Re: [Pce] Is there any activity related to PCE graceful restart?

Dhruv Dhody <dhruv.ietf@gmail.com> Mon, 19 June 2017 06:26 UTC

Return-Path: <dhruv.ietf@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: pce@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: pce@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A7F051287A3 for <pce@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 18 Jun 2017 23:26:17 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.998
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.998 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 gzs10h7t6igk for <pce@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 18 Jun 2017 23:26:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qk0-x229.google.com (mail-qk0-x229.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c09::229]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D7C0F127601 for <pce@ietf.org>; Sun, 18 Jun 2017 23:26:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qk0-x229.google.com with SMTP id r62so26327215qkf.0 for <pce@ietf.org>; Sun, 18 Jun 2017 23:26:14 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc; bh=aGwSclUsPP4kQXr1p//T/AekJBFOzuSIfBqa9OxDsSw=; b=PAM9ipCZLbC8FdkYw0DuKuBuYLXtkEjiWAMfeW/oaORHVeW5PfvNdZRuL+Wl7rLk8L gZmprJvgDweDmRfzyXI3UWVgpMCopBM+Edtc4hIgNNBfnf510+HcaoXFSugeNJ9rZgk5 XoR6MYbHEEE7v6gsPlE5+Xn53f+Hd45k3bSOF0CntdCYKke7oHveXohnGuHAtjRUaJBt nylAkpwD5UwhDo67NXTlevpP+fSPNUx97UMD5VMkeAdT7l67FkEic1xb/teE83IiDv7r VZ1AJYlkMXZF+3PhPBoUckNnzRRJ9GHWsMzQDxNwjiKH1+ytjPD37Q4BfPKVQFcHFl94 eDXQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=aGwSclUsPP4kQXr1p//T/AekJBFOzuSIfBqa9OxDsSw=; b=oG3jbUTjtGkgVLPVV2aUEGvW3fkc+eOXA7ilUH2Nr3ijVCX6yFo/LWAcCb3zhyfE/Y D6fSBBicHknsS+oF3UOZpMFekKz+iUhVnNwiK1twQevNxmgn7WKeyFjF1hJ+52CpODlX 7TkrTpY2+Zlk4QgJLtIeyo61z03h8U0wRB0jLZIiqpiuUlMFM57zfZDU68NrWdCWVsXo /3QnACkmCtZCQjztbFPIccub4qMiobeP1n5iMi2ZjOLYkLPNQ9JA0e6+6FSjjMPHtU5g 5mtEyDl29FBUoRg+TM5+fgLLMoRr3QilTwJrw9VEbX1YXfaHk08W1UWJn/7aactgJMrK n/hQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AKS2vOyhS3rKrkdJqqxCYKunHU/9tpGmJ2C+YCYy/ipKdODH1cn8gzqi yWBIWTaK+UAi9/iZpdUlhq+PVD8g8g==
X-Received: by 10.55.133.70 with SMTP id h67mr27675612qkd.125.1497853574001; Sun, 18 Jun 2017 23:26:14 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: dhruvdhody@gmail.com
X-Google-Sender-Delegation: dhruvdhody@gmail.com
Received: by 10.200.55.225 with HTTP; Sun, 18 Jun 2017 23:26:13 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <AM4PR03MB17132D067E3F2E924D6C92DB9DC70@AM4PR03MB1713.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
References: <AM4PR03MB17132D067E3F2E924D6C92DB9DC70@AM4PR03MB1713.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
From: Dhruv Dhody <dhruv.ietf@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2017 11:56:13 +0530
X-Google-Sender-Auth: xiqpeSC_J8FK5jLyAtloTzRoYrQ
Message-ID: <CAB75xn78AtX4GCrxFVH3JCJHOaDuxznMjTKxbj6hZiZ=A+436w@mail.gmail.com>
To: Alexander Vainshtein <Alexander.Vainshtein@ecitele.com>
Cc: "jonathan.hardwick@metaswitch.com" <jonathan.hardwick@metaswitch.com>, "jpv@cisco.com" <jpv@cisco.com>, "julien.meuric@orange.com" <julien.meuric@orange.com>, Marina Fizgeer <Marina.Fizgeer@ecitele.com>, Michael Gorokhovsky <Michael.Gorokhovsky@ecitele.com>, "pce@ietf.org" <pce@ietf.org>, Alexander Ferdman <Alexander.Ferdman@ecitele.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="94eb2c060edc343adf05524a36ae"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/pce/4NXvIqHNHCAyvu5z8KKk5KgqmfU>
Subject: Re: [Pce] Is there any activity related to PCE graceful restart?
X-BeenThere: pce@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: Path Computation Element <pce.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/pce>, <mailto:pce-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/pce/>
List-Post: <mailto:pce@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:pce-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce>, <mailto:pce-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2017 06:26:18 -0000

