IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [PCN] Architecture draft - probing section & general updates.

Lars Eggert <lars.eggert@nokia.com> Thu, 25 October 2007 09:55 UTC

Return-path: <pcn-bounces@ietf.org>
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IkzQh-00080e-2w; Thu, 25 Oct 2007 05:55:07 -0400
Received: from pcn by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IkzQf-00080X-Pt for pcn-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 25 Oct 2007 05:55:05 -0400
Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IkzQf-0007zi-Dk for pcn@ietf.org; Thu, 25 Oct 2007 05:55:05 -0400
Received: from smtp.nokia.com ([131.228.20.171] helo=mgw-ext12.nokia.com) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IkzQe-0001ZA-SH for pcn@ietf.org; Thu, 25 Oct 2007 05:55:05 -0400
Received: from esebh105.NOE.Nokia.com (esebh105.ntc.nokia.com [172.21.138.211]) by mgw-ext12.nokia.com (Switch-3.2.5/Switch-3.2.5) with ESMTP id l9P9si8g005257; Thu, 25 Oct 2007 12:55:02 +0300
Received: from esebh103.NOE.Nokia.com ([172.21.143.33]) by esebh105.NOE.Nokia.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Thu, 25 Oct 2007 12:54:37 +0300
Received: from esebh101.NOE.Nokia.com ([172.21.138.177]) by esebh103.NOE.Nokia.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Thu, 25 Oct 2007 12:54:36 +0300
Received: from mgw-int01.ntc.nokia.com ([172.21.143.96]) by esebh101.NOE.Nokia.com over TLS secured channel with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Thu, 25 Oct 2007 12:54:36 +0300
Received: from [172.21.35.48] (esdhcp03548.research.nokia.com [172.21.35.48]) by mgw-int01.ntc.nokia.com (Switch-3.2.5/Switch-3.2.5) with ESMTP id l9P9sZYp027042; Thu, 25 Oct 2007 12:54:35 +0300
In-Reply-To: <9671A92C3C8B5744BC97F855F7CB646512CCCEE0@zcarhxm1.corp.nortel.com>
References: <9671A92C3C8B5744BC97F855F7CB646512C6F7D0@zcarhxm1.corp.nortel.com> <1B6169C658325341A3B8066E23919E1C0DE91D@S4DE8PSAANK.mitte.t-com.de> <9671A92C3C8B5744BC97F855F7CB646512CCCEE0@zcarhxm1.corp.nortel.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v752.3)
Message-Id: <9EE2BE22-5E19-4625-B368-3A603728ED52@nokia.com>
From: Lars Eggert <lars.eggert@nokia.com>
Subject: Re: [PCN] Architecture draft - probing section & general updates.
Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2007 12:54:29 +0300
To: ext Jozef Babiarz <babiarz@nortel.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.752.3)
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 25 Oct 2007 09:54:37.0046 (UTC) FILETIME=[0D8CF160:01C816ED]
X-Nokia-AV: Clean
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: c3a18ef96977fc9bcc21a621cbf1174b
Cc: pcn@ietf.org, "Geib, Ruediger" <Ruediger.Geib@t-systems.com>
X-BeenThere: pcn@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: PCN WG list <pcn.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pcn>, <mailto:pcn-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/pcn>
List-Post: <mailto:pcn@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:pcn-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pcn>, <mailto:pcn-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1884103659=="
Errors-To: pcn-bounces@ietf.org

On 2007-10-24, at 19:14, ext Jozef Babiarz wrote:
> I'm thinking of a scenario that many enterprises face today. Large  
> multi
> location enterprises use multiple WAN links or VPS to interconnect  
> their
> locations. PCN is run inside the enterprise network including WAN  
> links
> which maybe tunneled across the carrier network. Network Access  
> Control
> with PCN admission control is done at the enterprise access edge  
> nodes.
> New flows can be routed to any egress access edge node and some flows
> will (between different locations) be routed over one of the WAN links
> which are normally bandwidth constrained.

I understand your scenario so far.

> There is a high probability
> that many access nodes will only have one flow between each other as
> there are a large number of them.

I don't see how this follows, however. It seems that if the sites  
that are being interconnected aren't tiny, there should very likely  
be multiple flows per ingress/egress pair, no?

Lars
_______________________________________________
PCN mailing list
PCN@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pcn

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email