IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [nmrg] Control plane [was Next version of draft-irtf-nmrg-autonomic-network-definitions]

"Michael Behringer (mbehring)" <mbehring@cisco.com> Wed, 30 July 2014 08:45 UTC

Return-Path: <mbehring@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: nmrg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: nmrg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 29B511A00C5 for <nmrg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 30 Jul 2014 01:45:41 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.502
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.502 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham
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 LRLXu_6i8FhI for <nmrg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 30 Jul 2014 01:45:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rcdn-iport-7.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-7.cisco.com [173.37.86.78]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E63081A0052 for <nmrg@irtf.org>; Wed, 30 Jul 2014 01:45:39 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=2936; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1406709940; x=1407919540; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=VCWZaO5qqqdon52MC6etQjD/WruyzxsYG5OREYRsPrg=; b=Zb0iCVPPCqt8V/mnHJj2TOzmRx3RNEkGs11DZMtW+JpedOYKmhgN2XCU a/5Elm+BSRHKkPyJK5hbNU8RCf6jDaKq6vDF3CjmzFsa3LnDxeek+jAhY ypWrtPBTW21z6351JrrTH5NdQS0raQ6osJPwkOUq/2k0/75Bup4YTxpeJ A=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AjsFAByw2FOtJV2Q/2dsb2JhbABZgw6BKQSCdNACARl1FneEAwEBAQMBIxFFBQcEAgEIEQQBAQMCBh0DAgICHxEUAQgIAgQBDQUIiCYDCQioGZBWDYcJF4Esi3OBfDEHBoJzNoEbAQSZT5AwhiWCA4FGbAGBRA
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.01,762,1400025600"; d="scan'208";a="343771660"
Received: from rcdn-core-8.cisco.com ([173.37.93.144]) by rcdn-iport-7.cisco.com with ESMTP; 30 Jul 2014 08:45:39 +0000
Received: from xhc-rcd-x15.cisco.com (xhc-rcd-x15.cisco.com [173.37.183.89]) by rcdn-core-8.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id s6U8jcQv001022 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Wed, 30 Jul 2014 08:45:38 GMT
Received: from xmb-rcd-x14.cisco.com ([169.254.4.221]) by xhc-rcd-x15.cisco.com ([173.37.183.89]) with mapi id 14.03.0123.003; Wed, 30 Jul 2014 03:45:38 -0500
From: "Michael Behringer (mbehring)" <mbehring@cisco.com>
To: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>, Laurent Ciavaglia <Laurent.Ciavaglia@alcatel-lucent.com>
Thread-Topic: Control plane [was Next version of draft-irtf-nmrg-autonomic-network-definitions]
Thread-Index: AQHPq2rA3rMubLfWP0mlRS/Nd/Fr5Zu4PF+Q
Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2014 08:45:37 +0000
Message-ID: <3AA7118E69D7CD4BA3ECD5716BAF28DF21BFA22A@xmb-rcd-x14.cisco.com>
References: <3AA7118E69D7CD4BA3ECD5716BAF28DF21BF933F@xmb-rcd-x14.cisco.com> <53D7C297.3080700@alcatel-lucent.com> <53D80265.8070404@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <53D80265.8070404@gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-GB, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.61.72.28]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/nmrg/yVoBbfKkL1T3a8bNVgjioAt2jew
Cc: "draft-irtf-nmrg-autonomic-network-definitions@tools.ietf.org" <draft-irtf-nmrg-autonomic-network-definitions@tools.ietf.org>, "nmrg@irtf.org" <nmrg@irtf.org>, "anima@ietf.org" <anima@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [nmrg] Control plane [was Next version of draft-irtf-nmrg-autonomic-network-definitions]
X-BeenThere: nmrg@irtf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Network Management Research Group discussion list <nmrg.irtf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.irtf.org/mailman/options/nmrg>, <mailto:nmrg-request@irtf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.irtf.org/mail-archive/web/nmrg/>
List-Post: <mailto:nmrg@irtf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:nmrg-request@irtf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/nmrg>, <mailto:nmrg-request@irtf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2014 08:45:41 -0000

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Brian E Carpenter [mailto:brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com]
> Sent: 29 July 2014 22:22
> To: Laurent Ciavaglia
> Cc: Michael Behringer (mbehring); nmrg@irtf.org; anima@ietf.org; draft-
> irtf-nmrg-autonomic-network-definitions@tools.ietf.org
> Subject: Control plane [was Next version of draft-irtf-nmrg-autonomic-
> network-definitions]
> 
> Just commenting on one point from Laurent. I'll stick to cross-posting for
> this point. In due course I think we should avoid it, but OK for now.
> 
> > -It is not clear/straightforward what "in the global context of each device"
> means. If we want to say that the control protocols can run in-band/out-
> band, let's just say that.
> 
> Yes, I think we have to be more explicit. One approach is to have an explicit
> autonomic control plane which is an in-band overlay on the physical
> network. Another approach is to make this implicit - just use the existing
> L2/L3 network but without considering it to be a control plane at all (that's
> what most routing protocols do). A third approach would be a truly separate
> control plane such as a dedicated L2VPN. The point is that they could all
> support autonomic behaviour; it's a design choice.

Suggestions for better wording is welcome. For a L3 device it's relatively clear: It's either the global routing table or a virtual routing table, such as a VRF, or a virtual router. Problem is that the concept of the Autonomic Control Plane as described in draft-behringer-autonomic-control-plane applies also to non-L3 devices, for example to switches or NMS systems, or .... 

So, what is the generic term for "global routing table" and "virtual routing table" which is valid also for non-L3 devices? 

So, the full range of options is: 
- inband, as we run for example IGPs today
- Over a configured VPN ("management VPN")
- Over the self-managing Autonomic Control Plane (See above mentioned draft)
- Over a "real" out of band network. 

Should we list those, and explain what they do in a bit more detail? Maybe that would make things clearer... 

Michael
 
>     Brian

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email