IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [CCAMP] draft-ietf-ccamp-te-metric-recording-02

John E Drake <jdrake@juniper.net> Fri, 09 August 2013 16:39 UTC

Return-Path: <jdrake@juniper.net>
X-Original-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC12E21F9C8B for <ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 9 Aug 2013 09:39:37 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.073
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.073 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.527, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 53K7dA7nFcz8 for <ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 9 Aug 2013 09:39:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from db9outboundpool.messaging.microsoft.com (mail-db9lp0253.outbound.messaging.microsoft.com [213.199.154.253]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7181611E81B8 for <ccamp@ietf.org>; Fri, 9 Aug 2013 09:32:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail22-db9-R.bigfish.com (10.174.16.235) by DB9EHSOBE035.bigfish.com (10.174.14.98) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.1.225.22; Fri, 9 Aug 2013 16:32:38 +0000
Received: from mail22-db9 (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail22-db9-R.bigfish.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 51C772400F2; Fri, 9 Aug 2013 16:32:38 +0000 (UTC)
X-Forefront-Antispam-Report: CIP:157.56.240.101; KIP:(null); UIP:(null); IPV:NLI; H:BL2PRD0510HT004.namprd05.prod.outlook.com; RD:none; EFVD:NLI
X-SpamScore: -21
X-BigFish: PS-21(zz9371I542I1432Izz1f42h208ch1ee6h1de0h1fdah2073h1202h1e76h1d1ah1d2ah1fc6hzz8275ch1de098h1033IL8275bh8275dh1de097hz2fh2a8h668h839hd24hf0ah1288h12a5h12a9h12bdh137ah13b6h1441h1504h1537h153bh162dh1631h1758h18e1h1946h19b5h19ceh1ad9h1b0ah1d07h1d0ch1d2eh1d3fh1de9h1dfeh1dffh1e1dh1fe8h9a9j1155h)
Received-SPF: pass (mail22-db9: domain of juniper.net designates 157.56.240.101 as permitted sender) client-ip=157.56.240.101; envelope-from=jdrake@juniper.net; helo=BL2PRD0510HT004.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ; .outlook.com ;
X-Forefront-Antispam-Report-Untrusted: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(13464003)(189002)(199002)(51704005)(377454003)(33646001)(4396001)(56776001)(76786001)(74876001)(74662001)(76482001)(54316002)(47446002)(74502001)(53806001)(83072001)(74366001)(16406001)(54356001)(81342001)(31966008)(59766001)(77982001)(79102001)(63696002)(46102001)(65816001)(76576001)(80022001)(51856001)(19580395003)(74316001)(76796001)(69226001)(80976001)(19580405001)(50986001)(83322001)(56816003)(49866001)(74706001)(47976001)(81542001)(77096001)(81686001)(47736001)(66066001)(24736002); DIR:OUT; SFP:; SCL:1; SRVR:BY2PR05MB144; H:BY2PR05MB142.namprd05.prod.outlook.com; CLIP:66.129.224.50; RD:InfoNoRecords; MX:1; A:1; LANG:en;
Received: from mail22-db9 (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mail22-db9 (MessageSwitch) id 1376065955450042_4926; Fri, 9 Aug 2013 16:32:35 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from DB9EHSMHS030.bigfish.com (unknown [10.174.16.253]) by mail22-db9.bigfish.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 698043A0047; Fri, 9 Aug 2013 16:32:35 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from BL2PRD0510HT004.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (157.56.240.101) by DB9EHSMHS030.bigfish.com (10.174.14.40) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.16.227.3; Fri, 9 Aug 2013 16:32:34 +0000
Received: from BY2PR05MB144.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.242.39.147) by BL2PRD0510HT004.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.255.100.39) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.16.341.1; Fri, 9 Aug 2013 16:32:33 +0000
Received: from BY2PR05MB142.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.242.39.144) by BY2PR05MB144.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.242.39.147) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.731.16; Fri, 9 Aug 2013 16:32:31 +0000
Received: from BY2PR05MB142.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([169.254.12.229]) by BY2PR05MB142.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([169.254.12.57]) with mapi id 15.00.0731.000; Fri, 9 Aug 2013 16:32:31 +0000
From: John E Drake <jdrake@juniper.net>
To: "Zafar Ali (zali)" <zali@cisco.com>, "Matt Hartley (mhartley)" <mhartley@cisco.com>, "CCAMP (ccamp@ietf.org)" <ccamp@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [CCAMP] draft-ietf-ccamp-te-metric-recording-02
Thread-Index: Ac6UeCOcyiZvNP7VTj6v1XoohGG+nwAmJqLQAAErlUAAAuecgAAA0JXQ
Date: Fri, 09 Aug 2013 16:32:30 +0000
Message-ID: <8bc1c2885c4a406a9ebcc0a8edad3f2e@BY2PR05MB142.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
References: <925f76c29b1a44d896e38962c33085f0@BY2PR05MB142.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> <B6585D85A128FD47857D0FD58D8120D30EA01AC9@xmb-rcd-x14.cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <B6585D85A128FD47857D0FD58D8120D30EA01AC9@xmb-rcd-x14.cisco.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [66.129.224.50]
x-forefront-prvs: 0933E9FD8D
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-2"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: juniper.net
X-FOPE-CONNECTOR: Id%0$Dn%*$RO%0$TLS%0$FQDN%$TlsDn%
Subject: Re: [CCAMP] draft-ietf-ccamp-te-metric-recording-02
X-BeenThere: ccamp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion list for the CCAMP working group <ccamp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ccamp>, <mailto:ccamp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ccamp>
List-Post: <mailto:ccamp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ccamp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ccamp>, <mailto:ccamp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 09 Aug 2013 16:39:38 -0000

