocNkc7MFMtQjSWGmKfdDFmjjlFUxQC1MUjPZ 8QvDVnrPWvJvQ5AaP6iz1Z1Mp1UoTvAc1gYhc4uzZmto1am2Gunneuc1j3sf7EEcJdcu IsUsf4HZi7rZU5lsQT8ZE6A2IaJuIi6tQbERm7WY/+pX2Ta2NFPembSdym8zBKn65iD0 fdvBv9rD8ws42FXTkqMcIHIRc3nkU7wGpA+ZKJkYUbaI+0qYGeLFXs5KF4ODO5Fji9Y0 3lkA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=kXEXD7Hxnajz9r6KBwivFXR0dQxMXl1CQ6dJTLx2hNs=; b=nUCr1X2jljJg7lEuz6gm3AF2Rh5BS2twYZu8jJhQ5BjXF6/6bSEkjJiHmatRXkY2lu /K5hM7CaNQBrqFYpgWBS8t1Dh//bUF2JWlDUXaeZ8hUlARP7Rm5JNqa82j5TcvMeaeQ1 ifnkZ8Xpvvm1k2ySrkcKYnIzZUF0wZmkm3tcYSkB3cV7fXCSshm8hbDOnfUNNJ7SDBgA lAbBIsGxj/4b4WAguOUsEHRwSDlw4GrcTu9zlQKpQ2OwYvIl8DX6VtD0OILp323eL0kv F4KiGOhwQidM2C6qa+vS+bTNvtPS+LKuZRH6fGIIgPmiUr1KpLRJguwcM5awzyWmQLQG +dbQ== X-Gm-Message-State: APt69E1TEXd+HYyQg1zLQPWardimmF60Q/ydxhvxfFO1GK0fZ4Lp+tIl n2XoQxbsdo5tJmFTcAHgjW7KCg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AAOMgpe2Dnt1mum23bovuj3vOwFlKc/e17yJYplud68WQhBGZFCF/lCGdv9nKt87wR2RVbuImQDkXA== X-Received: by 2002:a62:11c4:: with SMTP id 65-v6mr22153883pfr.54.1530650226878; Tue, 03 Jul 2018 13:37:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.178.38] ([118.148.121.80]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id x5-v6sm3258638pfh.67.2018.07.03.13.37.03 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 03 Jul 2018 13:37:06 -0700 (PDT) To: Stewart Bryant , gen-art@ietf.org Cc: draft-ietf-pals-ethernet-cw.all@ietf.org, pals@ietf.org References: <152877425096.2652.654313340478370473@ietfa.amsl.com> From: Brian E Carpenter Message-ID: <8b81d385-9852-d8ff-1c25-280f13aaf950@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2018 08:37:05 +1200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Pals] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-pals-ethernet-cw-06 X-BeenThere: pals@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: "Pseudowire And LDP-enabled Services dicussion list." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2018 20:37:12 -0000 Hi Stewart, On 02/07/2018 22:19, Stewart Bryant wrote: > Hi Brian >=20 > Thank you for your review comments. Please see inline. >=20 > On 12/06/2018 04:30, Brian Carpenter wrote: >> Reviewer: Brian Carpenter >> Review result: Ready with Nits >> >> Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-pals-ethernet-cw-06 >> >> I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area >> Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed >> by the IESG for the IETF Chair. Please treat these comments just >> like any other last call comments. >> >> For more information, please see the FAQ at >> . >> >> Document: draft-ietf-pals-ethernet-cw-06.txt >> Reviewer: Brian Carpenter >> Review Date: 2018-06-12 >> IETF LC End Date: 2018-06-15 >> IESG Telechat date: 2018-06-21 >> >> Summary: Ready with nits >> -------- >> >> Comments: >> --------- >> >> This (with RFC4928) is a wonderful example of why layer violations are= a Bad Thing. >> >> Nits: >> ----- >> >>> 1. Introduction >> ... >>> This document recommends the use of the Ethernet pseudowire contro= l >>> word in all but exceptional circumstances. >> That's wrong, it *mandates* this usage with a MUST (first paragraph of= section 4). >=20 > The text with the MUST is >=20 > "This document updates {{RFC4448}} to state that > where both the ingress PE and the egress PE support the Ethernet > pseudowire control word, then the CW MUST be used." >=20 > This is conditional on both equipments supporting the feature. >=20 > During WG discussion there was a lot of discussion on the degree to > which we would mandate the migration to CW.=C2=A0 The problem is that > the use of the CW has hardware implications. At one stage we went > so far as to recommend the the phasing out of equipment that could > not support the CW, but we got strong pushback from a specialist part > of the vendor community. This led us to a compromise position where > we RECOMMEND the use of the CW, but only=C2=A0 mandate that the CW be > used if it is available in the equipment used at both ends of > the PW. Fair enough, but the text doesn't quite say that. OLD: This document updates [RFC4448] to state that where both the ingress PE and the egress PE support the Ethernet pseudowire control word, then the CW MUST be used. NEW: This document updates [RFC4448] to state that both the ingress PE and the egress PE SHOULD support the Ethernet pseudowire control word, and that if supported the CW MUST be used. Regards Brian >=20 >>> 3. Background >> ... >>> A recent posting on the Nanog email list has highlighted this >>> problem: >>> >>> https://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/2016-December/089395.htm= l >> No, it's no longer recent. How about: >> >> For example, a posting on the N email list highlighted this >> problem: >=20 > I have changed the text to: >=20 > A posting on the NANOG