Re: Draft on constraint-based routing
Yao-Min Chen <ychen@fla.fujitsu.com> Fri, 05 February 1999 01:30 UTC
Received: from ns.newbridge.com (ns.newbridge.com [192.75.23.67]) by ietf.org (8.8.5/8.8.7a) with ESMTP id UAA26499 for <qosr-archive@odin.ietf.org>; Thu, 4 Feb 1999 20:30:45 -0500 (EST)
Received: (from smtpd@localhost) by ns.newbridge.com (8.8.8/8.6.12) id UAA22845 for qosr-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 4 Feb 1999 20:30:46 -0500 (EST)
Received: from kanata-gw1.newbridge.com(192.75.23.72), claiming to be "kanata-gw1.ca.newbridge.com" via SMTP by ns.newbridge.com, id smtpdLMAa17947; Thu Feb 4 20:28:58 1999
Received: from qmaster.ca.newbridge.com by kanata-mh1.ca.newbridge.com with ESMTP; Thu, 4 Feb 1999 20:26:41 -0500
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by qmaster.ca.newbridge.com. (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA28444 for qosr-outgoing; Thu, 4 Feb 1999 20:19:33 -0500 (EST)
Received: from kanata-mh1.ca.newbridge.com (kanata-mh1.ca.newbridge.com [138.120.118.18]) by qmaster.ca.newbridge.com. (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id UAA28420 for <qosr@qmaster.ca.newbridge.com>; Thu, 4 Feb 1999 20:19:26 -0500 (EST)
Received: from kanata-gw.ca.newbridge.com by kanata-mh1.ca.newbridge.com; Thu, 4 Feb 1999 20:19:23 -0500
Received: from ns.newbridge.com ([192.75.23.67]) by kanata-gw.ca.newbridge.com via smtpd (for kanata-mh1.ca.newbridge.com [138.120.118.18]) with SMTP; 5 Feb 1999 01:19:23 UT
Received: (from smtpd@localhost) by ns.newbridge.com (8.8.8/8.6.12) id UAA19908 for qosr@newbridge.com; Thu, 4 Feb 1999 20:19:22 -0500 (EST)
Received: from fujitsuII.fujitsu.com(133.164.11.2) via SMTP by ns.newbridge.com, id smtpdAAAa19897; Thu Feb 4 20:19:21 1999
Received: from cad.fla.fujitsu.com (cad.fla.fujitsu.com [133.164.58.131]) by fujitsuII.fujitsu.com (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id RAA03119; Thu, 4 Feb 1999 17:16:42 -0800 (PST)
Received: from napali.fla.fujitsu.com (napali.NET.FLA.FUJITSU.COM [133.164.59.104]) by cad.fla.fujitsu.com (8.8.6/3.5Wpl7) with SMTP id RAA10610; Thu, 4 Feb 1999 17:19:54 -0800 (PST)
Received: from fla.fujitsu.com by napali.fla.fujitsu.com (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id RAA07417; Thu, 4 Feb 1999 17:09:19 -0800
Message-Id: <36BA44BB.81209C65@fla.fujitsu.com>
Date: Thu, 04 Feb 1999 17:09:15 -0800
From: Yao-Min Chen <ychen@fla.fujitsu.com>
Reply-To: ychen@fla.fujitsu.com
Organization: Fujitsu Labs of America
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 [en] (X11; U; SunOS 5.5.1 sun4m)
X-Accept-Language: en
To: braja@ccrl.nj.nec.com
CC: qosr@newbridge.com
Subject: Re: Draft on constraint-based routing
References: <36AF3F22.84E17445@ccrl.nj.nec.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: qosr-owner@newbridge.com
Precedence: bulk
It seems reasonable to run in parallel best-effot and QoS routing protocols. The mechanism described in the proposal is described as "overlay" because QoS routing relies on link state info collected by the best effort routing protocol. The info is used to compute the MST. It seems that the proposal chose MST instead of other types of spanning trees because nodes can individually compute but the computations will lead to exactly the same tree, which is important to the correct operation of the proposal. Other than this, is there any strong empirical or analytical reason why MST should be used? Another type of spanning tree may be a min-hop one where the max number of hops between any pair of nodes along the tree is minimized. Since the draft requires reliable transmission between neighboring nodes at the QoS routing layer, per-hop delay may be significant. By reducing number of hops one can reduce the latency when some routing update needs to be propagated along the tree to all nodes. Rgds, Yao-Min Bala Rajagopalan wrote: > > The following ID was recently posted to internet-drafts. > Your comments are welcome. > > Regards, > > Bala > > ------------- > Title : An Overlay Model for Constraint-Based Routing > Author(s) : B. Rajagopalan, Q. Ma > Filename : draft-rajagopalan-CR-overlay-00.txt > Pages : 18 > Date : 25-Jan-99 > > This draft considers an overlay model for constraint-based intra- > > domain routing and describes a mechanism for efficient update > propagation that can be used as the basis for this model. As a > specific example, the incorporation of a constraint-based routing > > overlay on the OSPF protocol is discussed. > > A URL for this Internet-Draft is: > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-rajagopalan-CR-overlay-00.txt > > -- > > Bala Rajagopalan > NEC USA, C&C Research Labs > 4 Independence Way > Princeton, NJ 08540 > U.S.A > > Ph: +1-609-951-2969 > Fax: +1-609-951-2499 > Email: braja@ccrl.nj.nec.com -- Yao-Min Chen, Fujitsu Labs of America, ychen@fla.fujitsu.com 595 Lawrence Expressway, Sunnyvale, CA 94086-3922, USA Ph: +1 408 530 4513 Fax: +1 408 530 4518
- Draft on constraint-based routing Bala Rajagopalan
- Re: Draft on constraint-based routing Yao-Min Chen
- Re: Draft on constraint-based routing Guo, Liang
- Re: Draft on constraint-based routing Bala Rajagopalan