Hi Nikolay, On Thu, Nov 7, 2013 at 1:33 PM, Nikolay Milovanov <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Sri, > > I guess instead of "complete model of entire network topology" it should be > "a model of the network topology as visible from a particular device > perspective".
This is still a device-centric topology view. Even though it may be of the whole network and not just its immediate neighbors, it is still a device-centric view. Unless the device itself has a strong-consistency model of the entire network, in which case I would like to know what that is. > The topology discoverer acting as an i2rs client will have to have some > rules in order to handle differences between network models received by > different devices. My question to the group is whether those rules are in the I2RS charter. Will we be designing those procedures and mechanisms in I2RS WG (this may be replicating a link-state IGP's db update procedures). > > It is interesting how the i2rs client will do the merge if some edges part of > the model received from one network node(agent) and are missing from the > model received by its neighbor? Shall does go into the entire network model > or not? I guess this is an implementation detail not really related to the > info model spec. For example in such cases there might be a discrepancy > mechanism able to handle that. It might be configurable and able to do > different things as per the exact network use case. > I don't think this is an implementation detail. A network-centric topology model must be recursively stackable. It must be standardized as to how the "discrepancies" are handled. > I have a question to the group members related to How formal that model will > has to be?. For example it might contain not only nodes and edges but also > some of their key properties. It might be useful if for example some of the > edge properties to be the local/remote interface through which the edge has > been built also the local/remote L2/L3 network address used for edge building. > Also is interesting how to ensure that the data coming from different nodes > in the network but related to the same node/edge will have the same unique ID > so that the network topology manager will be able to merge it correctly. Seems like we are getting into a link-state advertisement discussion here :-) > > Nikolay > - Sri > > On Nov 7, 2013, at 11:11 PM, Sriganesh Kini wrote: > >> A critical question is whether the "merging of the models from each >> device" is within the scope of I2RS. Also note that "complete model of >> entire network topology" can be misleading. This may be true for small >> networks within a single administrative domain, but as the scope of >> the network increases (e.g. multiple administrative domains) there >> will not be a single way to get the "entire network topology", but >> there will be some details that will be abstracted out. >> >> - Sri >> >> On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 11:17 PM, Nikolay Milovanov >> <[email protected]> wrote: >>> Most likely the network-centric topology models coming from each of the >>> devices will have to be merged by the network topology manager in order the >>> rest of the applications to be able to benefit from a complete model of the >>> entire network topology. > > _______________________________________________ > i2rs mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs _______________________________________________ i2rs mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs
