> Sure it is possible to discover if my tailends are capable of handling in > band telemetry by off line means. But what I am struggling to see why we > allowed so much TE stuff into IGPs and we do not want to make it easier for > headends to operate without PCE at all for the purpose of delivering such > type of services.
AFAICT, we put a lot of effort into making headend path computation useful and, for the most part, it was and is not necessary. Even with legacy mechanisms, people decided that they need global optimization and that head-end path computation was Not That Interesting. It’s now 20 years later, the network is even more dynamic, the expectations about response time are that much higher, and concerns about link state database stability and scalability have increased. Modern telemetry is definitely not suitable to be passed in the IGP anymore. Thus, it seems like the IGP can provide base topology information and traffic engineering constructs should leverage that and provide an independent telemetry collection plane. Within that plane, telemetry capabilities can and should be confined to the telemetry plane. As we’ve said many times before: BGP is not a dump truck. Analogously, the IGP isn’t even an SUV. ;-) Regards, Tony
_______________________________________________ Lsr mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr
