One of the downsides to having four (at least) different control plane
operating systems across your product lines.
Phil
------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Mohamed Kamal <mailto:mka...@noor.net>
Sent: 4/8/2015 5:13 AM
To: NANOG <mailto:nanog@nanog.org>
Subject: Re: Cisco's IOS-XE and PCEP implementation
Here is Cisco's reply!
“Given PCEP’s main use-case is inter-area TE tunnels (or SDN controller in
TE environment) and ASR1K is not marketed for TE, support is unlikely”
What is .. "not marketed for TE"?!
All in all, I don't mind replacing them with some cheaper, powerful,
flexible and SDN-ready juniper MX that are marketed for TE.
Mohamed Kamal
Core Network Sr. Engineer
On 4/5/2015 10:42 PM, Mohamed Kamal wrote:
and hence being implemented on IOS-XR within the Cisco environment
today
I disagree! .. Engineering is all about optimization, and using an ASR1k
(which is being marketed as an "edge/PE router") in my edge doesn't mean
that my network is not a "high-scale environment", it does mean that it
fits my needs in this location, where other IOS-XR (ASR9k) fits in
others.
Plus, PCEP is no magic, Juniper's MX series starting from the vMX is
supporting PCEP. They didn't claim that, a "higher-scale environment" is
being required for this.
the demand for online calculation has increased - either due to
dependencies for new TE path-instantiating protocols (e.g., SR), or
more complex constraints that cannot be well met by offline
calculation or CSPF
That's why PCEP support should be added to the road-map in the near
future.
Mohamed Kamal
Core Network Sr. Engineer
On 4/5/2015 8:33 PM, Rob Shakir wrote:
On 30 March 2015 at 15:42:59, Mohamed Kamal (mka...@noor.net) wrote:
I'm wondering, why there is no MPLS-TE PCE support for IOS-XE till
now?!
Should I be getting a 9k/CRS on the edge to implement an automatic
tool
to build MPLS-TE tunnels!
In general, PCE(P) implementations have been limited. IMHO the last
10 years of RSVP-TE management has generally been done with auto-mesh
tools, or in-house driven offline path calculation tools (e.g., WANDL,
Cariden, Aria…).
As such, the demand for online calculation has increased - either
due to dependencies for new TE path-instantiating protocols (e.g.,
SR), or more complex constraints that cannot be well met by offline
calculation or CSPF (e.g., path-diversity with disjoint head-end PEs).
This demand is mainly coming in higher-scale environments - and hence
being implemented on IOS-XR within the Cisco environment today. I
expect this is why IOS-XE is lagging. There are certainly requests for
support - but as Mark says, you’ll need to interface with your account
team to figure out when code will be available for your platform.
As to whether you should buy an IOS XR device for your edge, I’m
not sure what kind of logic would mean that device selection is solely
based on PCEP support :-). I would certainly look more into the
existing “automatic” tools, and possibilities for offline calculation
in the interim period.
r.