Hi Sasha,

Since you pointed stateful PCE specifically, the draft talks about what to
do during a session restart. [
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-pce-stateful-pce-19#section-5.6]

There is another draft that talks about optimizing it -
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-pce-stateful-sync-optimizations/

Note that we also have re-delagation, which would try to find another
active stateful PCE to take over control -
[https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-pce-stateful-pce-19#section-5.7.5]

As Adrian asked, do you have something else in mind when you say GR?

Regards,
Dhruv


On Sun, Jun 18, 2017 at 9:12 PM, Alexander Vainshtein <
Alexander.Vainshtein@ecitele.com> wrote:

> Re-sending with the correct WG mailing list address…
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Sasha
>
>
>
> Office: +972-39266302
>
> Cell:      +972-549266302
>
> Email:   Alexander.Vainshtein@ecitele.com
>
>
>
> *From:* Alexander Vainshtein
> *Sent:* Sunday, June 18, 2017 6:41 PM
> *To:* 'jonathan.hardwick@metaswitch.com' <jonathan.hardwick@metaswitch.com>;
> 'jpv@cisco.com' <jpv@cisco.com>; 'julien.meuric@orange.com' <
> julien.meuric@orange.com>
> *Cc:* 'pce@ietf.prg' <pce@ietf.prg>; Michael Gorokhovsky <
> Michael.Gorokhovsky@ecitele.com>; Marina Fizgeer <
> Marina.Fizgeer@ecitele.com>; Alexander Ferdman <
> Alexander.Ferdman@ecitele.com>
> *Subject:* Is there any activity related to PCE graceful restart?
>
>
>
> Hi all,
>
> My colleagues and I tried to find any work in the PCE WG related to PCEP
> graceful restart.
>
> So far, we did not succeed. This could mean one of the following:
>
> -          Our search did not go deep enough. In this case pointers to
> any specific documents would be highly appreciated
>
> -          Such work does not exist because (for some reason) it is not
> required. This looks problematic to me, especially if we deal with a
> stateful  active PCE and the path computed by the PCE was implemented using
> Segment Routing (so that only the head end of the computed path is aware of
> the path). However, I could have missed something obvious, and any
> clarifications would be highly appreciated
>
> -          Such work is required but, so far, nobody has taken care of
> it. The implications are obvious:-(.
>
>
>
> Your feedback would be highly appreciated.
>
>
>
> Regards, and lots of thanks in advance,
>
> Sasha
>
>
>
> Office: +972-39266302
>
> Cell:      +972-549266302
>
> Email:   Alexander.Vainshtein@ecitele.com
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> _______________
>
> This e-mail message is intended for the recipient only and contains
> information which is
> CONFIDENTIAL and which may be proprietary to ECI Telecom. If you have
> received this
> transmission in error, please inform us by e-mail, phone or fax, and then
> delete the original
> and all copies thereof.
> ____________________________________________________________
> _______________
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pce mailing list
> Pce@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce
>
>