[Pce] Re: Comment on draft-ietf-pce-pcecp-interarea-reqs-00.txt
Zhang Renhai <zhangrenhai@huawei.com> Mon, 16 January 2006 09:20 UTC
Received: from localhost.cnri.reston.va.us ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1EyQWz-0007ic-Qf; Mon, 16 Jan 2006 04:20:05 -0500
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1EyQWy-0007iB-6K for pce@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 16 Jan 2006 04:20:05 -0500
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id EAA26597 for <pce@ietf.org>; Mon, 16 Jan 2006 04:18:40 -0500 (EST)
Received: from szxga02-in.huawei.com ([61.144.161.54] helo=huawei.com) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1EyQeq-00010H-4s for pce@ietf.org; Mon, 16 Jan 2006 04:28:14 -0500
Received: from huawei.com (szxga02-in [172.24.2.6]) by szxga02-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.25 (built Mar 3 2004)) with ESMTP id <0IT600E7KIFZ8R@szxga02-in.huawei.com> for pce@ietf.org; Mon, 16 Jan 2006 17:31:11 +0800 (CST)
Received: from szxml01-in ([172.24.1.3]) by szxga02-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.25 (built Mar 3 2004)) with ESMTP id <0IT600ETBIFYP4@szxga02-in.huawei.com> for pce@ietf.org; Mon, 16 Jan 2006 17:31:11 +0800 (CST)
Received: from z18605 ([10.111.12.87]) by szxml01-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.25 (built Mar 3 2004)) with ESMTPA id <0IT600KNTILLM9@szxml01-in.huawei.com>; Mon, 16 Jan 2006 17:34:33 +0800 (CST)
Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 16:53:05 +0800
From: Zhang Renhai <zhangrenhai@huawei.com>
To: LE ROUX Jean-Louis RD-CORE-LAN <jeanlouis.leroux@francetelecom.com>
Message-id: <005f01c61a7a$441384e0$570c6f0a@huawei.com>
MIME-version: 1.0
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4807.1700
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4807.1700
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-priority: Normal
References: <D109C8C97C15294495117745780657AE03FCE27D@ftrdmel1.rd.francetelecom.fr>
X-Spam-Score: 3.3 (+++)
X-Scan-Signature: 17bdfcaea25d1444baef0e24abc38874
Cc: pce@ietf.org
Subject: [Pce] Re: Comment on draft-ietf-pce-pcecp-interarea-reqs-00.txt
X-BeenThere: pce@lists.ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Path Computation Element <pce.lists.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce>, <mailto:pce-request@lists.ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/pce>
List-Post: <mailto:pce@lists.ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:pce-request@lists.ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce>, <mailto:pce-request@lists.ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0517005409=="
Sender: pce-bounces@lists.ietf.org
Errors-To: pce-bounces@lists.ietf.org
Hi, Jean-Louis Thanks for your reply, see inline. ----- Original Message ----- From: LE ROUX Jean-Louis RD-CORE-LAN To: Zhang Renhai Cc: pce@ietf.org Sent: Friday, January 13, 2006 5:22 PM Subject: RE: Comment on draft-ietf-pce-pcecp-interarea-reqs-00.txt Hi Zhang sorry for replying so late... Please see inline, ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- De : Zhang Renhai [mailto:zhangrenhai@huawei.com] Envoyé : mercredi 28 décembre 2005 08:04 À : LE ROUX Jean-Louis RD-CORE-LAN Cc : pce@ietf.org Objet : Comment on draft-ietf-pce-pcecp-interarea-reqs-00.txt Hi, Jean-Louis I have some comment on the draft draft-ietf-pce-pcecp-interarea-reqs-00.txt In section 7.11.1, In case of network failure, jittering will be used to avoid simultaneous requests sent to one PCE. Could more consideration be given here to the preemptment, becouse the jittering timeout is stochastic, some lower request may be served before a higher request and the path may be calculated differently. which may increase the probability of a preemptment. JLLR: You raised a good point. First of all note that this point is not a protocol requirement, this is a local implementation issue, and the jittering was just given as an example... The PCC could apply different jitter to low priority and high priority requests, and could send high priority request before low priority one, this is a local PCC decision. Also the request prioritization function could be used so that the PCE serves high priority requests first. The way a PCE is going to handle request prioritites is also a local implementation issue. Maybe we should remove this sentence to avoid any confusion. By the way note that this section is generic and has just been moved to the generic requirement draft. So we will have to clarify in the generic draft. [ZRH] I agree. I have always been thinking a question: if a PCC will not perform the CSPF computation, why does it still maintain the TEDB any longer? which may consume a lot of memory and CPU of a LSR.This question dost not aid at this draft. [JLLR] A LSR may be a PCC for some LSPs and a PCE for other LSPs. Anyway a LSR that runs ISIS or OSPF for IP routing has to maintain a LSDB. I agree removing TE info would save some memory and CPU but the gain sounds quite low compared to the impact: For any computation, even a simple intra-area CSPF, you would have to ask a PCE, and this may lead to a high PCE stress. You would have a small CPU gain on LSRs at a cost of a huge CPU consumption on PCEs... [ZRH]yes, your expanation is great, I think you are right. In inter-area environment,sometimes, a PCC may wish to get as many paths as possible, for all kinds of purpose,so could the PCC send the request to more than one PCEs? [JLLR] Yes, and this is a procedure local to the PCC, that does not imply specific PCECP procedure. [ZRH] I noticed that in the draft draft-ietf-pce-architecture-03, there are already restriction for a PCC to sent multiple requests for a LSP. So I would likt to ask if the restriction can be remove before we reach a agreement on this point? Thanks for these valuable comments Regards, JL Regards, Zhang
_______________________________________________ Pce mailing list Pce@lists.ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce
- [Pce] Comment on draft-ietf-pce-pcecp-interarea-r… Zhang Renhai
- Re: [Pce] Comment on draft-ietf-pce-pcecp-interar… JP Vasseur
- [Pce] Re: Comment on draft-ietf-pce-pcecp-interar… Zhang Renhai
- Re: [Pce] Comment on draft-ietf-pce-pcecp-interar… zhangrenhai 18605
- [Pce] RE: Comment on draft-ietf-pce-pcecp-interar… LE ROUX Jean-Louis RD-CORE-LAN
- Re: [Pce] RE: Comment on draft-ietf-pce-pcecp-int… JP Vasseur
- Re: [Pce] Comment on draft-ietf-pce-pcecp-interar… JP Vasseur
- Re: [Pce] Comment on draft-ietf-pce-pcecp-interar… Zhang Renhai