Re: [OPSAWG] WG last call for "Mechanisms for Optimal LAG/ECMP Component Link Utilization in Networks"

"Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" <dromasca@avaya.com> Tue, 10 September 2013 10:13 UTC

Return-Path: <dromasca@avaya.com>
X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6997821E80C5 for <opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 10 Sep 2013 03:13:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id OUgXiVo93kKd for <opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 10 Sep 2013 03:13:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from p-us1-iereast-outbound.us1.avaya.com (p-us1-iereast-outbound.us1.avaya.com [135.11.29.13]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A8A021E80B6 for <opsawg@ietf.org>; Tue, 10 Sep 2013 03:13:23 -0700 (PDT)
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AscKAJzvLlLGmAcV/2dsb2JhbABbgmYhOFGteQeUMYEoFnSCJQEBAQECAQEBAQ8LHTQLBQcEAgEIDQQEAQELFAUEBycLFAkIAgQBDQUIGodaBgELoxOcPhePKjEHBoMXgQADmSWFJ4sVgWOBPYIq
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.90,877,1371096000"; d="scan'208";a="27565913"
Received: from unknown (HELO co300216-co-erhwest-exch.avaya.com) ([198.152.7.21]) by p-us1-iereast-outbound.us1.avaya.com with ESMTP; 10 Sep 2013 06:13:22 -0400
Received: from unknown (HELO AZ-FFEXHC03.global.avaya.com) ([135.64.58.13]) by co300216-co-erhwest-out.avaya.com with ESMTP; 10 Sep 2013 06:11:09 -0400
Received: from AZ-FFEXMB04.global.avaya.com ([fe80::6db7:b0af:8480:c126]) by AZ-FFEXHC03.global.avaya.com ([135.64.58.13]) with mapi id 14.03.0146.000; Tue, 10 Sep 2013 06:13:20 -0400
From: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" <dromasca@avaya.com>
To: Melinda Shore <melinda.shore@gmail.com>, "opsawg@ietf.org" <opsawg@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [OPSAWG] WG last call for "Mechanisms for Optimal LAG/ECMP Component Link Utilization in Networks"
Thread-Index: AQHOoQbakNn37BHdZkSN0GBt4gbUPJm+1yNQ
Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2013 10:13:20 +0000
Message-ID: <9904FB1B0159DA42B0B887B7FA8119CA128CE68A@AZ-FFEXMB04.global.avaya.com>
References: <52191268.5070500@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <52191268.5070500@gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [135.64.58.46]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: "opsawg-chairs@tools.ietf.org" <opsawg-chairs@tools.ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] WG last call for "Mechanisms for Optimal LAG/ECMP Component Link Utilization in Networks"
X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List <opsawg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/opsawg>, <mailto:opsawg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/opsawg>
List-Post: <mailto:opsawg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:opsawg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg>, <mailto:opsawg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2013 10:13:28 -0000

Hi,

I apologize for the one day delay in sending this review. Vacation interfered. 

I read the document and I have a basic unclarity. Hopefully it is just me, and maybe some clarification text and references to be added. 

What does this document exactly refer to when saying 'LAG/ECMP techniques'? Is this either LAG (layer 2) or ECMP, or a combination of the two, or all of these? There is no reference at all in the document for LAG, no solid reference for ECMP (2992 only refers to 'an ECMP algorithm'). 

I also had a hard time finding the sFlow references. In desperation I went to wiki http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SFlow which kindly informed me that 

> sFlow is a technology for monitoring network,[1] wireless[2] and host[3] devices. The sFlow.org consortium[4] is the authoritative source for the sFlow protocol specifications.[5] sFlow version 5 is the current version of sFlow. Previous versions of sFlow, including RFC 3176, have been deprecated.[6]

This seems problematic. RFC 3176 has no mark of being 'deprecated' in IETF terms anyway. 

Regards,

Dan
 


> -----Original Message-----
> From: opsawg-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:opsawg-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf
> Of Melinda Shore
> Sent: Saturday, August 24, 2013 11:07 PM
> To: opsawg@ietf.org
> Cc: opsawg-chairs@tools.ietf.org
> Subject: [OPSAWG] WG last call for "Mechanisms for Optimal LAG/ECMP
> Component Link Utilization in Networks"
> 
> This is to announce the start of working group last call on:
> 
>     Mechanisms for Optimal LAG/ECMP Component Link Utilization in
>         Networks
> 
> http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-opsawg-large-flow-load-
> balancing/
> 
> It is intended for publication as an informational RFC.
> 
> Please give it a careful read and provide any feedback to this mailing
> list by September 9, 2013
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> opsawg chairs
> _______________________________________________
> OPSAWG mailing list
> OPSAWG@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg