Re: OSPF WG Charter Proposal
John Drake <jdrake@CALIENT.NET> Thu, 07 November 2002 16:35 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 LAA01252 for <ospf-archive@LISTS.IETF.ORG>; Thu, 7 Nov 2002 11:35:04 -0500 (EST)
Received: from walnut (209.119.0.61) by cherry.ease.lsoft.com (LSMTP for Digital Unix v1.1b) with SMTP id <4.007B7CB9@cherry.ease.lsoft.com>; Thu, 7 Nov 2002 11:37:32 -0500
Received: from DISCUSS.MICROSOFT.COM by DISCUSS.MICROSOFT.COM (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8e) with spool id 329955 for OSPF@DISCUSS.MICROSOFT.COM; Thu, 7 Nov 2002 11:37:32 -0500
Received: from 63.102.55.206 by WALNUT.EASE.LSOFT.COM (SMTPL release 1.0f) with TCP; Thu, 7 Nov 2002 11:27:32 -0500
Received: by lightwave.chromisys.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id <4GJZB2CW>; Thu, 7 Nov 2002 08:27:28 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Message-ID: <9D42C6E086250248810DCADA39CE7EFC971FD1@nimbus>
Date: Thu, 07 Nov 2002 08:27:27 -0800
Reply-To: Mailing List <OSPF@DISCUSS.MICROSOFT.COM>
Sender: Mailing List <OSPF@DISCUSS.MICROSOFT.COM>
From: John Drake <jdrake@CALIENT.NET>
Subject: Re: OSPF WG Charter Proposal
To: OSPF@DISCUSS.MICROSOFT.COM
Precedence: list
Tony, You saved me some typing. As another example, implementations of PNNI signalling ranged from something like ten calls per second to several thousand calls per second. Thanks, John -----Original Message----- From: Tony Przygienda [mailto:prz@XEBEO.COM] Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2002 8:17 AM To: OSPF@DISCUSS.MICROSOFT.COM Subject: Re: OSPF WG Charter Proposal Ash, Gerald R (Jerry), ALASO wrote: >Dave, > >>>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. >>> > >>I strongly disagree with this statement. While the design of the >>protocols can make it challenging, there is ample room in >>implementation to provide stable and scalable networks. >> >>When a network collapses, the fault lies at the feet of the >>implementers. In every case I've seen (too many), the collapse was >>inevitable sooner or later, due to naive design choices in software, >>but at the same time was quite nonlinear in its onset (making any >>predictive or self-monitoring approach pretty hopeless.) >> >>There are some things that would make the job easier, at the cost >>of additional complexity, but pointing at network collapses >>and blaming the protocols is disingenuous. >> > >I think you should review the ample evidence presented in http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ash-manral-ospf-congestion-control -00.txt that the protocols need to be enhanced to better respond to congestion collapse: > >- Section 2: documented failures and their root-cause analysis, across multiple service provider networks (also review the cited references) >- Appendix B: vendor analysis of a realistic failure scenario similar to one experienced as discussed in Section 2 (perhaps you would like to provide your own analysis of this scenario based on your OSPF implementation) >- Appendix C: simulation analysis of protocol performance (other I-D's being discussed provide analysis of proposed protocol extensions) > >To say that network collapse in *every* case is due to *naive design choices* ignores the evidence/analysis presented. Based on the evidence/analysis, there is clearly room for the protocols to be improved to the point where networks *never* go down for hours or days at a time (drawing unwanted headlines & business impact). > >Jerry > Jerry, most of the things you say in your