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

Alia Atlas <akatlas@gmail.com> Wed, 08 August 2012 00:30 UTC

Return-Path: <akatlas@gmail.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 EF73821F8540 for <irs-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 7 Aug 2012 17:30:30 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.555
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.555 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.044, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
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 BCrxPq8-EyRl for <irs-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 7 Aug 2012 17:30:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-yx0-f172.google.com (mail-yx0-f172.google.com [209.85.213.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3627021F847D for <irs-discuss@ietf.org>; Tue, 7 Aug 2012 17:30:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by yenm5 with SMTP id m5so227074yen.31 for <irs-discuss@ietf.org>; Tue, 07 Aug 2012 17:30:26 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=h2FeWML4srwc84AtaWXnhW6GMfvnCIywkV19IBGT0Kw=; b=rUK0veiKCY/PuEw9csFyqd6AoRnqHsPGX9QBBRM7xRNZddvbrL+yGfjOvR6RIorLu7 pUNTRmVktuyi8H5nK+z/ZQd3KdBWioOySg3wAMmyOqVk7obH13uWud8kWxlNAkvBsH9b 0MGPShG65B6oXmOJwOtvJvAAROYpOBMzUvsHYAt7PpzUZmXhmMZNVDyBvVBNnKiIm9B0 QPvbhONAZBeYgrpngLSy7+81MPbCUhLA3WBflw4BqocL9JbzlAVr+ook5xLkAyiN3KgY AWHXZxJS4hMH2Pw1TwgOkzweAP9dzZh3HP4VIGGzcp21wqQZdjgGcgrjwwFXCL1TyK2i lw6g==
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.42.140.4 with SMTP id i4mr12889065icu.18.1344385826363; Tue, 07 Aug 2012 17:30:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.50.91.135 with HTTP; Tue, 7 Aug 2012 17:30:26 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <C0E0A32284495243BDE0AC8A066631A81589DBDC@dfweml513-mbs.china.huawei.com>
References: <501B150C.9080304@raszuk.net> <CACKN6JFMxAiF63XPyUtGxE85iA1WpCe9S_y=yB684HA=57OsgQ@mail.gmail.com> <C0E0A32284495243BDE0AC8A066631A81589DBDC@dfweml513-mbs.china.huawei.com>
Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2012 20:30:26 -0400
Message-ID: <CAG4d1rfKmEeTTuKAtuKzhHUwW47_1w1U4QfC=cffzUP01mJTEA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Alia Atlas <akatlas@gmail.com>
To: Tina TSOU <Tina.Tsou.Zouting@huawei.com>, Edward Crabbe <edc@google.com>, "robert@raszuk.net" <robert@raszuk.net>, "irs-discuss@ietf.org" <irs-discuss@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Subject: Re: [irs-discuss] An idea ... MTR + IRS
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: Wed, 08 Aug 2012 00:30:31 -0000

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
>