email list highlighted this problem: >=20 >=20 >> >>> 7. Operational Considerations >>> >>> CW presence on the PW is controlled by the configuration and may b= e >>> subject to default operational mode of not being enabled. >> That sentence is hard to parse. Try this: >> >> A configuration switch might determine whether the CW is used on t= he PW. >> The default configuration might be to disable use of the CW. > This now says: >=20 > In some cases, the inclusion of a CW in the PW is determined by > equipment configuration. Furthermore, it is possible that the default > configuration in such cases is=C2=A0 to disable use of the CW. >=20 > - Stewart >=20 >=20 From nobody Wed Jul 4 05:48:39 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pals@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pals@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3097E130E7F; Wed, 4 Jul 2018 05:48:38 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 3NJbeNvUQca0; Wed, 4 Jul 2018 05:48:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-wr0-x231.google.com (mail-wr0-x231.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c0c::231]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 60D1F130E6A; Wed, 4 Jul 2018 05:48:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-wr0-x231.google.com with SMTP id j33-v6so5218759wrj.5; Wed, 04 Jul 2018 05:48:35 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:content-language; bh=VO6LrsHRXN7whdjTEocE0QY8wdE7Jpkg/G2cE06bp3s=; b=swS6/KjGVIqi7/DOHp2vgUpOz35RrovuQmb+571Y5kSGqeL+y9+YL4Kb2t+O6OlGDU ewpz3/y46lauIoAKKIK6kWFr+kf84i6gffKHCOOJ9Hm7JdIzmz0dbJrq68JoIEKbVT3J QSpc7E4Hdrw37Qvej7ZGa37ZTZ8hBv7JQkX8V7Y94oyhqx5Fy1UsrgjcD7zMSuoj7sE5 XmOumGukYvP8uqfgmCYa+fBEL3lEhe4s1TazVRMdo5/uz8jPeRevF6/l/QKmM4wOSwVR ppQ1w21rlPYB3gyuOQ1GIBQN5Bkx+eAsCp0ITl56UJqn0uO7NmsNwY6lWx08ZjvYCkb1 I1Fw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding :content-language; bh=VO6LrsHRXN7whdjTEocE0QY8wdE7Jpkg/G2cE06bp3s=; b=ZHB1aBlxXRDd9wBkkA9gPcSQDNIwc/pXYkxXYcx8KWn30TphX28CED5qo7y8kpKTED 9knHZlHuqis1lsMPCyf1nxcOkbYVmeMRErbVEgQAcYnDBj+GLahUAVnIN/pMCQ9p25ia w3k/nTQ4bzpTw5ek8X6gkZe1XIzM4R669HshKWez/IsMOKKG6zesj9VVjek+upQOt+xP HxpXPOK1HjXaIhbBDQx52+mX9GOOjeFgnLo0jbyVQdZFxOLvTXZyJ9G2gFhpN255YfAv c67vSYVcfoJstiievG4tUs1yCKenxwmGSWXjB8vZA5suPtuWYaD+cId/YLu+Gf32u+Ac 4oJw== X-Gm-Message-State: APt69E0/nKDJhx0z75p/NiSZBnAL+bLMQnEXQ73qQBRdaNv/EBF6H9nv F9ddYYWKkyjwBHXWgS9dToGJHCal X-Google-Smtp-Source: AAOMgpcL5vKjtneXYt6c5sUNLME/QhnozrpY+/V9zCRotO+ognQHXw5H2iMRb27r1FL7Ulkr4i6wUg== X-Received: by 2002:adf:c74e:: with SMTP id b14-v6mr1443424wrh.16.1530708513624; Wed, 04 Jul 2018 05:48:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.2.105] (host213-123-124-182.in-addr.btopenworld.com. [213.123.124.182]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id v67-v6sm3979240wme.8.2018.07.04.05.48.32 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 04 Jul 2018 05:48:32 -0700 (PDT) To: Brian E Carpenter , gen-art@ietf.org Cc: draft-ietf-pals-ethernet-cw.all@ietf.org, pals@ietf.org References: <152877425096.2652.654313340478370473@ietfa.amsl.com> <8b81d385-9852-d8ff-1c25-280f13aaf950@gmail.com> From: Stewart Bryant Message-ID: <005e2d4f-5364-eea5-d5df-f2ef38607461@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2018 13:48:31 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <8b81d385-9852-d8ff-1c25-280f13aaf950@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Language: en-GB Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Pals] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-pals-ethernet-cw-06 X-BeenThere: pals@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: "Pseudowire And LDP-enabled Services dicussion list." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 04 Jul 2018 12:48:38 -0000 On 03/07/2018 21:37, Brian E Carpenter wrote: > >>>> This document recommends the use of the Ethernet pseudowire control >>>> word in all but exceptional circumstances. >>> That's wrong, it *mandates* this usage with a MUST (first paragraph of section 4). >> The text with the MUST is >> >> "This document updates {{RFC4448}} to state that >> where both the ingress PE and the egress PE support the Ethernet >> pseudowire control word, then the CW MUST be used." >> >> This is conditional on both equipments supporting the feature. >> >> During WG discussion there was a lot of discussion on the degree to >> which we would mandate the migration to CW.  