IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [pim] New Version Notification for, draft-yong-rtgwg-igp-multicast-arch-00.txt

Haoweiguo <haoweiguo@huawei.com> Sat, 28 February 2015 01:43 UTC

Return-Path: <haoweiguo@huawei.com>
X-Original-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 294511A1AA7 for <pim@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 27 Feb 2015 17:43:22 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.211
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.211 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 7TCh60TbM-2j for <pim@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 27 Feb 2015 17:43:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [194.213.3.17]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 011211A0066 for <pim@ietf.org>; Fri, 27 Feb 2015 17:43:19 -0800 (PST)
Received: from 172.18.7.190 (EHLO lhreml401-hub.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.7.190]) by lhrrg01-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.3.7-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id BTC00416; Sat, 28 Feb 2015 01:43:18 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from NKGEML408-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.98.56.39) by lhreml401-hub.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.240) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.158.1; Sat, 28 Feb 2015 01:43:18 +0000
Received: from NKGEML501-MBS.china.huawei.com ([169.254.2.146]) by nkgeml408-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.98.56.39]) with mapi id 14.03.0158.001; Sat, 28 Feb 2015 09:43:11 +0800
From: Haoweiguo <haoweiguo@huawei.com>
To: "Heidi Ou (hou)" <hou@cisco.com>, "pim@ietf.org" <pim@ietf.org>, "pim-chairs@tools.ietf.org" <pim-chairs@tools.ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [pim] New Version Notification for, draft-yong-rtgwg-igp-multicast-arch-00.txt
Thread-Index: AQHQUuv9v+3xHwOef0WSuvOSuDZmCJ0FRrwX
Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2015 01:43:10 +0000
Message-ID: <DD5FC8DE455C3348B94340C0AB5517334F845E53@nkgeml501-mbs.china.huawei.com>
References: <54F0C313.1020901@gmail.com>,<D1162027.DBE79%hou@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <D1162027.DBE79%hou@cisco.com>
Accept-Language: en-US, zh-CN
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.135.23.94]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-6"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/pim/82W1lyZaBKTnuNgpmDcMOMvSMXU>
Subject: Re: [pim] New Version Notification for, draft-yong-rtgwg-igp-multicast-arch-00.txt
X-BeenThere: pim@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Protocol Independent Multicast <pim.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/pim>, <mailto:pim-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/pim/>
List-Post: <mailto:pim@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:pim-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pim>, <mailto:pim-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2015 01:43:22 -0000

Hi Heidi,
The IGP multicast solution is used to replace Bidir-PIM rather than PIM-SM/SSM,  data center network is the focus. It can be used for NVO3 underlay network multicast distribution tree construction to simplify network mangement and improve network convergence timer.

Thanks,
weiguo
________________________________________
From: pim [pim-bounces@ietf.org] on behalf of Heidi Ou (hou) [hou@cisco.com]
Sent: Saturday, February 28, 2015 8:17
To: pim@ietf.org; pim-chairs@tools.ietf.org
Subject: Re: [pim] New Version Notification for, draft-yong-rtgwg-igp-multicast-arch-00.txt

Hello, Lucy


I have read through this draft as well as
draft-yong-isis-ext-4-distribution-tree-03. The idea of using one protocol
to compute paths for both unicast and multicast traffic is well taken.
However, PIM has been deployed for a long time, and it has some unique
features widely used by existing customers, I am not confident that the
new approach adequately addresses all the key functionality of PIM.

I have quite a few questions but I would like to start with the following
two:

My first concern is that the draft seems to focus on group based flows. I
would expect the draft describe a lot more detail how to handle SSM and
optimize path for (S,G) based flows. I would think you would need one or
two TLV that are related to source specific information but I don't see it
in draft-yong-isis-ext-4-distribution-tree-03.

My second concern is how to load balance, with today's PIM deployment,
load balancing on G, or (S,G), or even next hop, is accomplished via local
policy and handles transient situation well". I am not seeing the same
flexibility with the draft.


Thanks
- Heidi





>On 02/26/2015 11:30 ب.ظ, pim-request@ietf.org wrote:
>> Re: New Version Notification for
>>        draft-yong-rtgwg-igp-multicast-arch-00.txt
>
>_______________________________________________
>pim mailing list
>pim@ietf.org
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pim

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

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email