Re: [irs-discuss] IRS Problem Statement Posted

Jamal Hadi Salim <hadi@mojatatu.com> Tue, 31 July 2012 16:41 UTC

Return-Path: <hadi@mojatatu.com>
X-Original-To: irs-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: irs-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6ED1821F869E for <irs-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 31 Jul 2012 09:41:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.841
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.841 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.136, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 oYA0KGNn4DXs for <irs-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 31 Jul 2012 09:41:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ob0-f172.google.com (mail-ob0-f172.google.com [209.85.214.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 78D8D21F867F for <irs-discuss@ietf.org>; Tue, 31 Jul 2012 09:41:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by obbwc20 with SMTP id wc20so12382158obb.31 for <irs-discuss@ietf.org>; Tue, 31 Jul 2012 09:41:06 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type:x-gm-message-state; bh=RLITcF5MFXs3XhYce2IVH1NFG0sSDqnu7uv8Mw/PvuQ=; b=N6eGzAYe+m8FOI03/uVe8r1bGIPTeSa5jHlgksTtjj0WyPRG3te4fmG0280ZGfcrIF vQWErIz4jjlNtx5l7zkWePGTi93ejz3YpzkS2q1vvSVlJGYgt2CN7WnL1Lbv6SKeRSbV zp3/OrsohjNVeWtRSUDmQI1Gx1CpX9pQZhNbAVfYKf9VNTHGLXtrovE1v4SBluQURYja sl5JOP7yuTc35F0P1MyaGfg1jdFPqtOdkL6akxZxdtO2zUhyidR6JTGZ3oT6zIP28+gI vL6cefB64AUxmsVDHJfXOguN5l0jCqHt6ckimRc25mOUydbzy+WxGJjUWMJXtZ8hJUfW brRw==
Received: by 10.182.117.71 with SMTP id kc7mr24159864obb.62.1343752866148; Tue, 31 Jul 2012 09:41:06 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.60.134.137 with HTTP; Tue, 31 Jul 2012 09:40:45 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAG4d1rfdL-Q7oXCK_=tFS+Qad3GEoWUoA8S5NdYmFzRyJ=3w1g@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CC3C1DEF.28D6%tnadeau@juniper.net> <CE39F5249064D946AA3535E63A014619656FB98703@EUSAACMS0703.eamcs.ericsson.se> <CAG4d1rdS8pa=2cQFhrrV2ZRqdp91Zwf_GVMcWA7xFNFf7Mgh5w@mail.gmail.com> <CE39F5249064D946AA3535E63A014619656FB9874A@EUSAACMS0703.eamcs.ericsson.se> <CAG4d1rfCqjjPBJT46HYY7hCH0zw1iSx_-BfpR20vB=Q+pWEPaQ@mail.gmail.com> <CE39F5249064D946AA3535E63A014619656FB98A72@EUSAACMS0703.eamcs.ericsson.se> <CAG4d1rfdL-Q7oXCK_=tFS+Qad3GEoWUoA8S5NdYmFzRyJ=3w1g@mail.gmail.com>
From: Jamal Hadi Salim <hadi@mojatatu.com>
Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2012 12:40:45 -0400
Message-ID: <CAAFAkD8YYpV=FjozJVABYHr9uBvdEK==ZjP5JNf4wjC65-8D=g@mail.gmail.com>
To: Alia Atlas <akatlas@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQljFcmFhPYFnMjDZBxhNxafrCOK6ziv7kFHCaW22zDdiu9PzXMeiIROUp0+wVZJk7WUhQK0
Cc: Thomas Nadeau <tnadeau@juniper.net>, James Kempf <james.kempf@ericsson.com>, "irs-discuss@ietf.org" <irs-discuss@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [irs-discuss] IRS Problem Statement Posted
X-BeenThere: irs-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Interface to The Internet Routing System \(IRS\)" <irs-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/irs-discuss>, <mailto:irs-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/irs-discuss>
List-Post: <mailto:irs-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:irs-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/irs-discuss>, <mailto:irs-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2012 16:41:07 -0000

On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 12:30 PM, Alia Atlas <akatlas@gmail.com>; wrote:

> This is one of the key differences - ForCES is about programming the
> forwarding plane.  IRS is about interfaces to the routing system - the
> lowest it goes is to the RIB layer.  IMHO, this gives good control and
> abstraction - no need to model forwarding plane differences.  That's
> what the router OS is for.

Ok, guess i am going to have say something then;->
While ForCES did start with intent to do control-datapath interfacing,
given that:  we have a data model (and language); a protocol that is
agnostic of what the entity being configured is - over the last few
years it has been used for anything that can be modelled using
the ForCES language. Basically model it as an LFB and you are good
to go.
I am actually presenting on how we do parts of the FE management
plane via ForCES at a session today. In our implementation, this
is how we do remote debug settings, change syslog levels etc.
Nothing to do with a FIB table programming etc...

cheers,
jamal