Robert,

Thanks for the quick reply.
Do you mean that P2 in Figure 1 can switch and swap labels carried by the IP 
header (for the T2 Path_A2)  based on the instruction from the controller ?
[cid:[email protected]]

My question is only to check if it is possible utilizing existing features on 
routers.

If P2 can be upgraded to support swapping bits in IP header, then more new 
features can be enabled (in addition to yours).

Linda

From: Robert Raszuk <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, September 27, 2019 5:53 PM
To: Linda Dunbar <[email protected]>
Cc: RTGWG <[email protected]>; [email protected]
Subject: Re: IP Traffic Engineering

Hi Linda,

Thank you for reading the proposal. Organizationally per recommendation from AD 
and chairs we will be moving this work to TEAS hence I am cc-ing that group.

As to your first question - P nodes are non participating nodes only running 
plain IP routing. Imagine those are ISPs between my anchor nodes - no PCE can 
talk to them. But this does not change the core of your question.

You are essentially asking - can I do the same using MPLS swapping + IP encap 
on SE nodes. Well technically you can - but the main motivation of this 
proposal is to minimize per packet overhead. And if you can simply do IP lookup 
why to throw away peeling the packet with nice bits which can contain more then 
needed information and get to next encapsulated here MPLS stack ?

Even if you look at processing chain of operations many more cycles in the data 
pipeline is needed to strip the header, process lookup on mpls label then apply 
new mapping then match new mapping to another encapsulation IP header, apply 
new IP header etc ... I do not see much rationale doing such maneuvers. I think 
while MPLS as service demux is great idea I would not invest too much in any 
solutions which relay on using MPLS as a transport.

For section 7 the answer is it depends. Some functions local to the midpoints 
for sure can be triggered by control plane. However some functions may be 
common to all packets (for example let's timestamp the packet at each TE 
midpoint) so it makes sense to have an architecture which allows to embed such 
function. On a similar note VPN demux values known on VPN ingress should be 
applied there and not carried in TE control plane if for nothing else then for 
avoiding TE control plane unnecessary grow.

Many thx for asking,
Robert.


On Sat, Sep 28, 2019 at 12:22 AM Linda Dunbar 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Robert,

Interesting proposal, especially on the Active Path Probing allowing minimum 
path quality metrics to be specified for data plane.

Can I use MPLS over IP solution + PCE to achieve what you show in Figure 1?
e.g. for T2 Path: PCE can instruct the proper switching on P2 for the path, and 
instruct the PE1 for the proper MPLS label, then the PE1 encapsulate the MPLS 
packet in IP packet (which can traverse the plain IP network to P2); P2 does 
the MPLS label swapping and switching instructed by the controller, and 
encapsulate the MPLS packet in the new label assigned by P2 in another IP 
packet to PE2.

For Section 7 Network Programming, you propose adding the information about the 
selected function to packet. If intermediate nodes can get instruction from the 
controller, why not letting the controller inform the list of functions for the 
packets at the specific nodes instead carried by the packets?

Linda Dunbar

From: rtgwg <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> On Behalf 
Of Robert Raszuk
Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2019 6:07 PM
To: RTGWG <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Subject: IP Traffic Engineering

Dear RTGWG,

I just submitted a document where I present new perspective on traffic 
engineering for IP networks. As the scope of the new architecture and 
deployment target does not fit any other working group I decided to submit it 
to RTGWG.

Comments, opinions, contribution - very welcome !

Kind regards,
Robert.

- - -

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.


        Title           : IP Traffic Engineering Architecture with Network 
Programming
        Author          : Robert Raszuk
        Filename        : draft-raszuk-rtgwg-ip-te-np-00.txt
        Pages           : 22
        Date            : 2019-09-26

Abstract:
   This document describes a control plane based IP Traffic Engineering
   Architecture where path information is kept in the control plane by
   selected nodes instead of being inserted into each packet on ingress
   of an administrative domain.  The described proposal is also fully
   compatible with the concept of network programming.

   It is positioned as a complimentary technique to native SRv6 and can
   be used when there are concerns with increased packet size due to
   depth of SID stack, possible concerns regarding exceeding MTU or more
   strict simplicity requirements typically seen in number of enterprise
   networks.  The proposed solution is applicable to both IPv4 or IPv6
   based networks.

   As an additional added value, detection of end to end path liveness
   as well as dynamic path selection based on real time path quality is
   integrated from day one in the design.


The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-raszuk-rtgwg-ip-te-np/<https://nam03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdatatracker.ietf.org%2Fdoc%2Fdraft-raszuk-rtgwg-ip-te-np%2F&data=02%7C01%7Clinda.dunbar%40futurewei.com%7C02ff3b0165bc4f7fdddd08d7439d6ae9%7C0fee8ff2a3b240189c753a1d5591fedc%7C1%7C0%7C637052215698214872&sdata=rVQaZc1YQFAmmrODfzEpraJToztMiI1vCu8%2B0aBnh%2BQ%3D&reserved=0>

There are also htmlized versions available at:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-raszuk-rtgwg-ip-te-np-00<https://nam03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ftools.ietf.org%2Fhtml%2Fdraft-raszuk-rtgwg-ip-te-np-00&data=02%7C01%7Clinda.dunbar%40futurewei.com%7C02ff3b0165bc4f7fdddd08d7439d6ae9%7C0fee8ff2a3b240189c753a1d5591fedc%7C1%7C0%7C637052215698224875&sdata=9VNG6OhnlJVQUuwz6JlfJek%2F5MDd3SAVVodLUIXagmg%3D&reserved=0>
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-raszuk-rtgwg-ip-te-np-00<https://nam03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdatatracker.ietf.org%2Fdoc%2Fhtml%2Fdraft-raszuk-rtgwg-ip-te-np-00&data=02%7C01%7Clinda.dunbar%40futurewei.com%7C02ff3b0165bc4f7fdddd08d7439d6ae9%7C0fee8ff2a3b240189c753a1d5591fedc%7C1%7C0%7C637052215698234871&sdata=KsxSjEST0DHGRBvV2fDIgxa5s3euuEzf7kXnkpP%2FYD0%3D&reserved=0>
_______________________________________________
rtgwg mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg

Reply via email to