On Fri, Nov 16, 2018 at 12:14:45AM -0800, Jeff Tantsura wrote:
> P.S. in my previous life, working on 5G transport slicing (yes, i know :))
> - i needed per slice identity over the common transport, we ended up
> looking at UDP port ranges, rather than DSCP - too few bits
Right. The main issue is when you start requiring new/more DSCP for
a purpose that is not QoS. Which by itself is not a good hard
definition, but at least a starting point.
Cheers
Toerless
>
> Cheers,
> Jeff
> On Thu, Nov 15, 2018 at 23:37 Robert Raszuk <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Jeff,
> >
> > > What architecture?
> > > PBR is a form of:
> > > match DSCP X
> > > set next-hop Y
> > > needs no interoperability...
> >
> > That's pretty narrow view. I could say the worst possible example :) You
> > would have to either encapsulate or apply your sample config consistently
> > on every hop. Brrrrr.
> >
> > To me DSCP can be used to map packets to different routing context,
> > different plane or can be used as a parameter in flex-algorithm.
> >
> > Thx,
> > R.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Nov 16, 2018 at 8:19 AM Jeff Tantsura <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Tony,
> >>
> >> What architecture?
> >> PBR is a form of:
> >> match DSCP X
> >> set next-hop Y
> >> needs no interoperability...
> >> If someone wants to describe how they use a particular vendor feature to
> >> solve a particular problem in a BCP, sure, the more BCPs - the better.
> >>
> >> Wrt using DSCP in routing decision process - it was a bad idea back then,
> >> hasn???t got any better now... besides - now we have got a toolbox that
> >> wasn???t available then.
> >>
> >> Cheers,
> >> Jeff
> >> On Thu, Nov 15, 2018 at 22:56 Tony Li <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Nov 15, 2018, at 8:47 PM, Jeff Tantsura <[email protected]>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> The question is really - what is here to standardize?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> There???s a fine architectural BCP here: this is how we are solving
> >>> problem XYZ. Please don???t break this.
> >>>
> >>> Tony
> >>>
> >>>
> _______________________________________________
> Lsr mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr
--
---
[email protected]
_______________________________________________
Lsr mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr
