Re: [Lsr] LSR WG Adoption Poll for "Flexible Algorithms: Bandwidth, Delay, Metrics and Constraints" - draft-hegde-lsr-flex-algo-bw-con-02

peng.shaofu@zte.com.cn Thu, 13 May 2021 07:29 UTC

Return-Path: <peng.shaofu@zte.com.cn>
X-Original-To: lsr@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: lsr@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 995833A2D59; Thu, 13 May 2021 00:29:26 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.895
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.895 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id yolyHmapJk0H; Thu, 13 May 2021 00:29:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mxhk.zte.com.cn (mxhk.zte.com.cn [63.217.80.70]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7A75D3A2D4D; Thu, 13 May 2021 00:29:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mxct.zte.com.cn (unknown [192.168.164.217]) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTPS id 9E608D438B26B4FAE3CD; Thu, 13 May 2021 15:29:21 +0800 (CST)
Received: from mse-fl1.zte.com.cn (unknown [10.30.14.238]) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTPS id 72997132B7CF986D8CAD; Thu, 13 May 2021 15:29:21 +0800 (CST)
Received: from njxapp05.zte.com.cn ([10.41.132.204]) by mse-fl1.zte.com.cn with SMTP id 14D7SreQ048928; Thu, 13 May 2021 15:28:53 +0800 (GMT-8) (envelope-from peng.shaofu@zte.com.cn)
Received: from mapi (njxapp01[null]) by mapi (Zmail) with MAPI id mid201; Thu, 13 May 2021 15:28:53 +0800 (CST)
Date: Thu, 13 May 2021 15:28:53 +0800
X-Zmail-TransId: 2af9609cd5354fa57854
X-Mailer: Zmail v1.0
Message-ID: <202105131528535473925@zte.com.cn>
In-Reply-To: <0BAE6DBA-04A3-4A3A-A1E3-14EFAA0FBE68@cisco.com>
References: 0BAE6DBA-04A3-4A3A-A1E3-14EFAA0FBE68@cisco.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
From: peng.shaofu@zte.com.cn
To: acee=40cisco.com@dmarc.ietf.org
Cc: lsr@ietf.org, draft-hegde-lsr-flex-algo-bw-con@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="=====_001_next====="
X-MAIL: mse-fl1.zte.com.cn 14D7SreQ048928
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lsr/PvpUwsh-WjEXQ2iRbvCVdX0ylns>
Subject: Re: [Lsr] LSR WG Adoption Poll for "Flexible Algorithms: Bandwidth, Delay, Metrics and Constraints" - draft-hegde-lsr-flex-algo-bw-con-02
X-BeenThere: lsr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Link State Routing Working Group <lsr.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/lsr>, <mailto:lsr-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/lsr/>
List-Post: <mailto:lsr@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:lsr-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr>, <mailto:lsr-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 13 May 2021 07:29:27 -0000

Hi WG,






I have a little doubt about the scheme described in this document.


See the following example:






S ---- X1 ----- X2 ---- ... ... ----- X10 ----- D


    \----------------------------------------------/






Suppose the links in S---X1---X2...---D have the same bandwidth  10G, and the link S-D has bandwidth 1G.


Suppose that we select "reference bandwidth = 100G", then, 


each link  in S---X1---X2...---D will have the same bandwidth-metric  10 (i.e., 100/10)


link S-D will have a bandwidth-metric 100 (i.e., 100/100)






So flex-algo path from S to D based on bandwidth-metric will be S-D, not S---X1---X2...---D, because the later has a large cumulative bandwitdh-metric (i.e., 11*10).


But our expect path should be S-D, not S---X1---X2...---D, as it has large bandwidth.


Do I misunderstand anything ?






Regards,


PSF














原始邮件



发件人:AceeLindem(acee)
收件人:lsr@ietf.org;
抄送人:draft-hegde-lsr-flex-algo-bw-con@ietf.org;
日 期 :2021年05月13日 05:49
主 题 :[Lsr] LSR WG Adoption Poll for "Flexible Algorithms: Bandwidth, Delay, Metrics and Constraints" - draft-hegde-lsr-flex-algo-bw-con-02


_______________________________________________
Lsr mailing list
Lsr@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr

 

Esteemed Members of the LSR WG,


 


This begins a 2 week WG adoption call for the following draft:


 


     https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-hegde-lsr-flex-algo-bw-con/    


 


Please indicate your support or objection by May 27th, 2021.


 


Authors, please respond to the list indicating whether you are aware of any IPR that applies to this draft.


 


Thanks,


Chris and Acee