Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments
Edward Crabbe <edc@google.com> Wed, 15 August 2012 18:57 UTC
Return-Path: <edc@google.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 7395D21E8034 for <irs-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 15 Aug 2012 11:57:33 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.837
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.837 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.139, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, 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 sfFWlgMOj3rD for <irs-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 15 Aug 2012 11:57:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-gh0-f172.google.com (mail-gh0-f172.google.com [209.85.160.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C450921F8702 for <irs-discuss@ietf.org>; Wed, 15 Aug 2012 11:57:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by ghbg16 with SMTP id g16so2326904ghb.31 for <irs-discuss@ietf.org>; Wed, 15 Aug 2012 11:57:31 -0700 (PDT)
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-system-of-record; bh=k4N6X4DgWySkURXbXvTD2WQKZATAIdxBPuXG1FmwmGI=; b=GO4Ixjo7epo6gqopn36u10GcrMwl0mP/04vaFAe7cL2hJcF2F2cnOO25fi4tgXfKCO A3whD4B39im66fnnQrOjlQY14WLWiWoI8BYxFPhMtMy8k9NIdJ9PoxsxRbsIsY0ARH0d wBWoCWG3hUnK/h+Nss8nLAmu5PC/dqjEnnamkqHe68ViF+sFRgokOCUJpxadQPEUBkgm SnnoS0/BpsuVept1OlNbswIBbCVJXf21kCbICksyIGixs6riWFf6XIPHiqHThYxCTlrp hLaH/3kif9om4KZKnvPN2wSQc+mh2uKvfn8Ffw+YYOSMDYNQIG76NrG4nWqYUN8serru c0eQ==
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-system-of-record:x-gm-message-state; bh=k4N6X4DgWySkURXbXvTD2WQKZATAIdxBPuXG1FmwmGI=; b=hZeIVkMPhTBo3lLktmO0zMZOyluyHJ48cN8Ou0wewXnKpc+EzLe9YBRY+kxyHrmgMp EujbzPHffDDopQ08Xm4a6Ddrz9Alx/+fUnue4LN3eiRFlG6VMtzwivmb+VB4OAWc5a4H JHJ1yZO3tF/dAru/SjjxX5+FosCreX6uPM6+sNiuyWZZ2ZycHR0JUN8bAu76JYjglSek fm4qxq1MWjh5IwQ3ICHCScCmdUmAXNIlj6wusG5w9/vXrJoYXlvnP6+xCFgWpEyqBwhc Cp3KPQDB4ea7ESb5D5trHKWo92D7WyFkXwMZVjQO7+tmbwl9I6zcvJu/bX6dlfaw2OLN 9fww==
Received: by 10.50.10.197 with SMTP id k5mr19623245igb.39.1345057050677; Wed, 15 Aug 2012 11:57:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.50.10.197 with SMTP id k5mr19623206igb.39.1345057049862; Wed, 15 Aug 2012 11:57:29 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.50.237.67 with HTTP; Wed, 15 Aug 2012 11:56:49 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <A3C4E51A53661B4EBEE7C5F5E6FCDEB5025AB94FE8E4@USEXCHANGE.corp.extremenetworks.com>
References: <812700A304640D4292205D5E83FC59E1061C211D@p-embx01-eq.jnpr.net> <CAG=JvvjYk_E6+Qdidyyjc5oDss9HeA2aq2pt5ciQeX06fuiWsQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAG4d1reLL2_4KRb6yseJK9WTB47YzumMBGdu+UwcOWXxmE0M8Q@mail.gmail.com> <CAG=JvvjVhGsVcSzEFxDKKfNckQxgQiWeezWvwpcoAOSgOP--Nw@mail.gmail.com> <CAG4d1rd_p6x_+PsHWtsYU=oOCT-GnmnZNL+MHcJf4NEG5boP7A@mail.gmail.com> <B37E6A2CE5957F4E83C1D9845A0FFE38014A33BC4A@MDWEXGMB02.ciena.com> <CAG4d1reWGjUU-z=9Gx_MvetAWF6wM8oUMpQRc9hxOg1MU37X_w@mail.gmail.com> <A3C4E51A53661B4EBEE7C5F5E6FCDEB5025AB94FE6D2@USEXCHANGE.corp.extremenetworks.com> <CAG4d1rfD8_0WgzRqH-OVAxfn1RYNfY_ynwkcmqN3MBYyrn5TnQ@mail.gmail.com> <3512BB31280C39448A9880F61DD54CEB09C07E@xmb-aln-x09.cisco.com> <CAG4d1rcvk1RmRmrpCwiAGx9s0v3X9aPECdeF1Wz7WSuYwzdFKA@mail.gmail.com> <CACKN6JH8eiYty3QOZ+E5Nt0wO3nYn87yB3pKixJK-3dnaOXfLQ@mail.gmail.com> <CACKN6JFMZqOnHU=vEkx8WxwSLjg5MYY=-VoJ7uOt8SAzvbAT6Q@mail.gmail.com> <A3C4E51A53661B4EBEE7C5F5E6FCDEB5025AB94FE847@USEXCHANGE.corp.extremenetworks.com> <CACKN6JFkzS7NLTWQOoP9UjtZQTFK5PTNrc6Ay_GZJuLaxt6R+w@mail.gmail.com> <A3C4E51A53661B4EBEE7C5F5E6FCDEB5025AB94FE8E4@USEXCHANGE.corp.extremenetworks.com>
From: Edward Crabbe <edc@google.com>
Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2012 11:56:49 -0700
Message-ID: <CACKN6JFQ3V6DMwEj5a888BaeK3zaU9Ni=ceFm=4zN0yPRq2KDg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Olen Stokes <ostokes@extremenetworks.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="14dae9340929a8e16e04c7527f05"
X-System-Of-Record: true
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmJIJG+yoVSKlOrmAXH3dYtPgOKGglorihWpyez5Q/XlIXNYds76omYb3YRfAoHrnWOcL1tTJmYlZXJFFUEAM6911ZjN7biEULDEddMDLytkU54d3UxDTbEeGer6kIeup9STVkzYJIWR8uqelOJv/vGQUBqCznS9lfW+4/EA/L4MD7H0fQSNyjgUAQVFJd10qynTHIj
Cc: "irs-discuss@ietf.org" <irs-discuss@ietf.org>, "David Lake (dlake)" <dlake@cisco.com>, Alia Atlas <akatlas@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments
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, 15 Aug 2012 18:57:33 -0000
