Skip to main content

Minutes IETF114: rtgwg

Meeting Minutes Routing Area Working Group (rtgwg) WG
Date and time 2022-07-28 14:00
Title Minutes IETF114: rtgwg
State Active
Other versions plain text
Last updated 2022-08-07

IETF 114 RTGWG Meeting Minutes

Chairs: Jeff Tantsura (
Yingzhen Qu (

WG Page:

Meeting Administrivia and WG Update
Chairs (5 mins)
WG document Update

YANG Models for Quality of Service (QoS)
Aseem Choudhary. (5 mins)
No questions at the end.

Dynamic Networks to Hybrid Cloud DCs Problem Statement and Gap Analysis
Linda Dunbar (10 mins)

[Alvaro]   Speaking as a WG participant, I think documents like this are
           important as they will guide the solutions. It is very good
           to document the problems and gaps to guide work in various
           WGs in Routing area. However, if we publish the gaps as RFC,
           then they become frozen. When solutions become available,
           the gaps no longer exist. I’d suggest we maintain these
           documents as working documents in the WG and maintain
           periodically, so they remain useful.
[Yingzhen] there is new information added, so please review it.
[Linda]    There are few use cases added.
[Tianji]   slides #4, there is a third case, the cloud provider may have
           its own backbone, in that case you may not have so many

RFC 5798bis
Acee Lindem (10 mins)

[Andrew Routing AD] Big thank you for this. Please keep going
[Alvaro Routing AD] It is not requirement to publish the implementation
           status to move to standard. The main thing is to keep the
           changes minimal. make sure to document those changes in the
           shepherd review.
[Acee]     I will revise the draft. Many of the changes are editorial.
           I can keep it minimal.

Revived WG document:

Destination/Source Routing
Jen Linkova (10 mins)

[Adrian Farrel]  No objection to the WG picking this up again. Thanks
           for long section on interop issues, and for calling out
           concerns about forwarding loops. I think this could be called
           “Semantic Routing” because you are making a forwarding
           decision based on something more than just the destination
           address - and that’s OK. But maybe it would be worth referring
           to draft-king-irtf-challenges-in-routing: many of the things
           listed in that draft will be well-known to you, but it will
           provide a checklist of things to think about (such as
           implications for scaling in the IGPs and consequences for
           convergence, etc.)
[Andrew AD] have the authors look into Line rate forwarding in today’s
[David]    I did look at some of the silicons, and it varies a lot. we
           don’t have actual data set. If anyone has insight, please
           let us know.
[Deren Cisco] depending on the hardware, it is doable.
[Acee]     take the source for forwarding. It is doable.
[Jen]      like traditional forwarding, we look at the destination
           first, looking for more specific destination. then we look
           at the source.
[ZhenBin Li] ACL and Flowspec can satisfy the requirement, not only the
           source address, it may also include port info. I don’t see
           the difference.
[David]    you don’t use ACL or flowspec to build routing table, correct?
[Jen]      Let’s take it to the list.

Introduction of a software framework for testing fat-tree routing
protocol implementations.

Sibyl: a Framework for Evaluating the Implementation of Routing
Protocols in Fat-Trees
Tommaso Caiazzi (15 mins)

[Tony P] I highly recommend people look into their implementation. this
           lead us to not only prove the correctness of protocol, but
           also the efficiency. This kind of framework allows us to
           observe distributed systems in a very formal way, and can
           help us to validate the protocol extension.
[Pascal Thubert] I’m interested to know whether the negative
           disaggregation really worked?
[Tommaso]  we didn’t test the negative disaggregation in RIFT.
[TianJi Jiang China Mobile]  for cloud dc, there are interconnection
           among multiple sites, and it seems that you didn’t consider
           like port channels. Have you considered fault tolerance
           mechanisms that were already put in?
[Jeff Tantsura] please continue this work and look at more topologies.
[Yingzhen] This is not a draft based presentation. If you have questions,
           please contact them directly or email the list.


Presentation 6-11 are new individual drafts, looking for community
feedbacks for future work.

SRv6 Egress Protection in Multi-home Scenario
Wenying Jiang / Weiqiang Cheng (10 mins)

[Aihua Liu] what is the improvement? did you evaluate with running code?
[Weiqiang Cheng - co-author] We have the prototype, the performance of
           the protection switching is very good.

SRv6 Midpoint Protection
Zhibo Hu (10 mins)

[Loa Andersson] Why is this in RTGWG?
[Yingzhen] Please take this to the list

Usecases of SRv6 Based Computing Interconnection Network
Feng Yang (10 mins)

[Linda Dunbar] Your slides talk about different compute resources
           requiring different paths. Is the work related to China
           Mobile’s CAN initiative?
[Feng Yang] No, it is not related.
[Linda Dunbar] so you’re not considering advertising computing resources?
[Feng Yang] no, that’s different.
[Tony Li]  We already have ubiquitous cloud computing with best effort
          services. What is the problem you are solving? Why?
[Feng Yang] We want to reserve resources for different applications.
[Tony Li] What breaks if you use best effort?
[Feng Yang] We cannot provide assured service to customers
[Tony Li] Sounds like a provisioning problem
[Feng Yang] Some of the access network is some form of a tree, so there
          may be congestion at the tree root.
[Tony Li] Sounds like an architectural issue
[Feng Yang] Cost of building full mesh is too high
[Tony Li] Has been done for many decades
[Feng Yang] We want to solve the problem using existing solutions
[Lin Han] how do you define the computing resources? name or port?
[Feng Yang] it can be central cloud or edge cloud.
[Daniel Huang] back to question asked by Linda. Strong recommend to link
          the work to Compute Aware networking

Problems and Requirements of Satellite Constellation for Internet
Tianji Jiang (10 mins)
This topic was presented at IETF 112 and 113:
Problems and Requirements of Satellite Constellation for Internet
Satellite Semantic Addressing for Satellite Constellation

[Dino]     are all the satellite nodes in one IGP domain?
[Tianji]   No. it is only for illustration purpose
[Lin Han]  The traditional technology requires us to configure BGP
           somewhere to interwork with the Internet, and that’s a problem.
[Dino]     do you believe GPS based routing will be used for satellite?
[Lin Han]  there are many options. We are considering them.
[Dino]     Do you have to interworking with these different solutions with
           different addressing?
[Lin Han]  Different satellite networks don’t interoperate with each
           other. We are only expect one satellite network to
           interoperate with each other
[Dino]     so to summarize, each satellite network can just work like a
           L2 system, then connect to the Internet.
[Lin Han]  that’s what we expect now.

Use Cases for Computing-aware Software-Defined Wide Area Network(SD-WAN) 
Use Cases of Computing-aware Service Function Chaining (SFC)
Shuai Zhang (15 mins)

No time for discussion.

## Not enough time to get to this presentation.

BGP Blockchain
Mike McBride (10 mins)