Tony –
You ask very important questions – but – as Acee has answered in a subsequent
email – all of these questions were openly debated in the WG during the work on
what became RFC8919/8920. This debate was contentious, took years, and the WG
eventually reached consensus on what became the two
Tony,
On 28/07/2021 22:06, Tony Li wrote:
Les,
ASLA exists to support the advertisement of attributes which can be
used in application specific ways.
Why do we need separate and different copies of attributes for different
applications?
The SRLG tries to capture the risk relationships
Hi there,
I completely agree with Les here. ASLA exist already as per RFC8919, RFC8920.
Example of application is here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-lsr-flex-algo-17#section-12.
Generic Metrics fits the application specific paradigm.
What are we trying to accomplish here
Speaking as WG chair:
We had a protracted discussion of the usage of link attributes for multiple
applications. The outcome was RFC 8919 and RFC 9820. If you browse the ospf and
isis WG archives for the years 2015-2018, you’ll see there was lots of
discussion. You can also view the IETF
Les,
> ASLA exists to support the advertisement of attributes which can be used in
> application specific ways.
Why do we need separate and different copies of attributes for different
applications?
The SRLG tries to capture the risk relationships between multiple links. Those
Tony –
IMO, you are asking the wrong question.
ASLA exists to support the advertisement of attributes which can be used in
application specific ways.
In any particular deployment case, a given attribute advertisement might be
used by one app, multiple apps, or all apps.
ASLA allows to
On 28/07/2021 20:22, Tony Li wrote:
FWIW, I think that this is the wrong question.
I think that a better question is: Is there a usecase that is so
overwhelmingly compelling that the added complexity of ASLA is warranted?
both TE metric and delay, that is used as metric for flex-algo, are
FWIW, I think that this is the wrong question.
I think that a better question is: Is there a usecase that is so overwhelmingly
compelling that the added complexity of ASLA is warranted?
Tony
> On Jul 28, 2021, at 11:18 AM, Shraddha Hegde
> wrote:
>
> WG,
>
>Generic metric as
WG,
Generic metric as described in
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-lsr-flex-algo-bw-con
can advertise multiple metric-types and values and be used
by any application. All the use cases that I heard from network
operators while writing the draft could be solved
Peter,
There is an agreement to open the Flex-algo draft and clarify the text
and here is a proposal for the modified text.
We can discuss about generic-metric in another thread.
New text for section "12. Advertisement of Link Attributes for
Flex-Algorithm " 2 nd
And 3rd
Ron,
the problem in hand is whether Generic Metric should be defined as an
application specific attribute or not. I have explained several times
why making it application specific makes sense and also provided
examples of other metrics that are defined as application specific (TE
metric,
11 matches
Mail list logo
