Re: [Mter] Need to decide on potential next steps for MTER

[Michael Menth <[e-mail]>]

Dear JP, Jean-Louis, and Raymond,

we are working on the field of multi-layer resilience, in particular 
regarding the required backup capacity of protection and restoration 
mechanisms, e.g. MPLS-FRR and others:
http://www3.informatik.uni-wuerzburg.de/~menth/Publications/Menth04c.pdf
http://www3.informatik.uni-wuerzburg.de/~menth/Publications/Menth05f.pdf
http://www3.informatik.uni-wuerzburg.de/~menth/Publications/Menth06f.pdf

We, as a university, are interested in the mter discussion to share our 
experience and to find new relevant issues for further research. I hope 
that sufficiently many manufacturers and operators also express their 
interest in this activity.

Kind regards,

    Michael

JP Vasseur wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Below the email we sent to the list some time ago, seeking for 
> feed-backs but so far the list has been pretty quiet. During the past 
> few months we received a very few off-line positive feed-backs 
> indicating some interest in this work. It is now a good time to decide 
> on whether there is enough interest to work on this topic by the IETF 
> community in which case we will request a BOF approval or whether the 
> interest is too weak to pursue this work.
>
> So we will follow up with a few discussion threads related to the 
> scenarios described in the problem statement ID, for which we'd like 
> to get your feed-back relatively quickly, should you think that it is 
> worth being pursed.
>
> Thanks.
>
> JP, Jean-Louis and Raymond.
>
> Hi,
>
> It took a little while to come up with a clear problem statement but 
> we now have an I-D (http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ahmad- 
> mter-problem-statement-00.txt (thanks to the authors)) that will 
> hopefully trigger some discussion with the objective to see whether 
> there is enough interest to pursue this work at the IETF.
>
> The draft has been structured so as to first show three scenarios 
> where various recovery mechanisms could be used in combination. This 
> does not aim to cover all possible cases but some pretty common 
> deployment scenario for the sake of illustration. Then various Multi- 
> TEchnology Recovery (MTER) issues are discussed.
>
> What is the objective of this work ?
>
> Let's start with the set of non-objective first ...
> * There is no intention to come up with protocols extensions that are 
> being worked out in existing WGs (ISIS, IDR, CCAMP, ....)
> * Discuss implementation-specific issues
>
> Now the objectives ...
>
> What has been shown through the three MTER deployment cases making use 
> of multiple recovery mechanisms in combination is the following:
>
> -> There are cases where being able to identify the root failure cause 
> would significantly improve various recovery metrics such as the 
> convergence time, required backup capacity, ... and so on. Do we need 
> to work on such mechanisms at the IETF is an open question ?
>
> -> MIBs and OAM tools have been defined for most of the recovery 
> techniques (IGP, BGP, MPLS FRR, GMPLS, ... ) and there are clearly no 
> such tool for the aspects related to their combined use. It looks like 
> the availability of such tools would help Service Providers to manage, 
> tune and troubleshooting their network. Again, feed-backs from this ML 
> are critical to see how to move forward and if the community expressed 
> some interest.
>
> Thanks for your feed-backs.
>
> JP, Jean-Louis and Raymond.
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> MTER mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mter
>   

-- 
Dr. Michael Menth, Assistant Professor
University of Wuerzburg, Institute of Computer Science
Am Hubland, D-97074 Wuerzburg, Germany, room B206
phone: [phone], fax: [phone]
mailto:[e-mail]
http://www3.informatik.uni-wuerzburg.de/research/ngn


_______________________________________________
MTER mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mter