The problem is that >> the use of the CW has hardware implications. At one stage we went >> so far as to recommend the the phasing out of equipment that could >> not support the CW, but we got strong pushback from a specialist part >> of the vendor community. This led us to a compromise position where >> we RECOMMEND the use of the CW, but only  mandate that the CW be >> used if it is available in the equipment used at both ends of >> the PW. > Fair enough, but the text doesn't quite say that. > > OLD: > This document updates [RFC4448] to state that where both the > ingress PE and the egress PE support the Ethernet pseudowire control > word, then the CW MUST be used. > > NEW: > This document updates [RFC4448] to state that both the > ingress PE and the egress PE SHOULD support the Ethernet > pseudowire control word, and that if supported the CW MUST be used. > > Hi Brian That seems to be a useful change which reflects the intent of the document. Deborah, how do you want to deal with this, a re-spin or an editor's note. - Stewart From nobody Wed Jul 4 07:18:36 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pals@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pals@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E19C130F84; Wed, 4 Jul 2018 07:18:34 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.601 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.601 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id BIUevOHfeuPj; Wed, 4 Jul 2018 07:18:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx0a-00191d01.pphosted.com (mx0b-00191d01.pphosted.com [67.231.157.136]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BDBB4130F12; Wed, 4 Jul 2018 07:18:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pps.filterd (m0049459.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by m0049459.ppops.net-00191d01. (8.16.0.22/8.16.0.22) with SMTP id w64EEo5I037759; Wed, 4 Jul 2018 10:18:30 -0400 Received: from alpi155.enaf.aldc.att.com (sbcsmtp7.sbc.com [144.160.229.24]) by m0049459.ppops.net-00191d01. with ESMTP id 2k0w5j2rwd-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 04 Jul 2018 10:18:30 -0400 Received: from enaf.aldc.att.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by alpi155.enaf.aldc.att.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id w64EITMM029654; Wed, 4 Jul 2018 10:18:29 -0400 Received: from zlp27126.vci.att.com (zlp27126.vci.att.com [135.66.87.47]) by alpi155.enaf.aldc.att.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id w64EIReI029642; Wed, 4 Jul 2018 10:18:27 -0400 Received: from zlp27126.vci.att.com (zlp27126.vci.att.com [127.0.0.1]) by zlp27126.vci.att.com (Service) with ESMTP id 6067B4000372; Wed, 4 Jul 2018 14:18:27 +0000 (GMT) Received: from MISOUT7MSGHUBAF.ITServices.sbc.com (unknown [130.9.129.150]) by zlp27126.vci.att.com (Service) with ESMTPS id 4AB2E400036B; Wed, 4 Jul 2018 14:18:27 +0000 (GMT) Received: from MISOUT7MSGUSRDE.ITServices.sbc.com ([169.254.5.148]) by MISOUT7MSGHUBAF.ITServices.sbc.com ([130.9.129.150]) with mapi id 14.03.0399.000; Wed, 4 Jul 2018 10:18:26 -0400 From: "BRUNGARD, DEBORAH A" To: Stewart Bryant CC: Brian E Carpenter , "gen-art@ietf.org" , "draft-ietf-pals-ethernet-cw.all@ietf.org" , "pals@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: Genart last call review of draft-ietf-pals-ethernet-cw-06 Thread-Index: AQHUAf3IBbYz9GWEnUSJdAFHC/y29aR8G2mAgAI+3oCAAQ9rgP//1hGr Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2018 14:18:26 +0000 Message-ID: References: <152877425096.2652.654313340478370473@ietfa.amsl.com> <8b81d385-9852-d8ff-1c25-280f13aaf950@gmail.com>, <005e2d4f-5364-eea5-d5df-f2ef38607461@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <005e2d4f-5364-eea5-d5df-f2ef38607461@gmail.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:, , definitions=2018-07-04_05:, , signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_policy_notspam policy=outbound_policy score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1011 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 impostorscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1806210000 definitions=main-1807040164 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Pals] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-pals-ethernet-cw-06 X-BeenThere: pals@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: "Pseudowire And LDP-enabled Services dicussion list." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 04 Jul 2018 14:18:35 -0000 Since this is the only fix remaining, I can do it as an editor=92s note. Much thanks Brian for your very careful review and Stewart for sorting out = and holding the pen! I=92ll approve tomorrow (after our holiday here - need to sort out logistic= s of hot dogs with lots of toppings currently:-)) Deborah Sent from my iPhone > On Jul 4, 2018, at 8:48 AM, Stewart Bryant wro= te: >=20 >=20 >=20 >> On 03/07/2018 21:37, Brian E Carpenter wrote: >>=20 >>>>> This document recommends the use of the Ethernet pseudowire contro= l >>>>> word in all but exceptional circumstances. >>>> That's wrong, it *mandates* this usage with a MUST (first paragraph of= section 