Re: [Isis-wg] draft-previdi-filsfils-isis-segment-routing

[stefano previdi <[e-mail]>]

Hi Patryk,

On Apr 25, 2013, at 5:31 PM, Patryk Konczyk wrote:
> Hello Stefano I've seen Clarence presentation about Segment Routing
> at MWC in Paris. I like the concept of using IGP for signalling and to
> simply use existing tools like remote LFA for traffic protection.
> Traffic Engineering looks simple as well. My initial concern was
> around large label stack  especially in cases where there is
> significant amount of Traffic Engineering going on. Clarence pointed
> out that this can be resolved with loose hops using just two labels in
> majority of the cases.


indeed. In current SP topologies, and with current HW capabilities, 
the label stack size is a non issue. Having said that, we shouldn't 
neglect mechanisms for stack compression anyway.


> I was also chatting to Stewart Bryant and he suggested compressing
> the label stack I belive you touched on that on page 6 in the ECMP
> context. I was wondering if this could be extended for strict and
> loose path signalled with single label only, so that we have the same
> label stack as in LDP/RSVP based solution. This probably would require
> additional signalling.


the question is whether (and how much more) do you need to compress 
the stack and what benefits it brings you (assuming my statement 
above).


> IPv6 variant is looking interesting as well. I'm hoping that more
> details will appear in the draft shortly and we will have more
> discussion on the mailing list.


yes, we're in the process of updating the draft and more details 
are to come soon.


> In Section 2.2 comparative study has been mentioned could your share
> more details ?
> 
> Also are there any plans to discuss segment routing in Berlin ?


Hopefully yes!

Thanks.
s.


> 
> Thanks Patryk Konczyk
>