Zafar,

Given that a client has no idea what the TE metric it receives from the server network means, how exactly does this work?

Yours Irrespectively,

John

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Zafar Ali (zali) [mailto:zali@cisco.com]
> Sent: Friday, August 09, 2013 8:54 AM
> To: John E Drake; Matt Hartley (mhartley); CCAMP (ccamp@ietf.org)
> Subject: Re: [CCAMP] draft-ietf-ccamp-te-metric-recording-02
> 
> Hi John:
> 
> Please see in-line.
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Regards Š Zafar
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: "jdrake@juniper.net" <jdrake@juniper.net>
> Date: Friday, August 9, 2013 11:41 AM
> To: "Matt Hartley (mhartley)" <mhartley@cisco.com>, "ccamp@ietf.org"
> <ccamp@ietf.org>
> Subject: Re: [CCAMP] draft-ietf-ccamp-te-metric-recording-02
> 
> >
> >
> >Yours Irrespectively,
> >
> >John
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Matt Hartley (mhartley) [mailto:mhartley@cisco.com]
> >> Sent: Friday, August 09, 2013 8:07 AM
> >> To: John E Drake; CCAMP (ccamp@ietf.org)
> >> Cc: Matt Hartley (mhartley)
> >> Subject: RE: draft-ietf-ccamp-te-metric-recording-02
> >>
> >> John,
> >>
> >> The point you raise is a good one, but I don't think it has much to
> >>do with this  draft.
> >
> >JD:  This draft is proposing that the cumulative TE metric associated
> >with the establishment of an LSP in the server network be passed to the
> >client LSP endpoints.  My point is that this is probably useless at best.
> 
> This is all controlled by policy at the client layer and depends on the use cases
> of independent vs. dependent costs.
> 
> >
> >>
> >> > I think there is a basic issue with this draft, which is that the
> >> > server network manages its own TE metrics and those metrics almost
> >> > certainly have nothing in common with the TE metrics used in a
> >> > given
> >>client
> >> network.
> >>
> >> So if I understand you correctly, you're just saying that "cost" is a
> >>somewhat  vague thing that may mean different things to different
> >>network operators?
> >> This is true sometimes, but that doesn't mean it will always be the
> >>case.
> >
> >JD:  You have no way of knowing whether there is any congruence between
> >the TE metrics in the server network and the TE metrics in a client
> >network.
> 
> This is all controlled by policy at the client layer.
> ><snip>
> 
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email