We have discussed this before. From an implementer's perspective, the two clean 
solutions to the problem seem to either stateful "compute-only" tunnels or a 
stateless RPC.

Michael


From: mpls [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Igor Bryskin
Sent: Thursday, November 03, 2016 2:34 PM
To: Daniele Ceccarelli; CCAMP ([email protected]); [email protected]; TEAS WG 
([email protected]); [email protected]
Subject: [ALU] 
[mpls]http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-busibel-teas-yang-path-computation-00

Hi,

>From the draft:

6.    YANG Model for requesting Path Computation


   Work on extending the TE Tunnel YANG model to support the need to
   request path computation has recently started also in the context of
   the 
[TE-TUNNEL<https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-busibel-teas-yang-path-computation-00#ref-TE-TUNNEL>]
 draft.

   It is possible to request path computation by configuring a
   "compute-only" TE tunnel and retrieving the computed path(s) in the
   LSP(s) Record-Route Object (RRO) list as described in 
[TE-TUNNEL<https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-busibel-teas-yang-path-computation-00#ref-TE-TUNNEL>].

   This is a stateful solution since the state of each created
   "compute-only" TE tunnel needs to be maintained and updated, when
   underlying network conditions change.

   The need also for a stateless solution, based on an RPC, has been
   recognized.


   The YANG model to support stateless RPC is for further study.





IB>> Please, note, that in the TE Tunnel model we consider the 
COMPUTE_AND_FORGET mode. We also consider the concept of path computation 
action to be defined under the TE tunnel node. All this is to facilitate 
stateless path computations.

Cheers,
Igor

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

Reply via email to