Re: [irs-discuss] Suggestions for IRS Way Forward

Alia Atlas <akatlas@gmail.com> Thu, 02 August 2012 22:29 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 A1F2A11E8176 for <irs-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 2 Aug 2012 15:29:49 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.299
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.299 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.300, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_33=0.6, 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 p9nJJvhA2xbv for <irs-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 2 Aug 2012 15:29:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-gg0-f172.google.com (mail-gg0-f172.google.com [209.85.161.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5280D11E80E1 for <irs-discuss@ietf.org>; Thu, 2 Aug 2012 15:29:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by ggnc4 with SMTP id c4so62699ggn.31 for <irs-discuss@ietf.org>; Thu, 02 Aug 2012 15:29:48 -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 :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=24aIJ/dvqKJLT5Z8e59HZ/ZeQRXlIByx62Rp+v02Nqo=; b=mphe0Rt+JqDzWy/jjpXQwJ9CzRwdfR25fwjcIP1Hb7L0vEG/USPRdTW1WO+84N2/fp H5DtUgPR6Cf50qCA7qOR79Ktpdi0VSuO0nKwB8DqfoXt2h8gAIgFcvK2EGnrUbmyJjat AuP8OR/pe61r64TlEyOYSIvhlOtTRJaAVZa3bRd9IiLuFOtQqwtWfUABuHTSotKEKVz2 h3NzKllt1CKkIilebI2otIn0aAun/8jHjsS7w6ZmUOa8rRTM1CQ5UlwPnsG113igPLFh f3R/uXZ8ZghMWab6gTM2xSvw1qucTk06ZNZSpv933IMrh9XnIPzc6vrzu+s6fHLE78EG J6lA==
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.50.104.228 with SMTP id gh4mr6209982igb.71.1343946587321; Thu, 02 Aug 2012 15:29:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.50.34.169 with HTTP; Thu, 2 Aug 2012 15:29:47 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CE39F5249064D946AA3535E63A014619656FC6A4FB@EUSAACMS0703.eamcs.ericsson.se>
References: <CE39F5249064D946AA3535E63A014619656FC6A4FB@EUSAACMS0703.eamcs.ericsson.se>
Date: Thu, 02 Aug 2012 18:29:47 -0400
Message-ID: <CAG4d1reDYvB0EvtKhd5XJh6ECEeN9QGGmGh1+kVh0=Qou=q+rg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Alia Atlas <akatlas@gmail.com>
To: James Kempf <james.kempf@ericsson.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: "irs-discuss@ietf.org" <irs-discuss@ietf.org>
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 22:29:49 -0000

James,

Thanks for the feedback.  I certainly agree that the topology
data-model should be an early focus and deliverable.

At the end of my talk this morning, I did try to describe how to scope
the work so as to keep it within reasonable bounds to make work.

A way of focusing the work, I think, is to discuss and agree on a few
key use-cases that we want to facilitate.

I fully expect that at least one of those use-cases will depend on the
topology data-model.

Alia

On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 6:24 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