4). >>> The text with the MUST is >>>=20 >>> "This document updates {{RFC4448}} to state that >>> where both the ingress PE and the egress PE support the Ethernet >>> pseudowire control word, then the CW MUST be used." >>>=20 >>> This is conditional on both equipments supporting the feature. >>>=20 >>> During WG discussion there was a lot of discussion on the degree to >>> which we would mandate the migration to CW. The problem is that >>> the use of the CW has hardware implications. At one stage we went >>> so far as to recommend the the phasing out of equipment that could >>> not support the CW, but we got strong pushback from a specialist part >>> of the vendor community. This led us to a compromise position where >>> we RECOMMEND the use of the CW, but only mandate that the CW be >>> used if it is available in the equipment used at both ends of >>> the PW. >> Fair enough, but the text doesn't quite say that. >>=20 >> OLD: >> This document updates [RFC4448] to state that where both the >> ingress PE and the egress PE support the Ethernet pseudowire control >> word, then the CW MUST be used. >>=20 >> NEW: >> This document updates [RFC4448] to state that both the >> ingress PE and the egress PE SHOULD support the Ethernet >> pseudowire control word, and that if supported the CW MUST be used. >>=20 >>=20 >=20 > Hi Brian >=20 > That seems to be a useful change which reflects the intent of the documen= t. >=20 > Deborah, how do you want to deal with this, a re-spin or an editor's note= . >=20 > - Stewart >=20 >=20 From nobody Thu Jul 5 04:12:03 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pals@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pals@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 338ED12D949; Thu, 5 Jul 2018 04:12:01 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id gr63er50BKMf; Thu, 5 Jul 2018 04:11:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-oi0-x22e.google.com (mail-oi0-x22e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c06::22e]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 87F36126DBF; Thu, 5 Jul 2018 04:11:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-oi0-x22e.google.com with SMTP id d189-v6so16073219oib.6; Thu, 05 Jul 2018 04:11:59 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=j+oSWiC+GEBHJyPSgJBufzqstdRF2C0PBoCntjNUXd8=; b=XZCq/4I1kkVWjoEj94F/69LxwDv4qnLpzCFCkWpJiEy47EL/4Mh8KaH2x6KZda8DmD Rq40IS7sz7otEvmfSAzdELeuAELYjgMi8OdN8CstWNKBzEu6e0W95/DMSMvEBC2ybqDt TBJElhIXFa02H2xd+AC3G1/5LcRUg93fXhBvgu9pA4b5chVbcjHmC72SNSV0mhUEJcQn ZXyAYKIYNzk/4oqcDCiZYJmyfXp/pslFsr4CY82qJqX8HFP1WWfcEShJ512SCuteI+GN 464a2DpI3rb3YEUf1Ti8loAvex8Pb3tep1QqtCWJGzbwyOLdE+GWRl2Fa87XUudM6zWc OxbQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=j+oSWiC+GEBHJyPSgJBufzqstdRF2C0PBoCntjNUXd8=; b=HYH+Hz0s2hGi5KB9XOJh7wTpRTqzx7AsGI2/RRHxB/M2HVVtSQdqYR4t70DpeS9N4q IdSqArUGjW+VLLik6taO55Nwmc/RWs4nHasT7qprEp2mcelBKIT0CKpD08qgvir07wzC CDGaayWStpi19qLEIVY/vJ++NCmrdPF9rms/L5mSwa+mzomysySHAdZ+2Ot85VxzcFPL InGWCs0btqk7oxVMAluDD9yCAzAlxOAdWZ77EDOQ+Py7JyHotGc1282Bg8GJ33bi3lgy NfjhNLau8Lp42B2NSZysYmfwSS5V+PcxM5d/r+zyCbUDqX76tZf3sa1bCuQVMhjHruuu 1cqw== X-Gm-Message-State: APt69E2qFba0Mlk/qVonT2heFIM/95IK0HiWtML2Lyhjxe566WUD4MBN S5/LA0agzVhyZ3xincpUQfeQ9PFH7brbkUbruF1AYA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AAOMgpcLDqMAJkMVcMaWJGyJU43AHHMbnzxabFhSI8PNHn65MNBAOmeLtJEPfleasiMa4/a790Obm1SKucAkDwPZ1gQ= X-Received: by 2002:aca:42:: with SMTP id 63-v6mr5668577oia.154.1530789118824; Thu, 05 Jul 2018 04:11:58 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 2002:a9d:30c2:0:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Thu, 5 Jul 2018 04:11:38 -0700 (PDT) From: "Andrew G. Malis" Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2018 07:11:38 -0400 Message-ID: To: pals@ietf.org Cc: mpls-chairs , "BRUNGARD, DEBORAH A (ATTLABS)" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000a7590805703e9d7d" Archived-At: Subject: [Pals] One PALS draft being presenting during the MPLS WG meeting X-BeenThere: pals@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: "Pseudowire And LDP-enabled Services dicussion list." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2018 11:12:02 -0000 --000000000000a7590805703e9d7d Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable PALSers, Although PALS isn=E2=80=99t meeting in Montreal, we do have a new draft bei= ng presented during the MPLS WG session in Montreal, draft-busi-pals-pw-cw-stitching. Stewart and I would like to thank the MPLS chairs for providing us this time. You can find the MPLS agenda at https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/102/materials/agenda-102-mpls-00 . See you in Montreal! Cheers, Andy --000000000000a7590805703e9d7d Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
PALSers,

