Re: [i2rs] Question and new use case

Jeffrey Haas <jhaas@pfrc.org> Thu, 05 June 2014 20:33 UTC

Return-Path: <jhaas@slice.pfrc.org>
X-Original-To: i2rs@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: i2rs@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B94B01A02B5 for <i2rs@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 5 Jun 2014 13:33:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.619
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.619 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, IP_NOT_FRIENDLY=0.334, J_CHICKENPOX_14=0.6, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.651, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=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 p-wsh50xESEJ for <i2rs@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 5 Jun 2014 13:33:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from slice.pfrc.org (slice.pfrc.org [67.207.130.108]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F3621A0325 for <i2rs@ietf.org>; Thu, 5 Jun 2014 13:32:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by slice.pfrc.org (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 2820DC138; Thu, 5 Jun 2014 16:32:22 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Thu, 05 Jun 2014 16:32:22 -0400
From: Jeffrey Haas <jhaas@pfrc.org>
To: ramki Krishnan <ramk@Brocade.com>
Message-ID: <20140605203222.GQ13606@pfrc>
References: <C7634EB63EFD984A978DFB46EA5174F2C00500608D@HQ1-EXCH01.corp.brocade.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <C7634EB63EFD984A978DFB46EA5174F2C00500608D@HQ1-EXCH01.corp.brocade.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/i2rs/KdeRIjcPNFUCA0NuZTAUYKPMAQs
Cc: Anton Smith <anton.smith@ericsson.com>, "i2rs@ietf.org" <i2rs@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [i2rs] Question and new use case
X-BeenThere: i2rs@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Interface to The Internet Routing System \(IRS\)" <i2rs.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/i2rs>, <mailto:i2rs-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/i2rs/>
List-Post: <mailto:i2rs@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:i2rs-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs>, <mailto:i2rs-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 05 Jun 2014 20:33:07 -0000

Anton,

On Tue, Jun 03, 2014 at 10:42:25PM -0700, ramki Krishnan wrote:
> Hi Anton,
> 
> The draft below addresses the use case you are mentioning. Would love to have your comments.
> 
> http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-krishnan-i2rs-large-flow-use-case/?include_text=1


Additionally, some of this is covered in the service chaining draft as well
as the PBR info model.

A review of existing drafts might prove informative:

http://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/i2rs/
> 
> Thanks,
> Ramki
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: i2rs [mailto:i2rs-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Anton Smith
> Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2014 1:51 AM
> To: i2rs@ietf.org
> Subject: [i2rs] Question and new usecase
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> I have a question and a potential usecase. I was reading the charter today and it mentioned some fairly specific usecases. I've been thinking of another fairly specific class of usecase that I had hoped I2RS would deliver.
> 
> The question is, where do you raise discussion on a new usecase, is it here on the list?
> 
> The usecase itself is about flow installation or basically non-destination based routing and forwarding. Imagine a router participating in an IP/MPLS domain, which is running for example multiple L3VPNs, L2VPNs, or even just plain L3 routing.
> 
> It would be desirable to be able to dynamically push down new policy based rules to an access interface such that as traffic ingresses the node it can be redirected to either services (like an L3VPN context) or forwarded, based on whatever can be filtered/matched in the incoming packet.
> 
> In essence policy based forwarding (aka PBR), but allowing I2RS to push down the policies (match criteria, action, etc.), edit them, remove them, and so forth. This could allow for instance, based off orchestration layer decisions, the dynamic redirection or separation of traffic that would have been previously grouped together, and not restricted to just QoS separation but allowing path separation or service redirection. 
> 
> Regards,
> Anton
> 
> _______________________________________________
> i2rs mailing list
> i2rs@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs
> 
> _______________________________________________
> i2rs mailing list
> i2rs@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs