Re: [Pce] Comment on draft-ietf-pce-pcecp-interarea-reqs-00.txt
zhangrenhai 18605 <zhangrenhai@huawei.com> Fri, 13 January 2006 03:40 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 1ExFnf-0004oK-I7; Thu, 12 Jan 2006 22:40:27 -0500
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1ExFnc-0004jf-9l for pce@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 12 Jan 2006 22:40:25 -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 WAA25593 for <pce@ietf.org>; Thu, 12 Jan 2006 22:39:02 -0500 (EST)
Received: from usaga01-in.huawei.com ([12.129.211.51] helo=huawei.com) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ExFuq-0000o8-6i for pce@ietf.org; Thu, 12 Jan 2006 22:47:53 -0500
Received: from huawei.com (usaga01-in [172.18.4.6]) by usaga01-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.25 (built Mar 3 2004)) with ESMTP id <0IT000IQZI1EM5@usaga01-in.huawei.com> for pce@ietf.org; Thu, 12 Jan 2006 19:36:50 -0800 (PST)
Received: from huawei.com ([172.17.1.188]) by usaga01-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.25 (built Mar 3 2004)) with ESMTP id <0IT000M4FI1CBW@usaga01-in.huawei.com> for pce@ietf.org; Thu, 12 Jan 2006 19:36:50 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [172.24.1.3] (Forwarded-For: [10.161.114.61]) by szxmc01-in.huawei.com (mshttpd); Fri, 13 Jan 2006 11:40:01 +0800
Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 11:40:01 +0800
From: zhangrenhai 18605 <zhangrenhai@huawei.com>
Subject: Re: [Pce] Comment on draft-ietf-pce-pcecp-interarea-reqs-00.txt
To: JP Vasseur <jvasseur@cisco.com>
Message-id: <11aac111b1bc.11b1bc11aac1@huawei.com>
MIME-version: 1.0
X-Mailer: iPlanet Messenger Express 5.2 HotFix 1.25 (built Mar 3 2004)
Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-language: en
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Content-disposition: inline
X-Accept-Language: en
Priority: normal
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 8de5f93cb2b4e3bee75302e9eacc33db
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: pce@ietf.org
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>
Sender: pce-bounces@lists.ietf.org
Errors-To: pce-bounces@lists.ietf.org
Hi, JP Sorry for seeing your reply so late. Thanks, see inline. ----- Original Message ----- From: JP Vasseur <jvasseur@cisco.com> Date: Thursday, January 5, 2006 3:07 am Subject: Re: [Pce] Comment on draft-ietf-pce-pcecp-interarea-reqs-00.txt > Hi , > > On Dec 28, 2005, at 2:03 AM, Zhang Renhai wrote: > > > 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. > > > > The decision on the PCC request scheduling is out of the scope of > this ID. Note that the point that you mentioned also applies to > the > located-PCE case. I am not sure what scope this point belongs to. I just considered more about what has been mentioned in the draft. Is this consideration important anough to be added somewhere? > > > > > 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. > > > > Because > (1) The PCE may decide to use a remote PCE for some LSPs and not > for > others (for instance, inter versus intra-domain) > (2) The PCE may decide to always use a PCE and fall back to local > path computation or loose hop routing under specific conditions Agree, I just want to be convinced if some routers acting as a pure PCC (no longer perform path computation)can save some CPU and memory so there could be a lower requirement on capability to these routers in PCE-based environment.Maybe this is a benefit to PCE Architecture. > > > 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? > > > > Yes, although this would clearly be very sub-optimal .... I am not sure your point, could you please expand your explanation any more? In my opinion, a ABR acting as a PCE usually can not have a full AS-scope information of TED. so it may return a sub-optimal compuation result compared to some latent path which can be returned by other ABR linked to a different area. I know this can be solved by a ABR through sending the request to multiple ABR in a area, otherwise, how to solve this problem? Thanks, Zhang > > JP. > > > Regards, > > Zhang > > _______________________________________________ > > Pce mailing list > > Pce@lists.ietf.org > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce > > _______________________________________________ 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