Although PALS isn=E2=80=99t me= eting in Montreal, we do have a new draft being presented during the MPLS W= G session in Montreal,=C2=A0draft-busi-pals-pw-cw-stitching. Stewart and I = would like to thank the MPLS chairs for providing us this time.
<= br>
You can find the MPLS agenda at=C2=A0https://datatrack= er.ietf.org/meeting/102/materials/agenda-102-mpls-00 . See you in Montr= eal!

Cheers,
Andy

--000000000000a7590805703e9d7d-- From nobody Mon Jul 9 12:48:59 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pals@ietf.org Delivered-To: pals@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 61DA7131055; Mon, 9 Jul 2018 12:48:46 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: The IESG To: "IETF-Announce" X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.81.3 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Cc: The IESG , db3546@att.com, Matthew Bocci , matthew.bocci@nokia.com, pals-chairs@ietf.org, pals@ietf.org, draft-ietf-pals-ethernet-cw@ietf.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <153116572639.5664.11226636125143831111.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2018 12:48:46 -0700 Archived-At: Subject: [Pals] Protocol Action: 'Use of Ethernet Control Word RECOMMENDED' to Proposed Standard (draft-ietf-pals-ethernet-cw-07.txt) X-BeenThere: pals@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 List-Id: "Pseudowire And LDP-enabled Services dicussion list." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2018 19:48:47 -0000 The IESG has approved the following document: - 'Use of Ethernet Control Word RECOMMENDED' (draft-ietf-pals-ethernet-cw-07.txt) as Proposed Standard This document is the product of the Pseudowire And LDP-enabled Services Working Group. The IESG contact persons are Alvaro Retana, Martin Vigoureux and Deborah Brungard. A URL of this Internet Draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-pals-ethernet-cw/ Technical Summary The pseudowire (PW) encapsulation of Ethernet, as defined in RFC 4448, specifies that the use of the control word (CW) is optional. In the absence of the CW an Ethernet pseudowire packet can be misidentified as an IP packet by a label switching router (LSR). This in turn may lead to the selection of the wrong equal-cost-multi- path (ECMP) path for the packet, leading in turn to the misordering of packets. This problem has become more serious due to the deployment of equipment with Ethernet MAC addresses that start with 0x4 or 0x6. The use of the Ethernet PW CW addresses this problem. This document recommends the use of the Ethernet pseudowire control word in all but exceptional circumstances. This document updates RFC 4448. Working Group Summary The document was developed to try to resolve observed misordering of packets on Ethernet PWs which can occur when ECMP is applied and the packet aliases for an IPv4 or IPv6 packet. Although this problem is already well understood, and a solution (the PW control word) is widely implemented and deployed. However the CW was defined as optional in RFC4448 and so there are some cases where it is not implemented or not enabled by operators. There are reports that this is becoming an increasing problem with the IEEE allocating MAC addresses starting with 0x4 or 0x6, and so stronger recommendations are required. Document Quality No concerns about the quality of the document. It represents WG consensus, and it has been widely reviewed and discussed on the list over a number of years. The document does not specify any MIB changes or additions which would need review. Personnel Who is the Document Shepherd for this document? Matthew Bocci Who is the Responsible Area Director? Deborah Brungard RFC Editor Note Section 4 1st paragraph/2nd sentence: OLD: This document updates [RFC4448] to state that where both the ingress PE and the egress PE support the Ethernet pseudowire control word, then the CW MUST be used. NEW: This document updates [RFC4448] to state that both the ingress PE and the egress PE SHOULD support the Ethernet pseudowire control word, and that if supported the CW MUST be used. From nobody Mon Jul 9 17:37:10 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pals@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pals@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 57882130E70; Mon, 9 Jul 2018 17:37:01 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.998 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.998 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id lCgAX3cvpFMx; Mon, 9 Jul 2018 17:36:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-yb0-x235.google.com (mail-yb0-x235.