Olen, Nope, I'm using it in a very general sense. It could just as easily describe a PCE. On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 11:38 AM, Olen Stokes <ostokes@extremenetworks.com>wrote: > I understand that. Sorry, I should have been more specific. I am trying > to understand if usage of the word “controller” on this list implies a > reference to any existing description such as “Open Flow Controller”.**** > > ** ** > > Olen**** > > ** ** > > *From:* Edward Crabbe [mailto:edc@google.com] > *Sent:* Wednesday, August 15, 2012 2:20 PM > *To:* Olen Stokes > *Cc:* Alia Atlas; David Lake (dlake); irs-discuss@ietf.org > > *Subject:* Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments**** > > ** ** > > The software (interacting with the 'applications' and) generating the > actual PDUs understood by the NEs. **** > > ** ** > > On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 10:30 AM, Olen Stokes <ostokes@extremenetworks.com> > wrote:**** > > Thanks. Can you also give us what you mean by “controller”. **** > > **** > > Olen**** > > **** > > *From:* Edward Crabbe [mailto:edc@google.com] > *Sent:* Wednesday, August 15, 2012 1:24 PM > *To:* Alia Atlas > *Cc:* David Lake (dlake); Olen Stokes; irs-discuss@ietf.org**** > > > *Subject:* Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments**** > > **** > > s/wg/pre-BOF proto-wg :P/g **** > > On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 10:22 AM, Edward Crabbe <edc@google.com> wrote:*** > * > > +1 Alia. There's been a lot of confusion over this term. Having gone a > few rounds with folks on this one in other forums, I'll point out that what > most people mean by application (myself included) is some set of control > software (a scheduler, a path optimizer etc) that provides instructions to > the controller, which are in turn translated to the appropriate PDUs.**** > > **** > > Having 'end user' applications request/make changes to forwarding state > without an intermediate broker/aggregator acting on their behalf sounds > like a recipe for disaster for operational networks, or, as is more likely, > a quick hike to the protocol grave yard (followed by a long grave-side > party :P) for the wg. **** > > **** > > my 2c. **** > > **** > > On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 8:48 AM, Alia Atlas <akatlas@gmail.com> wrote:**** > > Hi David, > > We do need to clarify what is meant by an application. I would not > expect that real user-land applications would talk directly to routing > devices via IRS. I can see that going through an intermediary. The > IRS abstractions are unlikely to be as high-level as user-land > applications would want and the security and policy issues would get > exciting. > > Clarifying what applications are more in-scope initially is part of > where use-cases will help. Can you write up ones to > categorize/describe your thoughts? > > Alia**** > > > On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 11:40 AM, David Lake (dlake) <dlake@cisco.com> > wrote: > > As another newbie to this, I have some questions about "application > vendors." > > > > Who is the target audience here ? That will determine what > functionality and abstraction of the network we need to expose to that > "application." > > > > This presently appears to be a little confused - at least in my mind. > The draft talks very much as if the application we are addressing is an > OSS/BSS system, essentially provisioning from the domain owner. > > > > However, linking this to the wider goals of SDN as voiced by > customers/users at the first Open Network Summit, there appears to be a > desire for cross-domain and user-land application integration. > > > > At this level - as an example giving a content cache the ability to > ensure delivery of an HD video to an end user - the application will not be > interested in the underlying topology of the network; it will need to know > that application X can be delivered with parameters Y between reading from > the content store to delivery to the user's browser. How the stream > traverses the infrastructure is immaterial. > > > > Are we intending that IRS satisfies BOTH these requirements (i.e. for > ALL applications ?), or should we be more prescriptive about which > application space we are addressing ? > > > > Thanks > > > > David > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: irs-discuss-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:irs-discuss-bounces@ietf.org] > On Behalf Of Alia Atlas > > Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2012 7:23 AM > > To: Olen Stokes > > Cc: irs-discuss@ietf.org > > Subject: Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments > > > > I have not specifically heard from application vendors about this. > > My current plan is that we focus on a Use-Cases draft and define within > that some motivating use-cases that we agree are good first targets. Those > can drive which subset of functionality we focus on. > > > > More use-cases are, of course, quite welcome. Posting them to the > mailing list is a good first start. Russ White is starting the general > use-cases draft based on the three use-cases that he sent to the list. > > > > Alia > > > > On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 9:43 AM, Olen Stokes < > ostokes@extremenetworks.com> wrote: > >> Are there applications vendors out there that already have specific > requirements for what this " subset of the data-models for sub-interfaces" > should be? > >> > >> Olen > >> > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: irs-discuss-bounces@ietf.org > >> [mailto:irs-discuss-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Alia