Re: [Pce] Concurrent Optimization and More

<david.amzallag@bt.com> Fri, 20 June 2008 07:26 UTC

Return-Path: <pce-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: pce-archive@megatron.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-pce-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B6CC63A698E; Fri, 20 Jun 2008 00:26:32 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: pce@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: pce@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3549E3A6987 for <pce@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 20 Jun 2008 00:26:31 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.998
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.998 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id cghTSsiR6ePB for <pce@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 20 Jun 2008 00:26:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp3.smtp.bt.com (smtp3.smtp.bt.com [217.32.164.138]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F18203A6904 for <pce@ietf.org>; Fri, 20 Jun 2008 00:26:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from E03MVW2-UKDY.domain1.systemhost.net ([193.113.30.47]) by smtp3.smtp.bt.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Fri, 20 Jun 2008 08:26:28 +0100
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2008 08:26:27 +0100
Message-ID: <0D63518CCAD12D479B4C66FE4572D78D035D7082@E03MVW2-UKDY.domain1.systemhost.net>
In-Reply-To: <002701c8d1f1$e7aa4b80$b6fee280$@net>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: [Pce] Concurrent Optimization and More
Thread-Index: AcjR1SVOYXa7NpiiQlqiI9RX22M6nAAG9VTQABwzIZA=
From: david.amzallag@bt.com
To: pce@ietf.org
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 20 Jun 2008 07:26:28.0622 (UTC) FILETIME=[F45D52E0:01C8D2A6]
Subject: Re: [Pce] Concurrent Optimization and More
X-BeenThere: pce@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Path Computation Element <pce.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce>, <mailto:pce-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/pipermail/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>
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0618894619=="
Sender: pce-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: pce-bounces@ietf.org

Dan,
 
Many thanks for your fast reply. Are you familiar with any "real-time"
implementation of few of the PCE ideas? Anyone that implements the
distributed approach?
 
Warm regards,
 
David Amzallag,
BT

________________________________

From: Daniel King [mailto:dk@danielking.net] 
Sent: 19 June 2008 12:50
To: pce@ietf.org
Subject: RE: [Pce] Concurrent Optimization and More



Hi David, 

 

A few quick responses:

 

>>1. How does the protocol for computing a single path works in a
hierarchical network (more than one level of PCE's)?

 

So far this requirement has been out of scope for the current work.
There is growing momentum in the application of PCE to multi-layer
networks, ASON, and "domain-paths." So this topic will require further
thought and discussion.

 

>>2. What the draft for the concurrent optimization referred to: only
inside of a sub-domain or also an inter-domain optimization which
requires communication between the PCE's?

 

As above. The pce-global-concurrent-optimization draft focuses on single
domain optimisation, specifically the PCC-PCE communication needs and
protocol extensions to support the concurrent optimisation. Although,
the authors do mention that a Global Concurrent Optimization (GCO) is
applicable to a Virtual Network Topology (VNT) and multi-layer traffic
engineering for new deployments. 

 

>>3. Can we assume that the node's demands are splittable (i.e., can be
simultaneously satisfied by more than one path)?

 

I may need some further clarity on this question. Do you mean that there
may be more than one possible solution to a path computation, or that
the solution to the computation may be a set of "parallel" paths with
some assumption of load sharing (e.g. inverse multiplexing)?

 

The answer to the first question is yes and is already done, although
some work might be required to allow the PCE to supply a choice of paths
to the PCC.

 

The answer to the second question is also yes, but (very simple)
protocol extensions will be needed to handle this case.

 

Other relevant drafts you may find interesting for this topic include:

 

A Path Computation Element (PCE)-Based Architecture 

http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc4655.txt

 

A Framework for Inter-Domain Multiprotocol Label Switching Traffic
Engineering

http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc4726.txt

 

A Per-Domain Path Computation Method for Establishing Inter-Domain
Traffic Engineering (TE) Label Switched Paths (LSPs)

http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc5152.txt

 

Evaluation of existing GMPLS Protocols against Multi Layer and Multi
Region Networks (MLN/MRN)

http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-mln-eval-05.t
xt

 

A Backward Recursive PCE-based Computation (BRPC) Procedure To Compute
Shortest Constrained Inter-domain Traffic Engineering Label Switched
Paths

http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-pce-brpc-09.txt

 

Br, Dan

 

 

From: pce-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:pce-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
david.amzallag@bt.com
Sent: 19 June 2008 07:25
To: pce@ietf.org
Subject: [Pce] Concurrent Optimization and More

 

Hi,

 

I have three basic questions (but I might the correct place in RFCs or
drafts for that...);

 

1. How does the protocol for computing a single path works in a
hierarchical network (more than one level of PCE's)?
2. What the draft for the concurrent optimization referred to: only
inside of a sub-domain or also an inter-domain optimization which
requires communication between the PCE's?

3. Can we assume that the node's demands are splittable (i.e., can be
simultaneously satisfied by more than one path)?

 

Many thanks,

 

David Amzallag

BT

 

_______________________________________________
Pce mailing list
Pce@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce