IETF Logo Mail Archive

[Detnet-dp-dt] an attempt on math for global pools of labels

Loa Andersson <loa@pi.nu> Wed, 22 February 2017 10:59 UTC

Return-Path: <loa@pi.nu>
X-Original-To: detnet-dp-dt@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: detnet-dp-dt@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6FA781296BD for <detnet-dp-dt@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 02:59:41 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, 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 XBYnZCWnZZEz for <detnet-dp-dt@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 02:59:40 -0800 (PST)
Received: from pipi.pi.nu (pipi.pi.nu [83.168.239.141]) (using TLSv1.1 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 047A112968C for <detnet-dp-dt@ietf.org>; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 02:59:40 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.1.11] (unknown [122.52.25.23]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: loa@pi.nu) by pipi.pi.nu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 120EF18013BE for <detnet-dp-dt@ietf.org>; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 11:59:37 +0100 (CET)
From: Loa Andersson <loa@pi.nu>
To: "detnet-dp-dt@ietf.org" <detnet-dp-dt@ietf.org>
Message-ID: <d3c06c89-daee-9a8f-c6d9-24e125f8adac@pi.nu>
Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2017 18:59:33 +0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.7.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/detnet-dp-dt/tb9Vgvdq5BdfsjawlkV2s0QQ_Ic>
Subject: [Detnet-dp-dt] an attempt on math for global pools of labels
X-BeenThere: detnet-dp-dt@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: DetNet WG Data Plane Design Team <detnet-dp-dt.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/detnet-dp-dt>, <mailto:detnet-dp-dt-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/detnet-dp-dt/>
List-Post: <mailto:detnet-dp-dt@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:detnet-dp-dt-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/detnet-dp-dt>, <mailto:detnet-dp-dt-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2017 10:59:41 -0000

Folks,

Figures are not scientific, just off the top of my head.

Assume that we have 400 edge nodes and the receiving and sending
capability of each node is 2400 G and the average DetNet flow is 1G,
and the traffic matrix is close to even.

This means that each node will need 2400 Labels to manage as a pool for
the d-pw labels if we go with the idea to make them unique for the
entire domain. 400 * 2400 = 960 000 which brings us close to exhausting 
the label space.

I real life I don't think that the average speed is as high as 1G, if it
were "only" 500 M, the label space would be exhausted.

/Loa
-- 


Loa Andersson                        email: loa@mail01.huawei.com
Senior MPLS Expert                          loa@pi.nu
Huawei Technologies (consultant)     phone: +46 739 81 21 64

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email