Atlas > >> Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2012 9:08 AM > >> To: Shah, Himanshu > >> Cc: Gert Grammel; irs-discuss@ietf.org; Lenny Giuliano; Thomas Nadeau; > >> Alia Atlas; Scott Whyte > >> Subject: Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments > >> > >> Hi Himanshu, > >> > >> Welcome. I agree that IRS isn't going to spring into being fully > >> formed - I expect that we'll focus on a subset of the data-models for > sub-interfaces along with an associated protocol (whether that is a new one > or extending an existing one). > >> > >> Alia > >> > >> On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 7:41 AM, Shah, Himanshu <hshah@ciena.com> > wrote: > >>> Newbie to this discussions list and have read only a last couple of > mails, so pardon the repeat if somebody has already raised the following as > a concern. > >>> > >>> I realize we are early in IRS architecture definition but one thing to > keep in mind is the user experience. > >>> We need to make sure that exposed interface to > >>> RIB/LFIB/FIB/IGPs/BGP/LSDBs etc etc provide a consistent predictive > action/response/events even when different implementations has varying > capabilities. > >>> > >>> At the moment it seems like a wild wild west. > >>> Perhaps IRS can be defined in phases starting with a simpler, limited > version.. > >>> > >>> Thanks, > >>> himanshu > >>> > >>> > >>> -----Original Message----- > >>> From: irs-discuss-bounces@ietf.org > >>> [mailto:irs-discuss-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Alia Atlas > >>> Sent: Monday, August 13, 2012 8:41 AM > >>> To: Scott Whyte > >>> Cc: Thomas Nadeau; Gert Grammel; Alia Atlas; Lenny Giuliano; > >>> irs-discuss@ietf.org > >>> Subject: Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments > >>> > >>> ...snip... > >>> > >>> On Fri, Aug 10, 2012 at 9:03 PM, Scott Whyte <swhyte@google.com> > wrote: > >>>> On Fri, Aug 10, 2012 at 5:16 PM, Alia Atlas <akatlas@gmail.com> > wrote: > >>> > >>>>> I do think it is important to have the RIB as an arbitration > mechanism > >>>>> on the device. Russ's suggestion that for the RIB sub-interface, > the > >>>>> IRS agent might communicate logically to an IRS routing process > >>>>> gives good semantics and interactions. Obviously, implementations > >>>>> may differ. > >>>> > >>>> As long as the arbitration mechanism is reconfigurable by the > >>>> operator to whatever precedence they want, I agree. Its not clear > >>>> to me if various RIB implementations treat all proffered routes the > >>>> same, nor if they store the same meta-data with all protocol sources. > >>>> So there needs to be some way for the operator to leverage exposed > >>>> protocol-specific optimizations, without conflict from the other > >>>> routing processes, if they so desire. OTOH if it can all be done > >>>> via static routes, it seems much simpler. :) > >>> > >>> Clearly the IRS sub-interface for the RIB needs to introduce/define > the different precedences; my assumption is that it would be per route with > a well-defined small set of meta-data. This is part of where having good > use-cases will help us understand what behavior is necessary. The static > routes do seem like a simpler case to start with. > >>> > >>> Alia > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> 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 > > _______________________________________________ > > 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**** > > **** > > **** > > ** ** >
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Thomas Nadeau
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Gert Grammel
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Alia Atlas
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Gert Grammel
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Alia Atlas
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Thomas Nadeau
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Lin Han
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Thomas Nadeau
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Thomas Nadeau
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Lin Han
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Alia Atlas
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Lin Han
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Susan Hares
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Robert Raszuk
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Thomas Nadeau
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Gert Grammel
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Scott Whyte
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Susan Hares
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Gert Grammel
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Alia Atlas
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Scott Whyte
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Alia Atlas
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Shah, Himanshu
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Alia Atlas
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Olen Stokes
