IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Banana] diff (banana load distribution, next-hop selection of multipath)

Joe Touch <touch@isi.edu> Sat, 04 February 2017 17:57 UTC

Return-Path: <touch@isi.edu>
X-Original-To: banana@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: banana@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7049B12967E for <banana@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 4 Feb 2017 09:57:48 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.001
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Wi8ai6lIe7x7 for <banana@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 4 Feb 2017 09:57:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: from boreas.isi.edu (boreas.isi.edu [128.9.160.161]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BBA2112967A for <banana@ietf.org>; Sat, 4 Feb 2017 09:57:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.1.189] (cpe-172-250-240-132.socal.res.rr.com [172.250.240.132]) (authenticated bits=0) by boreas.isi.edu (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id v14HutU0005939 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT); Sat, 4 Feb 2017 09:56:57 -0800 (PST)
To: Margaret Cullen <margaretw42@gmail.com>
References: <4552F0907735844E9204A62BBDD325E7A6386E6A@NKGEML515-MBX.china.huawei.com> <C328BFD1-A2B7-4E95-956A-D553A8167922@gmail.com> <f5bc7430-45dd-c5a6-d376-9d349d40a373@isi.edu> <6F657BB7-A556-4428-B3FE-015F7EC92A61@gmail.com>
From: Joe Touch <touch@isi.edu>
Message-ID: <209d92ca-32c4-0f79-bfda-74b469390df1@isi.edu>
Date: Sat, 04 Feb 2017 09:56:56 -0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.7.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <6F657BB7-A556-4428-B3FE-015F7EC92A61@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-ISI-4-43-8-MailScanner: Found to be clean
X-MailScanner-From: touch@isi.edu
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/banana/HBlzbxVIHRsvUj6WRqWvvKI5-UE>
Cc: Mingui Zhang <zhangmingui@huawei.com>, "banana@ietf.org" <banana@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Banana] diff (banana load distribution, next-hop selection of multipath)
X-BeenThere: banana@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Bandwidth Aggregation for interNet Access: Discussion of bandwidth aggregation solutions based on IETF technologies." <banana.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/banana>, <mailto:banana-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/banana/>
List-Post: <mailto:banana@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:banana-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/banana>, <mailto:banana-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 04 Feb 2017 17:57:48 -0000


On 2/4/2017 9:49 AM, Margaret Cullen wrote:
> Hi Joe,
> ,,,
> There are all sorts of devices that are routers AND include other sorts of traffic shaping or loadsharing.  There are even some routers deployed today that can share a single flow across multiple access links, recombining the traffic in a provider network.   However, there is no standard that I am aware of for doing this, so both ends need to be provided by a single vendor.

OK, so this would be about picking a standard for coordinating the
endpoints, tunneling with sequence numbers, and (maybe) the "ECMP"
sharing alg.

I'm just trying to scope the problem. Right now, it looks a lot like it
might also include trying to use multiple heterogeneous links without a
cooperating party upstream where the traffic merges, which is quite a
different problem.

IMO, it'd be useful to be clear about that scope.

Joe

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email