Hi. This is Kwang-koog from kt which is one of major network providers in South Korea. First, I appreciate a vast of contributions by i2rs members for enabling intelligent and simple routing operations.
As Alia mentioned in her draft, many network providers including kt today have very huge and complex routing networks according to the growth of the IP-based services but they really need simple operation and new business model for covering a number of use cases on that. With the benefit of the distributed routing manner, modern routing systems easily plugged into a designated routing network and forward user packets to desired destinations. But, in the operator perspective, policy-based routing control and necessary optimizations for routing are always major issues for them because it is very hard to control multi-vendor ruters with their own proprietary functions. Our company has operated huge routing systems with the size of thousands of routing systems during tens of years and made a significant effort to optimize routing systems. So, current routing systems support preferable service level aggrement and traffic utilization is optimized by the our own planning rules. However, to this end, there have been even much trial-and-error and many times. So, I expect that the works of i2rs help network providers to easily control their network and also support many usecases from our customers. I also think Alia clearly stated such concerns of modern routing systems so that I also support the WG adoption. I2RS members pointed out many comments and feedbacks for enhancing that document which I also agree with. In addition, I give a small comment to her draft for "Sec. 5 desired aspect of a protocol for i2rs" That is "*interoperability between protocol versions*". For example, newly defined software define network protocols such as openflow rapidly changed and a bunch of functions are added. But, nobody does consider the interoperability of such protocols. I think providers are very wonderring that different version protocols can be inter-working or not. So, I want to comment that i2rs protocol has to have this aspect. Thanks. sincerly, Kwang-koog Lee (Ph.D) the advanced institue of technology of kt, South Korea On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 7:52 PM, Jon Mitchell <[email protected]>wrote: > On 24/07/13 17:53 -0400, Alia Atlas wrote: > > Please review draft-atlas-i2rs-problem-statement-01 and comment on > whether > > it should be adopted by I2RS. Detailed technical conversation is also > most > > welcome. > > > > Support adoption.. some small issues to authors direct. > > -Jon > > _______________________________________________ > i2rs mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs >
_______________________________________________ i2rs mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs
