Re: [Pce] Concurrent Optimization and More
"Daniel King" <dk@danielking.net> Fri, 20 June 2008 08:15 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 64D3E3A695A; Fri, 20 Jun 2008 01:15:43 -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 538443A6904 for <pce@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 20 Jun 2008 01:15:42 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.598
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001]
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 Y0kPDdBwKruk for <pce@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 20 Jun 2008 01:15:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from an-out-0708.google.com (an-out-0708.google.com [209.85.132.247]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 945D53A68F4 for <pce@ietf.org>; Fri, 20 Jun 2008 01:15:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by an-out-0708.google.com with SMTP id d18so396438and.122 for <pce@ietf.org>; Fri, 20 Jun 2008 01:15:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.100.46.10 with SMTP id t10mr4891602ant.22.1213949733668; Fri, 20 Jun 2008 01:15:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from Serenity ( [88.97.23.122]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id c27sm3727578ana.37.2008.06.20.01.15.31 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Fri, 20 Jun 2008 01:15:32 -0700 (PDT)
From: Daniel King <dk@danielking.net>
To: pce@ietf.org
References: <002701c8d1f1$e7aa4b80$b6fee280$@net> <0D63518CCAD12D479B4C66FE4572D78D035D7082@E03MVW2-UKDY.domain1.systemhost.net>
In-Reply-To: <0D63518CCAD12D479B4C66FE4572D78D035D7082@E03MVW2-UKDY.domain1.systemhost.net>
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2008 09:15:42 +0100
Message-ID: <002201c8d2ad$d6a0d9a0$83e28ce0$@net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0
Thread-Index: AcjR1SVOYXa7NpiiQlqiI9RX22M6nAAG9VTQABwzIZAAEgDVcA==
Content-Language: en-gb
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="===============0484297711=="
Sender: pce-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: pce-bounces@ietf.org
Hi David, Aha ,"real-time". Well as we know real-time is relative. We talked previously about the PCE GCO application. Performing a GCO, via an NMS on a centralized PCE, on a complex network might require 6hrs of computation time. This could be considered real-time and perhaps is an acceptable amount of time to wait for a near-optimal solution. Another scenario might be performing path computation for a local backup path after an existing backup path fails. A local backup path solution could be required within a few seconds and computed via a distributed PCE that has local network knowledge. Both scenarios would require a real-time view (topology, services and resources) of the network at the time of the path computation request. The mechanisms are in place to support these architectures and I am aware of vendors implementing some of these ideas. We should not mention specific vendors on the WG mailing list. I am compiling a list of PCE vendors and implementers at: www.pathcomputationelement.com. Any vendors not currently listed are welcome to contact me and add their name and information. Br, Dan. From: pce-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:pce-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of david.amzallag@bt.com Sent: 20 June 2008 08:26 To: pce@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Pce] Concurrent Optimization and More 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.txt 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
- [Pce] Concurrent Optimization and More david.amzallag
- Re: [Pce] Concurrent Optimization and More Daniel King
- Re: [Pce] Concurrent Optimization and More david.amzallag
- Re: [Pce] Concurrent Optimization and More Daniel King