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c09::235]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3E52B127148; Mon, 9 Jul 2018 17:36:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-yb0-x235.google.com with SMTP id k127-v6so7942674ybk.6; Mon, 09 Jul 2018 17:36:59 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=GiGqOO4T40Yoe+Z/eTlegYbdfRAjjwdjBhByiqDFbeo=; b=ec9r/ENZlXi7hXwGURUGbHgpXIBqGRd7Ts5tcP5yd9qZOomNShsX12PGjHxuPH316U jQlfgj2NU/i21ebkuVGNy07IjeN0GTHk+IbkCe5rD7I4kE6SiEl60X4FeqB6B2gbrKYP TfoB2uuF/etk+Dj1lJtx9QyEzJx1SVaWAiyroxhOsE6vmw+qxr4RXhJUtVVoKlaWY+is GENOVlixYw2VVv7o0jBeH22xAjCV1ln2Yc61fF/DuTf4NG9l4A5+lnXTfkK6gLiPiBwd ObfeyHSvUUBVaEsz/Exq5ZgKac4M9jv3e1LD7NJCAvR6eO9mdzj5Kfzuva3AX7NRNx5I uRmQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=GiGqOO4T40Yoe+Z/eTlegYbdfRAjjwdjBhByiqDFbeo=; b=lf2CXu7a7ez8HpxUTvfyzQMv0ycAJreNG9Ke4eL8WkqWxxYzU0P+pnZmDYmcWOorlV ZWJQhlWgzJNEn5SfZHWK8602U9709WwGy0IvQjV57bi0oyoznyN68S91NXOO9ZDGcpOB jWqRW6jWDka4KTwYFXubPkN28/9U8E0T9Bib8ooO/9Jisbz/MKQwPs1p1aHkOs55CiDk vcYE/dstYlf/ySZU5M44TSA+PMMT5V375G3gVTQEM1HXUCXMPd05v6LMbh8DNRd4Ybfe bsmQQYqB+BU1d5s5tKztc6A68nNqbaec+TIua2F5dahV6Pf/Nzx4/8KTSS7BqpWNZ0NE 9r/g== X-Gm-Message-State: APt69E0CgFHcXST4Gq28J5bYlfkyTWMn1o9LLwjBZsQJ1AcWjB91hZoo 5Bj1QELMv74Y3sozi3o+2avs4eXLP1Quj+IQGjA= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AAOMgpf8F1LvnDNnm2OwwYlnYzZKgZhqAvFO2XE3bHghFDd1XbGnkjiOHJMFZma7yuUMy5YRm6pQXp93ex9shaJOOwc= X-Received: by 2002:a25:2557:: with SMTP id l84-v6mr12125223ybl.110.1531183018207; Mon, 09 Jul 2018 17:36:58 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <152951875020.28521.17434622502794226440.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <9c3e4096-0c0d-1818-017f-fa650461e7a8@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <9c3e4096-0c0d-1818-017f-fa650461e7a8@gmail.com> From: Spencer Dawkins at IETF Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2018 19:36:47 -0500 Message-ID: To: Stewart Bryant Cc: IESG , draft-ietf-pals-ethernet-cw@ietf.org, Matthew Bocci , pals-chairs@ietf.org, pals@ietf.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000e2f04205709a5334" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Pals] Spencer Dawkins' No Objection on draft-ietf-pals-ethernet-cw-06: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: pals@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "Pseudowire And LDP-enabled Services dicussion list." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2018 00:37:02 -0000 --000000000000e2f04205709a5334 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Hi, Stewart, On Mon, Jul 2, 2018 at 6:02 AM Stewart Bryant wrote: > > > On 20/06/2018 19:19, Spencer Dawkins wrote: > > Spencer Dawkins has entered the following ballot position for > > draft-ietf-pals-ethernet-cw-06: No Objection > > > > When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all > > email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this > > introductory paragraph, however.) > > > > > > Please refer to > https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html > > for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. > > > > > > The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-pals-ethernet-cw/ > > > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > COMMENT: > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > In this text, > > > > This problem has recently become more serious for a number of > > reasons. Firstly, due to the deployment of equipment with Ethernet > > MAC addresses that start with 0x4 or 0x6 assigned by the IEEE > > Registration Authority Committee (RAC). Secondly, concerns over > > privacy have led to the use of MAC address randomization which > > assigns local MAC addresses randomly for privacy. Random assignment > > results in addresses starting with one of these two values one time > > in eight. > > > > the problem caused by the second case is explained well, but the problem > caused > > by the first reason is not. Would it be correct to say > > > > This problem has recently become more serious for a number of > > reasons. Firstly, due to the deployment of equipment with Ethernet > > MAC addresses that start with 0x4 or 0x6 assigned by the IEEE > > Registration Authority Committee (RAC). > > > > Any addresses that start with either of these two values can be > misidentified. > > > > Secondly, concerns over > > privacy have led to the use of MAC address randomization which > > assigns local MAC addresses randomly for privacy. Random assignment > > results in addresses starting with one of these two values one time > > in eight. > > > > ? > > > Spencer > > I have added a para that precedes the text that you are concerned about: > > IPv4 and IPv6 packets respectively start with the values 0x4 and 0x6. > Misidentification can arise if an Ethernet PW > packet without a CW is carrying an Ethernet packet with a destination > address that starts either of these values. > > I think that this will provide a useful clarification to the reader as > to what is happening. > Thanks, that looks perfect. Spencer > Best regards > > Stewart > > > --000000000000e2f04205709a5334 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi, Stewart,=C2=A0

