IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Isis-wg] draft-amante-isis-reverse-metric-01

"Chen, Jay (Jay)" <jay.chen@alcatel-lucent.com> Tue, 07 December 2010 22:28 UTC

Return-Path: <jay.chen@alcatel-lucent.com>
X-Original-To: isis-wg@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: isis-wg@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E6A928C0F3 for <isis-wg@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 7 Dec 2010 14:28:54 -0800 (PST)
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 ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 29gol38XNXxE for <isis-wg@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 7 Dec 2010 14:28:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ihemail4.lucent.com (ihemail4.lucent.com [135.245.0.39]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DDDA128C0DD for <isis-wg@ietf.org>; Tue, 7 Dec 2010 14:28:52 -0800 (PST)
Received: from usnavsmail3.ndc.alcatel-lucent.com (usnavsmail3.ndc.alcatel-lucent.com [135.3.39.11]) by ihemail4.lucent.com (8.13.8/IER-o) with ESMTP id oB7MThOS003763 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Tue, 7 Dec 2010 16:29:43 -0600 (CST)
Received: from USNAVSXCHHUB01.ndc.alcatel-lucent.com (usnavsxchhub01.ndc.alcatel-lucent.com [135.3.39.110]) by usnavsmail3.ndc.alcatel-lucent.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/GMO) with ESMTP id oB7MTfpd028536 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=NOT); Tue, 7 Dec 2010 16:29:42 -0600
Received: from USNAVSXCHMBSB3.ndc.alcatel-lucent.com ([135.3.39.135]) by USNAVSXCHHUB01.ndc.alcatel-lucent.com ([135.3.39.110]) with mapi; Tue, 7 Dec 2010 16:29:41 -0600
From: "Chen, Jay (Jay)" <jay.chen@alcatel-lucent.com>
To: "raszuk@cisco.com" <raszuk@cisco.com>, Tony Li <tony.li@tony.li>
Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2010 16:29:40 -0600
Thread-Topic: [Isis-wg] draft-amante-isis-reverse-metric-01
Thread-Index: AcuViC8YKVqtUKsPSAK2M/asDeoyQwA0DVPg
Message-ID: <7D0D8053DEEE4D4B9427007ADB12C2ED058E3026F8@USNAVSXCHMBSB3.ndc.alcatel-lucent.com>
References: <C9F49613-1F78-484A-B7D3-7E4028E0B9C3@castlepoint.net> <AE36820147909644AD2A7CA014B1FB520CBA0665@xmb-sjc-222.amer.cisco.com> <2EEE5586-CD41-4C13-8D13-FC69ED126A1F@castlepoint.net> <AE36820147909644AD2A7CA014B1FB520CBA0737@xmb-sjc-222.amer.cisco.com> <309BCE56-9213-4B29-A364-B3421D952080@castlepoint.net> <4CFD4AC6.7090706@cisco.com> <975530EB-90F0-4FFA-AA5A-E1FBA7160439@tony.li> <4CFD4E2F.6040601@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <4CFD4E2F.6040601@cisco.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.57 on 135.245.2.39
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.64 on 135.3.39.11
Cc: "isis-wg@ietf.org" <isis-wg@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Isis-wg] draft-amante-isis-reverse-metric-01
X-BeenThere: isis-wg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF IS-IS working group <isis-wg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/isis-wg>, <mailto:isis-wg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/isis-wg>
List-Post: <mailto:isis-wg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:isis-wg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/isis-wg>, <mailto:isis-wg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2010 22:28:54 -0000

 
wide config making each router to be an NMS station. Call it C-ISIS. Example: instead of configuring links on the adjacent nodes configure link parameter anywhere, instead of configuring node at a node .. configure it anywhere.

Very interesting. Configure anywhere by anyone (maybe any computer) will be every powerful and very scaring too (security). A graph of network and transport of configure information will be needed. If protocol is proposed to do the job, should be a single protocol best fit? ISIS does know the topology of the network, on another hand BGP is better to transmit huge data and does incremental updates reliablely. A combination of functions from multiple protocol seems better than extending a single protocol.     
 
Jay


Many thx,
R.

PS.

/* After all we have many uses for ISIS today ... TRILL included :) */


> Robert,
>
>> Instead of working on network wide level config tool/protocol we are 
>> extending protocols to achieve the equivalent functionality.
>> And this is not only in ISIS, we do the same in BGP, we do the same 
>> in MPLS etc ...
>
>
> So, you're suggesting that we stop work on improving protocols until 
> the NMS folks get their act together.
>
> This doesn't seem like a practical suggestion.
>
> Regards, Tony
>
>

_______________________________________________
Isis-wg mailing list
Isis-wg@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/isis-wg

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email