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

Lin Han <Lin.Han@huawei.com> Tue, 07 August 2012 21:00 UTC

Return-Path: <Lin.Han@huawei.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 A320C11E80A6 for <irs-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 7 Aug 2012 14:00:18 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, 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 e9ICbiQhiG-b for <irs-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 7 Aug 2012 14:00:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dfwrgout.huawei.com (dfwrgout.huawei.com [206.16.17.72]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F44611E809B for <irs-discuss@ietf.org>; Tue, 7 Aug 2012 14:00:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from 172.18.9.243 (EHLO dfweml202-edg.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.9.243]) by dfwrg02-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.2.3-GA FastPath) with ESMTP id AIP44547; Tue, 07 Aug 2012 13:00:17 -0800 (PST)
Received: from DFWEML407-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.193.5.132) by dfweml202-edg.china.huawei.com (172.18.9.108) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.3; Tue, 7 Aug 2012 13:58:13 -0700
Received: from DFWEML513-MBS.china.huawei.com ([169.254.4.5]) by dfweml407-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.193.5.132]) with mapi id 14.01.0323.003; Tue, 7 Aug 2012 13:58:07 -0700
From: Lin Han <Lin.Han@huawei.com>
To: "robert@raszuk.net" <robert@raszuk.net>, "irs-discuss@ietf.org" <irs-discuss@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [irs-discuss] An idea ... MTR + IRS
Thread-Index: AQHNcQtJpcLUczuvNUyuQHWPVYoeQZdO2l3A
Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2012 20:58:06 +0000
Message-ID: <1D30AF33624CDD4A99E8C395069A2A161FE0E9F5@dfweml513-mbs.china.huawei.com>
References: <501B150C.9080304@raszuk.net>
In-Reply-To: <501B150C.9080304@raszuk.net>
Accept-Language: en-US, zh-CN
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.212.244.2]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
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: Tue, 07 Aug 2012 21:00:18 -0000

I think the MT will provide the network virtualization which is based on the basic topo of the forwarding device.
It should belong to either orchestration or application (SDN point of view). OF controller should only support OF, no more intelligence such as decision for routing and switching.
I don't know if IRS frame work should cover this since IRS frame work has a lot debatable areas.

Lin

-----Original Message-----
From: irs-discuss-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:irs-discuss-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Robert Raszuk
Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2012 5:02 PM
To: irs-discuss@ietf.org
Subject: [irs-discuss] An idea ... MTR + IRS

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