On Mon, Jul 2, 2018 at 6:02 AM Stewart Bryant <stewart.bryant@gmail.com> wrote:
=


On 20/06/2018 19:19, Spencer Dawkins wrote:
> Spencer Dawkins has entered the following ballot position for
> draft-ietf-pals-ethernet-cw-06: No Objection
>
> When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all<= br> > email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut thi= s
> introductory paragraph, however.)
>
>
> Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/i= esg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
> for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.
>
>
> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/d= raft-ietf-pals-ethernet-cw/
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------=
> COMMENT:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------=
>
> In this text,
>
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 This problem has recently become more serious for a numbe= r of
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0reasons.=C2=A0 Firstly, due to the deployment of eq= uipment with Ethernet
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0MAC addresses that start with 0x4 or 0x6 assigned b= y the IEEE
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0Registration Authority Committee (RAC).=C2=A0 Secon= dly, concerns over
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0privacy have led to the use of MAC address randomiz= ation which
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0assigns local MAC addresses randomly for privacy.= =C2=A0 Random assignment
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0results in addresses starting with one of these two= values one time
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0in eight.
>
> the problem caused by the second case is explained well, but the probl= em caused
> by the first reason is not. Would it be correct to say
>
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 This problem has recently become more serious for a numbe= r of
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0reasons.=C2=A0 Firstly, due to the deployment of eq= uipment with Ethernet
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0MAC addresses that start with 0x4 or 0x6 assigned b= y the IEEE
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0Registration Authority Committee (RAC).
>
> Any addresses that start with either of these two values can be miside= ntified.
>
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0Secondly, concerns over
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0privacy have led to the use of MAC address randomiz= ation which
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0assigns local MAC addresses randomly for privacy.= =C2=A0 Random assignment
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0results in addresses starting with one of these two= values one time
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0in eight.
>
> ?
>
Spencer

I have added a para that precedes the text that you are concerned about:
IPv4 and IPv6 packets respectively start with the values 0x4 and 0x6.
Misidentification can arise if an Ethernet PW
packet without a CW is carrying an Ethernet packet with a destination
address that starts either of these values.

I think that this will provide a useful clarification to the reader as
to what is happening.

