On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 11:10 AM, Sri Gundavelli (sgundave) <[email protected]> wrote: > Marco, > > Should some of this discussion on terminology be part of the other > arch/deployment spec ?
Is there such a thing? I did not know that. Regards, Behcet > We should use a consist terminology across all of > these 4 documents. I think the discussions we have had early this year on > the DMM functional entities, terminology and the deployment models should > still be applicable here. > > > Regards > Sri > > > From: Marco Liebsch <[email protected]> > Date: Thursday, December 18, 2014 3:03 AM > To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> > Subject: [DMM] Data-Plane anchors in a control-/data-plane separated > deyploment > > Folks, > > at IETF91 we received the valid comment to converge on a definition of the > term ‘anchor’. > In the FPSM discussion, we so far distinguished Data-Plane Anchor (DPA), > traditionally a downlink encap function, > Data-Plane Node (DPN), which is more located in the access to terminate > tunnels, and regular transport nodes. > > Another comment was about a scenario where a single flow may traverse > multiple DPAs on its way to the > MN. > > > > I’d like to propose and discuss the following: > In a decentralized data-plane and a control-/data-plane separated > deployment, I consider it a reasonable > assumption that each of the so far unambiguously named data-plane nodes can > take the role of the other. > So, we may solely refer to a single type of function, e.g. Data-Plane Anchor > (DPA), which receives policies > from the Control-Plane. > > For a certain deployment, it’s the Control-Plane that determines the role > and associated policies for each involved > DPA. > > > > Data-Plane nodes are agnostic to the role they play in mobility management. > > Control-Plane determines the role of each DPA according to the preferred > deployment and configures the > policies accordingly. > > > > I think such assumption allows flexible deployment and eases description in > our specifications. > > > > I am not good in drawing ASCII, but I gave it a try (for downlink operation > only). > > Using PMIP6 terms, the middle-DPA in the figure below serves as kind of LMA, > left DPA as MAG, > right DPA (one or multiple) may enforce per-host rules for traffic steering. > > > > Would be happy to get your opinion on this proposal. > > > > marco > > > > > > +--------------------------+ > > | Control-Plane | > > +--------------------------+ > > | | | > > | | | > > | | | > > \ / V V V > > +--+ -o- +---+ +---+ +---+ +--+ > > |MN| ---- |---|DPA|<========|DPA|<----|DPA|<--|CN| > > +--+ | +---+ +---+ +---+ +--+ > > Rules: Rules: Rules: > > Decap, Encap, host-route > > Forward Forward, > > qos > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > dmm mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm > _______________________________________________ dmm mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm
