Re: [Lsr] [Bier] PCE Controller & SDN Controller & Netconf/Yang NMS Controller - lines blurred and can the names be used ubiquitously meaning the same

[Adrian Farrel <[e-mail]>]

Hi again Gyan,

 

I think we’re narrowing down and getting somewhat esoteric for the mailing lists we’re spamming.

> Similarly other use cases such as with TEAS TS-Transport slice and being able
> to provision TS and capturing the TS Enhanced VPN RT & resource information
> and leveraging BGP-LS to do the same data gathering & ZTP like controller style
> provisioning. 

Is there a fundamental difference between ZTP & Day N provisioning and path computation for traffic engineering provisioning? It’s all determining how to configure the network to best carry traffic. 

Gyan> In my mind the fundamental difference would be TE - control plane TEDs and
forwarding plane routing action path computation and instantiation of path action
as compare to a NMS type Netconf/Yang configuration snippet push function not
routing or TE related.

 

[Adrian] I think it depends. The protocols are just tools. You could have a centralised TE system with a PCE to preform computations, but you can use any combinations of protocols to extract information from the network (IGPs, BGP-LS, PCEP-LS, Netconf, …) and any combination of protocols to program the network devices to install TE paths, reserve resources, and configure traffic forwarding rules (PCEP, RSVP-TE, Netconf, …).

 

Cheers,

Adrian