Re: [irs-discuss] An idea ... MTR + IRS

The requirement for topology export is DEFINITELY part of IRS.  It is
a crucial piece for a meaningful feedback loop.   Clearly there are
existing technology pieces that may have a role to play as well.

Alia

On Tue, Aug 7, 2012 at 10:40 PM, Tina TSOU <Tina.Tsou.Zouting@huawei.com> wrote:
> Oh, I meant in Nitin's description in the mailing list, there are 3 sub-layers of a orchestrator.
> Top layer: Northboundapi
> Middle layer: IRS
> Bottom layer: topo export
>
> Therefore, the topo export is not part of IRS. It is another layer which sits below IRS.
>
> Tina
>
> On Aug 7, 2012, at 5:30 PM, "Alia Atlas" <akatlas@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Topology export is definitely under the umbrella of IRS - and we are
>> actively starting to think about the associated requirements and
>> use-cases.   Feel free to contribute - on the list or towards drafts!
>>
>> Alia
>>
>> On Tue, Aug 7, 2012 at 6:23 PM, Tina TSOU <Tina.Tsou.Zouting@huawei.com> wrote:
>>> Nitin said topo information export is on the sub-layer under IRS.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Tina
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> From: irs-discuss-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:irs-discuss-bounces@ietf.org] On
>>> Behalf Of Edward Crabbe
>>> Sent: Tuesday, August 07, 2012 3:20 PM
>>> To: robert@raszuk.net
>>> Cc: irs-discuss@ietf.org
>>>
>>>
>>> Subject: Re: [irs-discuss] An idea ... MTR + IRS
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Robert,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> If topo information export is in scope (which I believe it is) and PBR route
>>> injection with nh recursion to rib (and thus connected routes) is in scope
>>> (which I'm quite sure it is) then yes, this is in scope.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Although I'm not sure what it has to do with OF /OF controllers? ;P
>>>
>>> On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 5:02 PM, Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> This morning Scott mentioned that he would like to use IRS to shut down all
>>> protocols and just be able to write to RIB. Now James said that he would
>>> like to get a network topology as "every OpenFlow controller requires this"
>>>
>>> Both connected together resulted in an idea of using multi-topology-routing
>>> where your base topology discovers physical link connectivity graph while
>>> other topologies could be programmed by external entities example: OF
>>> controllers or any other external to routers network intelligence oracles to
>>> deliver actual services ?
>>>
>>> Would that be in scope of IRS effort ? If so what would be the proposed
>>> "write to RIB" set of protocols ? Would you support OF 1.3 even if one would
>>> be happy to lock such topologies only to software/programmable switching
>>> paths ?
>>>
>>> Best rgs,
>>> R.
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> irs-discuss mailing list
>>> irs-discuss@ietf.org
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/irs-discuss
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> irs-discuss mailing list
>>> irs-discuss@ietf.org
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/irs-discuss
>>>