Re: Congestion Avoidance & Control for OSPF Networks <draft-ash-manral-ospf-congestion-control-00.txt>

"Ash, Gerald R (Jerry), ALASO" <gash@ATT.COM> Wed, 03 July 2002 19:19 UTC

Received: from cherry.ease.lsoft.com (cherry.ease.lsoft.com [209.119.0.109]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA01078 for <ospf-archive@LISTS.IETF.ORG>; Wed, 3 Jul 2002 15:19:19 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from walnut (209.119.0.61) by cherry.ease.lsoft.com (LSMTP for Digital Unix v1.1b) with SMTP id <15.0067D45E@cherry.ease.lsoft.com>; Wed, 3 Jul 2002 15:20:08 -0400
Received: from DISCUSS.MICROSOFT.COM by DISCUSS.MICROSOFT.COM (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8e) with spool id 44407 for OSPF@DISCUSS.MICROSOFT.COM; Wed, 3 Jul 2002 15:20:07 -0400
Received: from 192.128.134.71 by WALNUT.EASE.LSOFT.COM (SMTPL release 1.0f) with TCP; Wed, 3 Jul 2002 15:20:07 -0400
Received: from attrh1i.attrh.att.com ([135.71.62.10]) by kcmso2.proxy.att.com (AT&T IPNS/MSO-4.0) with ESMTP id g63IwZvC019782 for <OSPF@DISCUSS.MICROSOFT.COM>; Wed, 3 Jul 2002 14:20:05 -0500 (CDT)
Received: from occlust04evs1.ugd.att.com (135.71.164.13) by attrh1i.attrh.att.com (5.5.029) id 3CBB4973003C414E; Wed, 3 Jul 2002 15:19:58 -0400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.5762.3
content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Thread-Topic: IETF Draft for Comment -- "Proposed Mechanisms for Congestion Con trol/Failure Recovery in OSPF & ISIS Networks"
Thread-Index: AcEDx4Vpozilqm+4EdWKNwCQJ7Zb0j6FUg4QA+tUwfA=
Message-ID: <28F05913385EAC43AF019413F674A01701B653B2@OCCLUST04EVS1.ugd.att.com>
Date: Wed, 03 Jul 2002 15:19:58 -0400
Reply-To: Mailing List <OSPF@DISCUSS.MICROSOFT.COM>
Sender: Mailing List <OSPF@DISCUSS.MICROSOFT.COM>
From: "Ash, Gerald R (Jerry), ALASO" <gash@ATT.COM>
Subject: Re: Congestion Avoidance & Control for OSPF Networks <draft-ash-manral-ospf-congestion-control-00.txt>
Comments: To: "Moy, John" <John.Moy@sycamorenet.com>
Comments: cc: "Manral, Vishwas" <VishwasM@netplane.com>, Alex Zinin <zinin@psg.com>, Bill Fenner <fenner@research.att.com>
To: OSPF@DISCUSS.MICROSOFT.COM
Precedence: list
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ietf.org id PAA01078

Hello John, All:

Hopefully by now you've had chance to review our latest draft on OSPF congestion control http://search.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ash-manral-ospf-congestion-control-00.txt.

As requested (by John), we've narrowed the scope of the work to propose specific congestion control mechanisms not already addressed by other documents in the OSPF WG.  

These mechanisms will prevent control overloads from bringing down a network, as they have in the past (I give a brief background below).

We request your comments on our I-D.  We also request your suggestions for advancing the work in the working group.

Thanks,
Jerry Ash

Brief background:

AT&T has suffered a few massive failures of operational networks due to control overloads of link-state (LS) protocols ('OSPF', 'PNNI', etc.).  These outages are documented and referenced in http://search.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ash-manral-ospf-congestion-control-00.txt and in http://search.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ash-ospf-isis-congestion-control-02.txt.

In the instances cited, the LS protocol overwhelmed the network with a control load 'storm' ('LSA overload'), which brought the network down, and then prevented its recovery.  Fortunately such failures are very rare; however, 'rare' for such events is unacceptable, 'never' is the goal.  Other service providers have experienced similar outages caused by similar problems.

Such failures are not the fault of the service provider operation or the vendor/equipment implementation.  They are due to shortcomings in the link-state protocols themselves -- thus the need for the enhancements proposed in the draft. 

The proposals in the draft will prevent such events from being triggered, and/or provide recovery mechanisms in case such events occur.

The problem of control overload is becoming even more acute as LS protocols are enhanced to support new capabilities, such as:

MPLS traffic engineering http://search.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-katz-yeung-ospf-traffic-06.txt,
GMPLS http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ccamp-ospf-gmpls-extensions-07.txt,
multi-area TE http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-cheng-ccamp-ospf-multiarea-te-extensions-00.txt,
MPLS/DiffServ TE http://search.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-tewg-diff-te-reqts-05.txt,
etc.

With this ever advancing complexity, the need keeps increasing to address the stated problem, soon.