Re: [babel] About BIER in Babel

[Zhang Z <[e-mail]>]

 Hi Juliusz and all,
At first I must apology about the misunderstanding caused by the two drafts. One is “draft-zhang-bier-babel-extensions-00”, it was presented in Seoul meeting; it is the BIER Routing underlay technology. The other one is “draft-zhang-pim-babel-ext-02”, it was presented in this meeting. It is multicast flow overlay technology. The two drafts focus on different aspect of BIER technology. And the two drafts are independent though we can use them together. The man who is not familiar with BIER will be confused about it. The first draft “draft-zhang-bier-babel-extensions-00” had been discussed in BIER working group and many people thought that it is worth implemented. The second draft “draft-zhang-pim-babel-ext-02” is just an idea for multicast flow overlay. And the implementation that we discussed today is “draft-zhang-bier-babel-extensions-00”.
I suggest strongly that the draft “draft-ietf-bier-architecture-05” should be read first. You will know the meaning of Routing underlay/ BIER layer/ Multicast Flow Overlay. The three layers are focus on different aspect of BIER technology. Routing underlay is used to transfer BFR-id corresponding information. There are OSPF/ ISIS/ BGP BIER extension in BIER working group. You can find them through the link “https://tools.ietf.org/wg/bier/”. In fact, the draft “draft-zhang-bier-babel-extensions-00” also belongs to Routing underlay layer. And this draft is worth implemented first.
The draft “draft-zhang-pim-babel-ext-02” belongs to Multicast Flow Overlay. This layer is used to transfer particular multicast flow information. And there is also a draft “draft-pfister-bier-mld-03” that is used to solve it. And the “draft-pfister-bier-mld-03” is the function that we call MLD in abbreviation.
So, you will see that we can use “draft-zhang-bier-babel-extensions-00” and “draft-pfister-bier-mld-03” together to solve the Routing Underlay and Multicast Flow Overlay. It is Babel + MLD solution. And many people include me think that it is a good way to achieve the multicast deployment.
The way that I said use one protocol to solve multicast problem is that we use “draft-zhang-bier-babel-extensions-00” and “draft-zhang-pim-babel-ext-02” at the same time. In this situation we only use one protocol Babel to solve Routing underlay and Multicast flow overlay. This function is just an idea. And it means nothing if there is no situation that we can only use one protocol to deploy multicast.
In a word, we should consider the implementation of “draft-zhang-bier-babel-extensions-00”. The BIER forwarding plane software had also been implemented by ZTE, and I think Cisco does it also. So at first it should be considered that how to merge Babel protocol and BIER forwarding software together. And then implement “draft-zhang-bier-babel-extensions-00”.


Thanks,
Sandy

________________________________
发件人: babel <[e-mail]> 代表 Juliusz Chroboczek <[e-mail]>
发送时间: 2017年3月29日 4:47
收件人: [e-mail]
抄送: [e-mail]
主题: [babel] About BIER in Babel

Dear Sandy, dear all,

I think there are very good reasons why it would be interesting to
experiment with BIER and Babel.  As you explained, there are at least two
approaches worth considering:

  - announce BIER routing directly in Babel, as your draft suggests;
  - use MLD with Babel.

I am not competent to judge which approach is suitable, but it is clearly
attractive to run a single protocol.

As I mentioned at the mike, there are a number of problems with your
encoding.  My personal intuition would be to use a new AE number for BIER,
but of course someone would need to write it down and check the details.

As David mentioned, some of us would feel much more comfortable if there
were a prototype implementation before we are asked to adopt your draft.
I would be interested in helping, but I have neither the competence nor
the manpower to do the implementation on my own.

-- Juliusz

_______________________________________________
babel mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/babel