Re: [irs-discuss] Suggestions for IRS Way Forward
Thomas Nadeau <tnadeau@juniper.net> Thu, 02 August 2012 23:28 UTC
Return-Path: <tnadeau@juniper.net>
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 4FE4D11E81D9 for <irs-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 2 Aug 2012 16:28:46 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.141
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.141 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.142, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_33=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
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 Zs4E-wthz-DM for <irs-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 2 Aug 2012 16:28:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from exprod7og114.obsmtp.com (exprod7og114.obsmtp.com [64.18.2.215]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A5D0711E81CE for <irs-discuss@ietf.org>; Thu, 2 Aug 2012 16:28:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from P-EMHUB01-HQ.jnpr.net ([66.129.224.36]) (using TLSv1) by exprod7ob114.postini.com ([64.18.6.12]) with SMTP ID DSNKUBsNKtAPyayyTxEgwgyfY7RCROBwd6kw@postini.com; Thu, 02 Aug 2012 16:28:45 PDT
Received: from p-emfe02-wf.jnpr.net (172.28.145.25) by P-EMHUB01-HQ.jnpr.net (172.24.192.35) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.3.213.0; Thu, 2 Aug 2012 16:28:19 -0700
Received: from EMBX01-WF.jnpr.net ([fe80::1914:3299:33d9:e43b]) by p-emfe02-wf.jnpr.net ([fe80::c126:c633:d2dc:8090%11]) with mapi; Thu, 2 Aug 2012 19:28:18 -0400
From: Thomas Nadeau <tnadeau@juniper.net>
To: Susan Hares <susan.hares@huawei.com>, James Kempf <james.kempf@ericsson.com>, "irs-discuss@ietf.org" <irs-discuss@ietf.org>
Date: Thu, 02 Aug 2012 19:28:17 -0400
Thread-Topic: [irs-discuss] Suggestions for IRS Way Forward
Thread-Index: Ac1xBn8k1PtUa5tzQXmxFFokax+68A==
Message-ID: <CC405A5A.2DDA%tnadeau@juniper.net>
In-Reply-To: <728F9B956B2C48439CA9294B1723B14623755E3C@dfweml509-mbs.china.huawei.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.2.3.120616
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [irs-discuss] Suggestions for IRS Way Forward
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: Thu, 02 Aug 2012 23:28:46 -0000
On 8/2/12 4:21 PM, "Susan Hares" <susan.hares@huawei.com> wrote: >Tom: > >So, is ALTO, PCE, Yang modules with topology in scope. I think those are very good and important components yes. >Are you stating that we do not re-inventing the ALTO functions topology >(see previous note)? I'd definitely prefer to not reinvent those functions unless there are good reasons to do so. However, as Alia explained during the meeting, they are incomplete. --Tom > > >Sue > >-----Original Message----- >From: irs-discuss-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:irs-discuss-bounces@ietf.org] >On Behalf Of Thomas Nadeau >Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2012 3:32 PM >To: James Kempf; irs-discuss@ietf.org >Subject: Re: [irs-discuss] Suggestions for IRS Way Forward > > > I agree that one of the top work items for this effort should be a >standardized topology function, and one that is accessible via a >non-routing protocol. While not exactly "low hanging fruit", it is >something that (to me) is a clear work item with clear goals that should >be tackled straight away. > > --Tom > > > >On 8/2/12 3:24 PM, "James Kempf" <james.kempf@ericsson.com> wrote: > >>So after seeing part of Alia's talk this morning (I had to leave in the >>middle unfortunately), I'd like to make a couple suggestions. There were >>a lot of ideas presented in the talk, enough for an entire IETF Area. I >>think to make tangible progress, the work needs to be focussed on a small >>subset that would be of immediate interest and usability. >> >>There are a couple areas that suggest themselves, but one that would be >>useful in work that I've been involved in is a standardized format for >>network topology representation and a protocol for exchanging it. The >>Onix OpenFlow controller has a network information base with a >>specialized format for network topology, and every OpenFlow controller >>requires this. Having a standardized way to represent it might foster a >>common topology database package. Another application is network >>management. Every network management system needs some kind of topology >>representation. Finally, though I am not an expert in PCE construction, >>it would seem to me that a PCE would need some kind of topology >>representation in order to perform path calculations. Having a way,for >>example, for the OpenFlow controller and the PCE to exchange topology >>information would be really useful. I would say to start with physical >>topology because that is fundamental, but make the format flexible enough >>to support >> virtual topology representation. >> >> jak >>_______________________________________________ >>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] Suggestions for IRS Way Forward James Kempf
- Re: [irs-discuss] Suggestions for IRS Way Forward Alia Atlas
- Re: [irs-discuss] Suggestions for IRS Way Forward Thomas Nadeau
- Re: [irs-discuss] Suggestions for IRS Way Forward Susan Hares
- Re: [irs-discuss] Suggestions for IRS Way Forward Robert Raszuk
- Re: [irs-discuss] Suggestions for IRS Way Forward Susan Hares
- Re: [irs-discuss] Suggestions for IRS Way Forward Thomas Nadeau
- Re: [irs-discuss] Suggestions for IRS Way Forward Robert Raszuk
- Re: [irs-discuss] Suggestions for IRS Way Forward Susan Hares
- Re: [irs-discuss] Suggestions for IRS Way Forward Susan Hares
- Re: [irs-discuss] Suggestions for IRS Way Forward Thomas Nadeau
- Re: [irs-discuss] Suggestions for IRS Way Forward James Kempf
- Re: [irs-discuss] Suggestions for IRS Way Forward Susan Hares
- Re: [irs-discuss] Suggestions for IRS Way Forward Jan Medved (jmedved)
- Re: [irs-discuss] Suggestions for IRS Way Forward Jan Medved (jmedved)
- [irs-discuss] About ALTO Vs. BGP-LS stefano previdi
- Re: [irs-discuss] About ALTO Vs. BGP-LS Y. Richard Yang
- Re: [irs-discuss] Suggestions for IRS Way Forward Susan Hares
- Re: [irs-discuss] Suggestions for IRS Way Forward Alia Atlas
- Re: [irs-discuss] Suggestions for IRS Way Forward Alia Atlas
- Re: [irs-discuss] About ALTO Vs. BGP-LS Susan Hares
- Re: [irs-discuss] About ALTO Vs. BGP-LS Y. Richard Yang
- Re: [irs-discuss] About ALTO Vs. BGP-LS Volker Hilt
- Re: [irs-discuss] About ALTO Vs. BGP-LS Y. Richard Yang
- Re: [irs-discuss] About ALTO Vs. BGP-LS Alia Atlas
- Re: [irs-discuss] [alto] About ALTO Vs. BGP-LS Greg Bernstein
- Re: [irs-discuss] [alto] About ALTO Vs. BGP-LS Greg Bernstein
- Re: [irs-discuss] About ALTO Vs. BGP-LS Hannes Gredler
- Re: [irs-discuss] About ALTO Vs. BGP-LS Volker Hilt
- Re: [irs-discuss] [alto] About ALTO, BGP-LS, IRS Greg Bernstein
- Re: [irs-discuss] [Idr] [alto] About ALTO, BGP-LS… Hannes Gredler
- Re: [irs-discuss] Suggestions for IRS Way Forward Susan Hares