Minutes IETF108: rtgwg
minutes-108-rtgwg-00

Meeting Minutes Routing Area Working Group (rtgwg) WG
Title Minutes IETF108: rtgwg
State Active
Other versions plain text
Last updated 2020-08-03

Meeting Minutes
minutes-108-rtgwg

   IETF 108 RTGWG Meeting
Chairs:     Chris Bowers
            Jeff Tantsura
Secretary:  Yingzhen Qu
 
Date: Monday, 27 July 2020 
Time: 14:10 - 15:50 UTC



0
Administrivia and WG update           
Jeff/Chris


1
YANG Model for QoS
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-rtgwg-qos-model-02 
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-asechoud-rtgwg-qos-oper-model/ 
Aseem Choudhary


2
SRv6 Path Egress Protection
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-rtgwg-srv6-egress-protection-00 
Huaimo Chen/Zhibo Hu

Ketan:     the behavior of mirror Sid, is it going to be described in 
           SPRING or RTGWG? Code point from IANA?
Huaimo:    we changed to encap to match SRv6 network programing.
Ketan:     regarding mirror SID which is not in SRv6 network programming. 
           Let’s take it offline.
Ketan:     regarding IGP code points, are you going to present in LSR? 
Huaimo:    we’ll do IGP extension in LSR.
Jeff T:    you should send this work to LSR
Martin V:  This needs to go into the architecture doc.
Jeff T:    there should be formal definition in architecture regarding 
           mirror SID.


3
SRv6 Midpoint Protection
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-chen-rtgwg-srv6-midpoint-protection/ 
Xuesong Geng/Zhibo Hu


5
An Architecture for Network Function Interconnect
https://www.ietf.org/id/draft-bookham-rtgwg-nfix-arch-01.txt 
Wim Henderickx

Zhenbin Li: will VNF support SR-MPLS? this looks challenging. Because 
            the architecture depends heavily on SR-MPLS.
Wim:        We described so far with MPLS data plan, but it also works 
            with SRv6. In this architecture, you can have a virtual 
            switch that has the capability. You have various ways to 
            interact with so the VNF doesn't necessarily need to support 
            that capability.
Chris B:    We need to cut the discussion due to time limitation.
Jeff T:     Robin, please send your questions to the list.


4
Dynamic Networks to Hybrid Cloud DCs Problem Statement
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-rtgwg-net2cloud-problem-statement/ 
Networks Connecting to Hybrid Cloud DCs: Gap Analysis
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-rtgwg-net2cloud-gap-analysis/ 
Linda Dunbar


6
The Problem Statement for Precise Transport Networking
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-xiong-rtgwg-precise-tn-problem-statement/ 
The Requirements for Precise Transport Networking
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-xiong-rtgwg-precise-tn-requirements/ 

Jeff T:    interesting work. please make sure to add references to improve 
           readability.


7
SRv6 Deployment Consideration
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-tian-spring-srv6-deployment-consideration-03 
Robin Li

Wim:       have you considered RFC 8660 for comparison? Some statements 
           are incorrect if you take that into account. Let’s take it 
           off line.
Tony Li:   Have you considered overhead?
Robin:     In SPRING, there is discussion about SRv6 header compression.
Tony Li:   I’m interested in your deployment experience.
Chris B:   Let's take these to the list.


8
APN: Application-aware Networking
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-li-apn-framework-00 
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-li-apn-problem-statement-usecases-00 
Shuping Peng