Skip to main content

Minutes IETF120: bier: Thu 20:00
minutes-120-bier-202407252000-00

Meeting Minutes Bit Indexed Explicit Replication (bier) WG
Date and time 2024-07-25 20:00
Title Minutes IETF120: bier: Thu 20:00
State Active
Other versions markdown
Last updated 2024-08-09

minutes-120-bier-202407252000-00

IETF 120 BIER Session Agenda
WG info: https://datatracker.ietf.org/group/bier/about/
Chairs:
Greg Shepherd (gjshep@gmail.com)
Tony Przygienda (tonysietf@gmail.com)
Secretary:
Zheng(Sandy) Zhang (zhang.zheng@zte.com.cn)

Thursday Session II 13:00-14:30 Local time, July 25, 2024

  1. WG Status, Chairs
    About the milestone updating, poll result: yes 7, no 0, no opnion 0;

  2. draft-zzhang-bier-unmasked-bier, Tony Przygienda
    Jeff Tantsura: Highly support this draft. The BFR-ID may belong to
    different set. Needs to be hardware friendly.
    Tony Przygienda: Yes, needs to be translated to set lookup as
    simplest solution but there are other tricks.
    Others invited to contribute.

  3. draft-zzhang-bier-brownfield-options, Jeffrey Zhang
    Hooman Bidgoli: If some overlay technologies should be included in
    this draft, such pim over bier or mldp, etc.
    Hooman Bidgoli: Alvaro suggested the PIM light draft.
    Jeffrey Zhang: It's a good idea to cover overlay info here.
    Tony Przygienda: The DR election function used by all the overlay
    protocols is needed to be put in place. Did the work progress?
    Hooman Bidgoli: The part is missing because there is no hello in PIM
    light and hence they did yet another thing.
    Agree with the work adding DR election part in the draft is needed.

    Chair start the adoption poll for this draft: yes 5, no 0, no
    oponion 0.

  4. draft-liu-bier-uloop, Yuanxiang Qiu
    Tony Przygienda: This looks like IGP protection pretty much and rLFA
    would do same without delays introduced here. The
    point-to-multipoint protection is interesting but what kind of p2mp
    would you use for that?
    Jeffrey Zhang: If just using the existing technology for backup
    calculation, what's the difference?
    Yuanxiang Qiu: The first difference is the address used to calculate
    the PQ space. BIER uses the BFR prefix of BFER, while unicast uses
    the address of the destination node. The second is whether the
    method of establishing a repair path needs to distinguish between
    fault and fault recovery. The third is that if multiple BFERs has
    the same repair path, BIER can share path.
    Jeffrey Zhang: In IGP backup calculation calculates the path to
    prefix, in BIER calculation the path to BFR-ID, they are individual
    calculation. So if you break down, you need to reuse igp
    calculation.