Hi Meral,
Please be aware of the limitations of the current PCE charter. If the WG
wants to go beyond the constraint of a "small group of domains" then it will
need to recharter. As JP and Julien indicated, such an attempt to recharter
needs to be accompanied by a discussion of the operational requirements
and/or concerns in terms of applicability, order of magnitude,
implementation...
That said, it is certainly worthwhile to add scalability considerations to
I-Ds. The authors of draft-king-hierarchy-fwk intend to do some analysis of
the use of BRPC in a small domain mesh when the domain sequence is not known
in advance (and must be determined using BRPC).
Cheers,
Adrian
----- Original Message -----
From: "Meral Shirazipour" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Cc: <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, November 12, 2009 8:29 PM
Subject: Re: [Pce] Charter and Multi-Domain
Hello,
I am with Daniel and JP regarding the need to start considering
multiple domains and serious scalability pitfalls that might occur.
Just a comment regarding setting numbers: although 20 domains would be
a good start for testing some of the different ID?s and proposals, I
think it would be best to keep in mind that any solution should scale
to other numbers >20. If a proposal is not scalable, at least provide
the mechanism to deal with the situation: for example by detecting the
problem (monitoring flooding, waiting times etc) and reporting back
with notification error etc.). To this end I propose adding a
Scalability Section to all the upcoming IDs.
Regards,
Meral
"[email protected]" <[email protected]> a
écrit :
Hi PCE members.
As you may (SHOULD ;-) ) have noticed in our agenda for Hiroshima, Daniel
King will present his I-D named "The Application of the PCE Architecture
to the Determination of a Sequence of Domains in MPLS & GMPLS" (introduced
during the Stockholm meeting). Nonetheless our current charter soberly
says:
"The PCE WG will work on application of this model within a single Domain
or within a small group of domains (where a domain is a layer, IGP area
or Autonomous System with limited visibility from the head-end LSR). At
this time, applying this model to large groups of domains such as the
Internet is not thought to be possible, and the PCE WG will not spend
energy on that topic."
In other words, we are flirting with our charter border and the scope of
some drafts depends on it. In this context, the chairs would like to get a
feedback from the WG on evolving towards larger groups of domains.
Does the WG think we are now ready to follow this path? Do you have
operational requirements and/or concerns in mind in terms of
applicability, order of magnitude, implementation...? Comments are very
welcome.
You are probably aware that we have passed over a milestone about
rechartering: beyond the upcoming meeting, your feedback will be useful
input for the envisioned charter update (targetted for the end of the
year).
Many thanks
JP & Julien
_______________________________________________
Pce mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce
_______________________________________________
Pce mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce
_______________________________________________
Pce mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce