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Alia Atlas
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments David Lake (dlake)
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Alia Atlas
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Dutta, Pranjal K (Pranjal)
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Alia Atlas
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Dutta, Pranjal K (Pranjal)
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments David Lake (dlake)
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Edward Crabbe
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Edward Crabbe
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Olen Stokes
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Alia Atlas
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Alia Atlas
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments David Lake (dlake)
- Re: [irs-discuss] 答复: 答复: IRS comments Thomas Nadeau
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Alia Atlas
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Edward Crabbe
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Shah, Himanshu
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Edward Crabbe
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Olen Stokes
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Edward Crabbe
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Robert Raszuk
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Alia Atlas
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Alia Atlas
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Alia Atlas
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Alia Atlas
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Shah, Himanshu
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments UTTARO, JAMES
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Lin Han
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Shah, Himanshu
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Alia Atlas
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Alia Atlas
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Alia Atlas
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Alia Atlas
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Dutta, Pranjal K (Pranjal)
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Shah, Himanshu
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Shah, Himanshu
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Dutta, Pranjal K (Pranjal)
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Alia Atlas
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Alia Atlas
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Alia Atlas
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Dutta, Pranjal K (Pranjal)
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Ramon Casellas
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Shah, Himanshu
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Shah, Himanshu
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Dutta, Pranjal K (Pranjal)
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Alia Atlas
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Alia Atlas
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Alia Atlas
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Dutta, Pranjal K (Pranjal)
- [irs-discuss] 答复: IRS comments Mach Chen
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Alia Atlas
- Re: [irs-discuss] 答复: IRS comments Alia Atlas
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Dutta, Pranjal K (Pranjal)
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Dutta, Pranjal K (Pranjal)
- [irs-discuss] 答复: 答复: IRS comments Mach Chen
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Alia Atlas
- Re: [irs-discuss] 答复: 答复: IRS comments Alia Atlas
- [irs-discuss] 答复: 答复: 答复: IRS comments Mach Chen
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Dutta, Pranjal K (Pranjal)
- Re: [irs-discuss] 答复: 答复: IRS comments Thomas Nadeau
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Acee Lindem
- Re: [irs-discuss] 答复: 答复: IRS comments Susan Hares
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Edward Crabbe
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Alia Atlas
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Edward Crabbe
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Edward Crabbe
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Alia Atlas
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Dutta, Pranjal K (Pranjal)
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Edward Crabbe
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Dutta, Pranjal K (Pranjal)
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Dutta, Pranjal K (Pranjal)
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Edward Crabbe
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Dutta, Pranjal K (Pranjal)
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Edward Crabbe
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Alia Atlas
- Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments Thomas Nadeau