Thanks, that look= s perfect.=C2=A0

Spencer
=C2=A0
Best regards

Stewart


--000000000000e2f04205709a5334-- From nobody Tue Jul 17 09:59:17 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pals@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pals@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A6267130DBE for ; Tue, 17 Jul 2018 09:59:14 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id vOexgjhhCfKp for ; Tue, 17 Jul 2018 09:59:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-oi0-x22a.google.com (mail-oi0-x22a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c06::22a]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9F60F124BE5 for ; Tue, 17 Jul 2018 09:59:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-oi0-x22a.google.com with SMTP id r16-v6so3363410oie.3 for ; Tue, 17 Jul 2018 09:59:10 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=zctXvZ9o2TPR+AktGhrgXjYbNF8CfByvIiAycHpOpBg=; b=JO41lgaBP+T0o6S/x7ancY/qJ0ZT3ilXwWpAyoXKq8D6lU/bIIN4/O7q2ZQQCkof4c SRiRqdcTaL6p/s2NJixD5p+app5ITCHZfISbVPxqewY9e0AzbD+VKtOizsvwySFrf/JQ 9P6cuzhiJgQgKrYcRcvR/e3TP3g4gRD0JaH82ATxIElz6FyZqA3IzRv8fDakm9+dI+3r t5yVXu132tnikN1cQ2+W+7QSGFSvAyn5wahfn7R5/zv7Cdk56KWUEahC7xnY/RTzdJLF AyO7lTZwllthox2cVm6RDuIEGQvmsKSDUFN2ICFaLPTf4NaygaZmAubBOtinL4y+e+yz 7FdQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=zctXvZ9o2TPR+AktGhrgXjYbNF8CfByvIiAycHpOpBg=; b=PrhhqeUWXYb3Rw7KLkbI4GfAY36DdBN7unq5T/FxqfIU+XuB0MSLsRdMXUON3mjjNZ WCGy+ne1o84OvxDmu9sh0egF3KzFgdx2g7FkCPpO2v7jfXVRHVivZ9vfN2H6OVYbl1Zq ozJh8yQdbt2XuEwCUqmtxjf3L0WQS1J/v1dles/t/Gi6pjQOE3kn2lk1cGrUVpEIuuUN sIb2AY3b4FlaaZ2NngOpbR1Wp5tyiuHn4t6vfbJjBZ25iw+I9Se+4/Q8Q5EEzNEayMgo 4Mbgpkt1duPd9ArtSA/m9qNEgGVuyHlBf4D15374r9NcDuMVsDE2hsdVfDWyTgl8oBw5 AkVw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOUpUlGvaDsN0vYwLSMTgKomYsLKJVFS84He7cGHQLs6KEwP+NIGeBO8 x5D2W/UqlKaWDfsLk5/QRtcystWwAOXab8zw8dZgRg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AAOMgpfyD2k+P4UvTQQMTugJCgdkiGi6bXfJxKPjUhaDse8JAK1ecRatlj9A9xGRN96KfUI74ArTTWDQf/fCo6BCEog= X-Received: by 2002:aca:42:: with SMTP id 63-v6mr2369506oia.154.1531846749722; Tue, 17 Jul 2018 09:59:09 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 2002:a9d:30c2:0:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Tue, 17 Jul 2018 09:58:49 -0700 (PDT) From: "Andrew G. Malis" Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2018 12:58:49 -0400 Message-ID: To: pals@ietf.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000005e1b6c057134dd50" Archived-At: Subject: [Pals] PALS WG status for IETF 102 X-BeenThere: pals@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "Pseudowire And LDP-enabled Services dicussion list." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2018 16:59:15 -0000 --0000000000005e1b6c057134dd50 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable While PALS is not meeting during IETF 102, we did prepare our WG status for the IETF 102 Routing Area Working Group High-Level Summary wiki page at https://trac.ietf.org/trac/rtg/wiki/IETF102summary . Our WG status is reproduced here: PALS did not meet in Montr=C3=A9al. WG Highlights: - draft-ietf-pals-ethernet-cw has been approved for publication as an RFC. - PALS had a new draft presented during the MPLS WG meeting, draft-busi-pals-pw-cw-stitching. WG Status Summary: - One new RFC since IETF 101. - WG has published 18 RFCs (including one STD) since November 2015. This take the place of the usual WG summary slides that we would have presented if we had been meeting. Cheers, Andy and Stewart --0000000000005e1b6c057134dd50 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
While PALS is not meeting during IETF 102, we did prepare = our WG status for the=C2=A0IETF 102 Routing Area Working Group High-Level S= ummary wiki page at=C2=A0https://trac.ietf.org/trac/rtg/wiki/IETF102summary . Our W= G status is reproduced here:

PALS did not meet in Montr=C3=A9al.

WG Highlights:

  • draft-ietf-pals-ethernet-cw has been approv= ed for publication as an RFC.=C2=A0
  • PALS had a new draft presented during the MPLS WG m= eeting, draft-busi-pals-pw-cw-stitching.

WG Status Summary:

  • One new RFC since IETF 101.
    • WG has pub= lished 18 RFCs (including one STD) since November 2015.
=
This take the place= of the usual WG summary slides that we would have presented if we had been= meeting.

Cheers,
Andy and Stewart

--0000000000005e1b6c057134dd50--