On Jan 27, 2014, at 10:49 AM, Xuxiaohu wrote:
> Hi Peter,
> 
>> -----邮件原件-----
>> 发件人: Peter Psenak [mailto:[email protected]]
>> 发送时间: 2014年1月27日 16:41
>> 收件人: Xuxiaohu
>> 抄送: [email protected]; [email protected]
>> 主题: Re: [OSPF] fwd: New Version Notification for
>> draft-xu-ospf-global-label-sid-adv-00.txt
>> 
>> Xiaohu,
>> 
>> 
>> 1. draft-psenak-ospf-segment-routing-extensions has already defined the
>> mapping server functionality - please read the section 4.2 and 6.1
> 
> According to the description about mapping servers (see below) which is in 
> -01 version of the use case draft but is removed in -02 version of that 
> draft, it seems that the mapping server is deemed to advertise the mappings 
> on behalf of non-SR-capable routers.


As it is defined now, there is nothing that prevents the MS 
to be used for mapping SIDs/labels to indistinctly SR and 
non-SR routers.

s.


> In contrast, my draft proposes to allow the mapping server to allocate and 
> advertise mappings on behalf of SR-capable routers. Those two distinct design 
> goals cause different implications on the implementation and usage.
> 
>   "The mappings advertised by an SR mapping server result from local
>   policy information configured by the operator.  IF PE3 had been SR
>   capable, the operator would have configured PE3 with node segment
>   103.  Instead, as PE3 is not SR capable, the operator configures that
>   policy at the SRMS and it is the latter which advertises the 
> mapping."---quoted from -01 version of the use case draft.
> 
>> 2. TLVs that you defined in section 3 and 4 are very close to those defined 
>> in
>> draft-psenak-ospf-segment-routing-extensions and have the exact same
>> functionality as the ones defined in
>> draft-psenak-ospf-segment-routing-extensions
> 
> If I understand your draft correctly, the prefix SID sub-TLV defined in your 
> draft is intended to advertise index, rather than SID or global label. In 
> contrast, the Label Binding Sub-TLV and SID Binding Sub-TLV defined in my 
> draft are intended to advertise global labels and SIDs respectively. Besides, 
> the Label Binding Sub-TLV and SID Binding sub-TLV are just intended for label 
> or SID distribution without any correlation with the algorithm and MT-ID, 
> which is different from the prefix SID sub-TLV, IMHO.
> 
>> 3. The only new sub-TLV you defined is Label Request Sub-TLV.
>> 
>> First, given that we already have OSPF SR draft, you should have defined 
>> this as
>> a sub-TLV of the OSPF Extended Prefix TLV that is defined in
>> draft-psenak-ospf-segment-routing-extensions.
> 
>> Second, you proposed to use Opaque LSA that is flooded either area or domain
>> wide as a request mechanism between the router and mapping server. This
>> means that all routers in an area/domain would have to store and maintain 
>> such
>> 'request' LSAs, even though they would never use them locally. I seriously
>> question if flooding of the LSA is the right mechanism to achieve what you 
>> want.
> 
> Agree that it may not be attractive in the OSPF case. However, this choice 
> may be attractive in the IS-IS case since the label/SID request information 
> can be carried in the IP reachability advertisement. Anyway, as said in the 
> draft, the advertisement of label/SID request is just one option.
> 
> Best regards,
> Xiaohu
> 
>> regards,
>> Peter
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On 1/27/14 04:34 , Xuxiaohu wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>> 
>>> Any comments are welcome.
>>> 
>>> Best regards,
>>> Xiaohu
>>> 
>>>> -----邮件原件-----
>>>> 发件人: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]
>>>> 发送时间: 2014年1月21日 13:53
>>>> 收件人: Mach Chen; Mach Chen; Xuxiaohu; Xuxiaohu
>>>> 主题: New Version Notification for
>>>> draft-xu-ospf-global-label-sid-adv-00.txt
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> A new version of I-D, draft-xu-ospf-global-label-sid-adv-00.txt
>>>> has been successfully submitted by Xiaohu Xu and posted to the IETF
>> repository.
>>>> 
>>>> Name:              draft-xu-ospf-global-label-sid-adv
>>>> Revision:  00
>>>> Title:             Advertising Global Labels or SIDs Using OSPF
>>>> Document date:     2014-01-21
>>>> Group:             Individual Submission
>>>> Pages:             7
>>>> URL:
>>>> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-xu-ospf-global-label-sid-ad
>>>> v-00.txt
>>>> Status:
>>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-xu-ospf-global-label-sid-adv/
>>>> Htmlized:
>>>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-xu-ospf-global-label-sid-adv-00
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Abstract:
>>>>    Segment Routing (SR) is a new MPLS paradigm in which each
>> SR-capable
>>>>    router is required to advertise global MPLS labels or Segment IDs
>>>>    (SID) for its attached prefixes by using link-state IGPs, e.g., OSPF.
>>>>    One major challenge associated with such global MPLS label or SID
>>>>    advertisement mechanism is how to avoid a given global MPLS label or
>>>>    SID from being allocated by different routers to different prefixes.
>>>>    Although such global label or SID allocation collision problem can be
>>>>    addressed through manual allocation , it is error-prone and
>>>>    nonautomatic therefore may not be suitable in large-scale SR network
>>>>    environments.  This document proposes an alternative approach for
>>>>    allocating and advertising global MPLS labels or SIDs via OSPF so as
>>>>    to eliminate the potential risk of label allocation collision.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of
>>>> submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at 
>>>> tools.ietf.org.
>>>> 
>>>> The IETF Secretariat
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> OSPF mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf
>>> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> OSPF mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf

_______________________________________________
OSPF mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf

Reply via email to