[Detnet-dp-dt] Section 4.1 added (DP solution requirements)

[Balázs Varga A <[e-mail]>]

Hi,
Section 4.1 added on the GitHub.
Cheers
Bala'zs


-----Original Message-----
From: Jouni Korhonen [mailto:[e-mail]] 
Sent: Monday, March 06, 2017 7:23 PM
To: Balázs Varga A <[e-mail]>om>; Loa Andersson <[e-mail]>
Cc: [e-mail]; [e-mail]
Subject: Re: [Detnet-dp-dt] about identity labels.. was Re: new versions of my slides

Balazs,

Your proposed Section 4.x would definitely be good to have. I am not too much for Section 4.y since I do not see it would not be needed in the final document, except for the definitions that should go to Section 2.

Regarding the two choices we have now I just add prologue text and describe (graphically both). The logic of the "identity label/tag" is mostly the same independent of the location in the stack. The processing is of course different.

- Jouni

3/6/2017, 9:49 AM, Balázs Varga A kirjoitti:
> Hi Jouni,
>
>
>
> just for clarification: Do we intend to list all options in the draft ???
>
> They all have pros and cons ...
>
>
>
> Anyway I think we need a structure like below in the draft for example
>
> in section 4. Is it inline with your intention? Shall I prepare some 
> text
>
> around this items for the call on Wednesday?
>
>
>
> *4.x DP solution requirements*
>
> List of prerequisites for a proper solution on an x-PE:
>
> 1, to distinguish PWs going through (operation label-swap) and PWs 
> need DetNet serving (e.g., FRER)
>
> 2, to handle PW-label collisions (without major implementation
> difficulties)
>
> 3, to work with both centralized control and distributed control 
> (signaling)
>
>
>
> *4.y DP solution toolset*
>
> Description of the toolset discussed so far:
>
> A, L-label: additional label between t-label and PW-label
>
> B, different PW-labels per segment: similar to the MS-PW label 
> allocation mechanism
>
> C, e2e PW label: no change of the PW-label (same PW-label value 
> between T-PE nodes)
>
> D, d-id label: additional label used as T-PE identification
>
> E, Flow-ID outside of the label stack
>
>
>
> Cheers
>
> Bala'zs
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Detnet-dp-dt [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of 
> Loa Andersson
> Sent: Monday, March 06, 2017 3:07 AM
> To: Jouni Korhonen <[e-mail]>
> Cc: [e-mail]; [e-mail]
> Subject: Re: [Detnet-dp-dt] about identity labels.. was Re: new 
> versions of my slides
>
>
>
> Jouni,
>
>
>
> On 2017-03-06 07:36, Jouni Korhonen wrote:
>
>>
>
> <snip>
>
>>>
>
>>> - global as the special purpose labels, seems unlikely
>
>>> - global as unique with in the domain, though we know there is a
>
>>> scaling  problem
>
>>> - global for one sender, not that different from d-id, other that 
>>> the
>
>>> placment in the stack
>
>>>
>
>>> ???
>
>>
>
>> In my small mind I reasoned it to be unique within one domain. Since
> the identity would now be 32 bits (there is no need to restrict it to 
> 20 bits since it is part of the _encapsulation_header_ not the label 
> stack), the scaling concern is more relaxed. Assuming each node in the 
> domain would like to be able to name 4k unique detnet flows of their 
> own then the domain could host 1M such detnet nodes.. not too bad for 
> one domain.
>
>
>
> My earlier calculations estimated that we would have about the number 
> of PWs between any pair of T-DetNet-PEs would be about 400 and the 
> number T-DetNet-PEs about 1000.
>
>
>
> 32 bits is  4 000 millions, so there is ample number of flow id's even 
> if we would have to configure a range on each T-DetNet-PE.
>
>
>
> So you look at the flow-id and then compare the CW/Seq #, right?
>
>
>
> Now, range configuration is a kludge, can we find a way to avoid it, 
> maybe d-pw + node-id would work, all this would have to happen in the 
> context of the (outgoing) d-pw anyway, right?
>
>
>
> /Loa
>
>
>
>>
>
>> - Jouni
>
>>
>
>>
>
>>
>
>>
>
>>>
>
>>> /Loa
>
>>>>
>
>>>> Carlos
>
>>>>
>
>>>>> - Jouni
>
>>>>>
>
>>>>
>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>
>>>> Detnet-dp-dt mailing list
>
>>>> [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
>
>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/detnet-dp-dt
>
>>>>
>
>>>
>
>>> --
>
>>>
>
>>>
>
>>> Loa Andersson                        email: [e-mail]
> <mailto:[e-mail]>
>
>>> Senior MPLS Expert                          [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
>
>>> Huawei Technologies (consultant)     phone: [phone]
>
>>
>
>> _______________________________________________
>
>> Detnet-dp-dt mailing list
>
>> [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
>
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/detnet-dp-dt
>
>>
>
>
>
> --
>
>
>
>
>
> Loa Andersson                        email: [e-mail]
> <mailto:[e-mail]>
>
> Senior MPLS Expert                          [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
>
> Huawei Technologies (consultant)     phone: [phone]
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> Detnet-dp-dt mailing list
>
> [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
>
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/detnet-dp-dt
>