document (which is actually pretty good) has been known to people like Dave and other old-time implementors since years and avoiding exactly those things by smart implementation techniques was what was differentiating the have from the have-nots. I remember myself learning some of those things by hard experience and some by looking at old-hands code ;-) [Albeit I remember also picking up a lot of smart control protocol ideas from your RTNR work]. I do not think that Dave is putting down what you say, rather (and I commit the stupidity to interpret his words by my own beliefs) that what your document says are mostly _implementation_ issues, not _standardization_ and therefore it is not a very wise idea to add them to the charter of a _standards_ group. Good protocol specs are _not_ implementation cookbooks, they are documents governing bits on the wires in such a way that two people implementing things in vastly different ways can still talk to each other. Recommendations of implementation techniques prove long-term inherently dangerous (like Joel pointed out, at a certain point in time adding more code to an implementation introduces more bugs than the performance gain is worth) or utterly ridiculous (look at ISIS 0-63 metric to make SPF real fast, it lead to quite bad contortions). thanks -- tony
- OSPF WG Charter Proposal Rohit Dube
- Re: OSPF WG Charter Proposal Naidu, Venkata
- Re: OSPF WG Charter Proposal Rohit Dube
- Re: OSPF WG Charter Proposal Naidu, Venkata
- Re: OSPF WG Charter Proposal Acee Lindem
- Re: OSPF WG Charter Proposal Manral, Vishwas
- Re: OSPF WG Charter Proposal Mukesh Gupta
- Re: OSPF WG Charter Proposal Rohit Dube
- Re: OSPF WG Charter Proposal Acee Lindem
- Re: FW: OSPF WG Charter Proposal Rohit Dube
- Re: FW: OSPF WG Charter Proposal Don Goodspeed
- Re: FW: OSPF WG Charter Proposal Naidu, Venkata
- Re: FW: OSPF WG Charter Proposal Rohit Dube
- Re: OSPF WG Charter Proposal Manral, Vishwas
- Re: FW: OSPF WG Charter Proposal Manral, Vishwas
- Re: FW: OSPF WG Charter Proposal Jeff Parker
- Re: FW: OSPF WG Charter Proposal Joyal, Daniel R (Daniel)
- Re: OSPF WG Charter Proposal Ash, Gerald R (Jerry), ALASO
- Re: OSPF WG Charter Proposal Manohar Naidu Ellanti
- Re: OSPF WG Charter Proposal Dave Katz
- Re: OSPF WG Charter Proposal Ash, Gerald R (Jerry), ALASO
- Re: OSPF WG Charter Proposal Rohit Dube
- Re: OSPF WG Charter Proposal Joel M. Halpern
- Re: OSPF WG Charter Proposal Tony Przygienda
- Re: OSPF WG Charter Proposal John Drake
- Re: OSPF WG Charter Proposal Jeff Parker
- Re: OSPF WG Charter Proposal Manral, Vishwas
- Re: OSPF WG Charter Proposal Manral, Vishwas
- Re: OSPF WG Charter Proposal Tony Przygienda
- Re: OSPF WG Charter Proposal Ash, Gerald R (Jerry), ALASO
- Re: OSPF WG Charter Proposal Rohit Dube
- Re: OSPF WG Charter Proposal Ash, Gerald R (Jerry), ALASO
- Re: OSPF WG Charter Proposal Dave Katz
- Re: OSPF WG Charter Proposal Manohar Naidu Ellanti
- Re: OSPF WG Charter Proposal Dave Katz
- Re: OSPF WG Charter Proposal Choudhury, Gagan L, ALASO
- Re: OSPF WG Charter Proposal Manral, Vishwas
- Re: OSPF WG Charter Proposal Dave Katz
- Re: OSPF WG Charter Proposal Manral, Vishwas
- Re: OSPF WG Charter Proposal Tony Przygienda
- Re: OSPF WG Charter Proposal Rohit Dube
- Re: OSPF WG Charter Proposal Acee Lindem
- Re: OSPF WG Charter Proposal Choudhury, Gagan L, ALASO
- Re: OSPF WG Charter Proposal Dennis Ferguson
- Re: OSPF WG Charter Proposal Dave Katz
- Re: OSPF WG Charter Proposal Alex Zinin
- Re: OSPF WG Charter Proposal Choudhury, Gagan L, ALASO