Lucy,
   I agree with what you say here. This is a fact to consider especially if the
PCE architecture is to be adapted later on for inter-AS TE in the ‘Internet’.
What you say here is important if we consider the Internet peering models.

Regards,
   Meral Shirazipour




Selon Lucy Yong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

> Adrian,
>
>
>
> The draft layouts the basic PCE architecture and expresses the motivation
> for a PCE-based architecture. It is a good document.
>
>  Beyond these motivation facts, I think we should have another incentive for
> a PCE-based architecture.
>
>
>
> Today, a control plane based switching architecture assumes a user-network
> model or client-server model. A LSP is initiated at an end user point
> (client), then network establishes the LSP thru. the control plane
> instantly. PCE reserves that concept too. Thus all connection paths are
> based on instant requests from end users.
>
>
>
> In carrier reality world, it is hard to see that transport service will be
> offered this way only, especially for a large bandwidth and permanent
> bandwidth request. Typically, carrier has a service order reservation
> system, it allows customer to book a bandwidth ahead (pending order),
> carrier will do traffic engineering based on the pending order and will
> excuse the order when the time arrives. A path computer engine has a
> capability of taking a consideration about future pending orders while it
> computes a path. The architecture is pretty close to the PCE-based
> architecture except a lot of manual operation. I think PCE should consider
> this as its application too and revise the basic architecture to include
> this functionality.
>
>
>
> Here is the recommendation for the PCE-based architecture:
>
>
>
>                        ---------------
>                       |   ---------   | Routing   ----------
>                       |  |         |  | Protocol |          |
>                       |  |   TED   |<-+----------+->        |
>                       |  |         |  |          |          |
>                       |   ---------   |          |          |
>                       |      |        |          |          |
>                       |      | Input  |          |          |
>                       |      v        |          |          |
>  ---------- Response  |   ---------   |          |          |
> |          |Request   |  |         |  |          | Adjacent |
> |  SORD    |<-------->   |  |   PCE   |  |          |   Node   |
> |          |Input     |  |         |  |          |          |
>  ----------           |   ---------   |          |          |
>       ^               |      ^        |          |          |
>       |               |      |Request |          |          |
>       |               |      |Response|          |          |
>    Service Order      |      v        |          |          |
>                       |   ---------   |          |          |
>              Service  |  |         |  | Signaling|          |
>              Request  |  |Signaling|  | Protocol |          |
>                 ------+->| Engine  |<-+----------+->        |
>                       |  |         |  |          |          |
>                       |   ---------   |           ----------
>                        ---------------
>
>
> Here, SORD is the service order reservation database, it contains all
> service order requests in terms of ingress and egress points, bandwidth,
> service type, time period for the request, etc. When PCE computes a path, it
> could get input from SORD to indicate if there are some network resource is
> already blocked out. When a booking order in SORD is ready to kick off, SORD
> will send request to PCE for the path computation, then PCE will send a
> service request to signaling engine to establish the LSP.
>
>
>
> It is clarified that not all pending orders in SORD need to reserve the
> bandwidth ahead, carrier could have some policies in SORD to manage which
> order need to reserve the bandwidth ahead and which is not.
>
>
>
> Be glad to hear your and other people comment on this suggestion.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Lucy Yong
>
> Huawei Technologies, U.S.
>
>
>
>
>
>




_______________________________________________
Pce mailing list
[email protected]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce

Reply via email to