[Pce] P2MP PCE

"Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk> Fri, 28 December 2007 16:46 UTC

Return-path: <pce-bounces@lists.ietf.org>
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1J8IMD-0004P4-Lq; Fri, 28 Dec 2007 11:46:49 -0500
Received: from pce by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1J8IMB-0004EB-Rq for pce-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Fri, 28 Dec 2007 11:46:47 -0500
Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1J8IMB-00045e-GJ for pce@ietf.org; Fri, 28 Dec 2007 11:46:47 -0500
Received: from asmtp2.iomartmail.com ([62.128.201.249]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1J8IMA-0004Yi-8j for pce@ietf.org; Fri, 28 Dec 2007 11:46:46 -0500
Received: from asmtp2.iomartmail.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by asmtp2.iomartmail.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) with ESMTP id lBSGkdcR001321; Fri, 28 Dec 2007 16:46:39 GMT
Received: from your029b8cecfe (dsl-sp-81-140-15-32.in-addr.broadbandscope.com [81.140.15.32]) (authenticated bits=0) by asmtp2.iomartmail.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id lBSGkbAs001292; Fri, 28 Dec 2007 16:46:39 GMT
Message-ID: <04c701c84971$36a82360$0501a8c0@your029b8cecfe>
From: Adrian Farrel <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
To: jeanlouis.leroux@francetelecom.com
Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2007 16:42:19 -0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format="flowed"; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type="original"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3138
X-Mimeole: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3198
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: bb8f917bb6b8da28fc948aeffb74aa17
Cc: pce@ietf.org
Subject: [Pce] P2MP PCE
X-BeenThere: pce@lists.ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
Reply-To: Adrian Farrel <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
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>
Errors-To: pce-bounces@lists.ietf.org

Hi JL,

In Vancouver you said you had some thoughts and issues with the P2MP PCEP 
drafts draft-yasukawa-pce-p2mp-app-01.txt and 
draft-yasukawa-pce-p2mp-req-04.txt.

The main issue that you raised at the microphone was that you felt that the 
I-Ds were too strong in their assertion that P2MP computation would never be 
done at a head-end LSR.

Looking back at the I-Ds, I see that the requirements draft makes no claims 
about the applicability of the PCE architecture to P2MP LSP computation: it 
devolves this responsibility to the applicability I-D.

The applicability I-D does discuss the potentially greater computational 
load for P2MP LSPs compared to P2P LSPs. It states:
   Roughly speaking, the load to compute a least-cost-to-leaf tree is
   the same as the cost to compute a single optimal path to each leaf in
   turn. The load to compute a Steiner tree is approximately an order of
   magnitude greater.

>From what you said in Vancouver, you are suggesting that approximations to 
Steiner may be achieved in roughly the same order of magnitude as a 
least-cost-to-leaf tree. Would be enough to you if we added to this 
paragraph to say...
   ...although powerful heuristics exist that may make it possible
   to approximate a Steiner tree in the same computational time
   as a least-cost-to-leaf tree.

Were there any other issues you wanted to raise?

Cheers,
Adrian




_______________________________________________
Pce mailing list
Pce@lists.ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce